alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(50 Misc. Rep. 499.)

#### HOAG v. SOUTH DOVER MARBLE CO.

Dutchess County Court.

May, 1906.

Street Railroads—Frightening Horses—Evidence.

In an action against street railway for injuries caused by the frightening of plaintiff’s horse by a car, evidence *held*insufficient to show negligence of defendant.

[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 44, Cent. Dig. Street Railroads, §§ 243-246.]

Action by Mary Hoag against the South Dover Marble Company. Verdict for plaintiff. Motion to set aside verdict and for a new trial granted.

George Card and Charles Murschauser, for plaintiff.

Frank V. Johnson and Richard B. Aldcorft, for defendant.

PHILLIPS, J.

In this case the evidence most favorable to the plaintiff of the facts from which the negligence of the defendant can *640be reasonably inferred, is the plaintiff’s own testimony that, as she was proceeding along the highway driving a gentle horse, having just safely passed over the- defendant’s track at a crossing, while passing- a car of the defendant which had been stopped to allow her to pass, then not in motion, her horse became frightened at the noise caused by compressed air escaping from the car, ran away, and she being thrown from her wagon sustained injuries, the basis of this action. It appears from the evidence that the defendant operates a railroad from Wingdale on the Harlem Railroad several miles easterly to their quarries, by electric power; the cars are fitted with compressed air brakes; in order to start a car which has been stopped by the use of the air, the air must be allowed to escape from the cylinder, causing a hissing noise. The plaintiff testifies that the noise which she claims frightened her horse was the usual noise made when the cars are being started. The plaintiff had safely passed in front of the car, had reached a point on the highway opposite the middle of the car, and her horse had shown no sign of fear. This evidence is not, in my opinion, sufficient to impute negligence to the defendant and to support the verdict." Larsen v. U. S. Mortgage & Trust Co., 104 App. Div. 76, 93 N. Y. Supp. 610; Helgers v. Staten Island Midland R. Co., 69 App. Div. 570, 75 N. Y. Supp. 34; Fawdrey v. Brooklyn Heights R. R. Co., 64 App. Div. 418, 72 N. Y. Supp. 283.

Motion to set aside verdict as against the weight of evidence, and for a new trial, is granted upon payment of the costs of trial and disbursements of action to date. '

Motion granted.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2522 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to improve and make permanent 

the Department of Veterans Affairs loan guarantee for the purchase 

of residential cooperative housing units, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 26, 2013 

Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York (for herself and Ms. NORTON) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to improve and 

make permanent the Department of Veterans Affairs 

loan guarantee for the purchase of residential cooperative 

housing units, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Fair Access to Co5 ops for Veterans Act’’. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2522 IH

1 SEC. 2. IMPROVEMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AF2 FAIRS LOAN GUARANTEE FOR PURCHASE OF 

3 RESIDENTIAL COOPERATIVE HOUSING 

4 UNITS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 3710 of title 38, United 

6 States Code, is amended— 

7 (1) in subsection (a)(12), by striking ‘‘and be8 fore the date that is five years after that date,’’; and 

9 (2) in subsection (h)— 

10 (A) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and 

11 (3) as paragraphs (3) and (4), respectively; and 

12 (B) by inserting after paragraph (1) the 

13 following new paragraph (2): 

14 ‘‘(2) In prescribing regulations to carry out sub15 section (a)(12) the Secretary shall ensure that a loan for 

16 the purchase of stock or membership in a cooperative 

17 housing corporation that has been reviewed and approved 

18 by a lender approved by the Federal National Mortgage 

19 Association is not denied.’’. 

20 (b) AUTHORITY TO ADVERTISE.—The Secretary of 

21 Veterans Affairs shall use the authority of the Secretary 

22 under section 532 of title 38, United States Code, to ad23 vertise the availability of loan guarantees for housing co24 operative share loans under section 3710(a)(12) of such 

25 title and shall take such other appropriate actions as may 

26 be necessary to notify eligible veterans, participating lendVerDate Mar 15 2010 03:21 Jul 02, 2013 Jkt 029200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2522.IH H2522

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2522 IH

1 ers, and interested realtors of the availability of such loan 

2 guarantees and the procedures and requirements that 

3 apply to the obtaining of such guarantees. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2006-0613.

#### In re Walters.

Fairfield App. Nos. 2005-CA-65 and 2005-CA-66, 2006-Ohio-631. Discretionary appeal accepted on Proposition of Law Nos. II and III and cause consolidated with 2006-0614, *In re Walters,*Fairfield App. Nos. 2005-CA-65 and 2005-CA-66, 2006-Ohio-631.

Pfeifer and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., would accept the appeal on all Propositions of Law.

O’Donnell, J., would accept the appeal on Proposition of Law No. II only.

Resnick and Lanzinger, JJ., dissent.
§ 28.302 Terms of designation. The length of staple of any cotton shall be designated by that one of the following terms which expresses its measurement in inches and fractions of an inch in accordance with § 28.301: “Below 13 ⁄ 16; 7 ⁄ 8; 29 ⁄ 32; 15 ⁄ 16; 31 ⁄ 32; 1; 11 ⁄ 32; 11 ⁄ 16; 13 ⁄ 32; 11 ⁄ 8; 15 ⁄ 32; 13 ⁄ 16; 17 ⁄ 32; 11 ⁄ 4; 19 ⁄ 32; 15 ⁄ 16; 111 ⁄ 32; 13 ⁄ 8; 113 ⁄ 32; 17 ⁄ 16; 115 ⁄ 32; 11 ⁄ 2; 117 ⁄ 32; 19 ⁄ 16; 119 ⁄ 32; 15 ⁄ 8; 121 ⁄ 32; 111 ⁄ 16; 123 ⁄ 32; 13 ⁄ 4; and upward in like manner in gradations of thirty-seconds, disregarding any fraction less than a thirty-second.”
#### § 330.207 Cost and charges.

The inspection services of APHIS inspectors during regularly assigned hours of duty and at the usual places of duty will be furnished without cost. APHIS will not be responsible for any costs or charges incidental to inspections or compliance with the provisions of this subpart, other than for the inspection services of the inspector.
Exhibit 10.14



 Exhibit 10.14 
  
 MCI, Inc. 
 Board of Directors 
  
 Amendment to the MCI,
Inc. 2003 Employee Stock Purchase Plan 
  
 WHEREAS,
pursuant to Section 9.01 of the MCI, Inc. 2003 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the “Plan”), the Board of Directors of MCI, Inc. has the power to amend the Plan; and 
  
 WHEREAS, the Board of Directors desires to amend the Plan to clarify certain provisions of the Plan; 
  
 NOW THEREFORE BE IT, 
  
 RESOLVED, that the Plan is amended in accordance with the Exhibit A attached
hereto, effective as of June 25, 2004; and 
  
 FURTHER RESOLVED,
that the appropriate officers of the Company be, and each of them hereby is, authorized to execute any amendment, document, certificate or other instrument and to do all such acts and things as they or counsel for the Company may deem necessary or
advisable to carry out the purposes of the foregoing resolutions; and 
  
 FURTHER RESOLVED, that the appropriate officers of the Company be, and each of them hereby is, authorized to execute any amendments to (1) the Registration Statement on Form S-8 previously filed by the Company registering shares on behalf
the Plan; and (2) any Plan prospectus. 







 Exhibit A 
  
 SECOND AMENDMENT 
 TO THE 
 MCI, INC. 2003 EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN 
  
 Pursuant to the power reserved to it in Section 9.01 of the MCI, Inc. 2003 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the
“Plan”), the Board of Directors of MCI, Inc. hereby amends the Plan as follows: 
  
 Section 4.06, “Source of Shares” is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows: 
  
 Shares offered under the Stock Purchase Plan may be (i) authorized and issued Shares purchased in open market transactions by a Broker pursuant to
directions from the Committee and at the market price prevailing on the applicable exchange or (ii) treasury Shares. 
  
 * * * 
  
 This amendment is hereby adopted effective this      day of                     , 2004. 
  

			
	MCI, INC.
		
	By:	 	  


	Title:
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter C of Chapter II

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter C appear by Amdt. 381, 65 FR 64586, Oct. 30, 2000.

#### § 292.18 Requirements specific to States that administer Nutrition Assistance Program (NAP) programs.

Summer EBT benefits issued by a Territory that administers the Nutrition Assistance Program in lieu of SNAP may only be used by the eligible household that receives such summer benefits to purchase eligible foods from retail food stores that have been approved for participation in the Nutrition Assistance Program in American Samoa, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. States that administer NAP shall establish issuance and accountability systems which ensure that only certified eligible households receive Summer EBT benefits.
Exhibit 32.2

PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICERS CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of Aleritas Capital Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending
March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert D. Orr, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:



| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: May 12, 2008



/s/ Robert D. OrrRobert D. OrrChief Financial Officer




66
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 224 (Monday, November 22, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 71141]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29387]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs


Land Acquisitions; Suquamish Indian Tribe, Washington

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of final agency determination.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs made a final agency 
determination to acquire an approximately 6.67-acre tract of land into 
trust for the Suquamish Indian Tribe of Washington on November 10, 
2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paula L. Hart, Director, Office of 
Indian Gaming, MS-3657 MIB, 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240; 
Telephone (202) 219-4066.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice is published to comply with the 
requirement of 25 CFR part 151.12(b) that notice be given to the public 
of the Secretary's decision to acquire land in trust at least 30 days 
prior to signatory acceptance of the land into trust. The purpose of 
the 30-day waiting period in 25 CFR 151.12(b) is to afford interested 
parties the opportunity to seek judicial review of final administrative 
decisions to take land in trust for Indian tribes and individual 
Indians before transfer of title to the property occurs. On November 
10, 2010, the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs decided to accept an 
approximately 6.67-acre tract of land, consisting of nine (9) parcels, 
of land into trust for the Suquamish Tribe of Washington. The 6.67-acre 
tract of land parcel is located in Suquamish, Washington.
    The land proposed for acquisition is described as follows:
    That part of government lots 2 and 4, section 29, township 26 
north, range 2 east, Willamette Meridian, Kitsap County, Washington, 
described as follows:

Parcels I through IX, inclusive, as shown on volume 72 of surveys, 
pages 226 through 234, inclusive, auditor's file No. 200907220134, 
records of Kitsap County, Washington; together with an easement 16 feet 
in width for access and utilities over portions of Government lot 2, 
said section 29, township 26 north, range 2 east, W.M., as established 
in instruments recorded on December 8, 195, under auditor's file Nos. 
1117923 and 1117924, records of Kitsap County, Washington;
Situate in the County of Kitsap, State of Washington.

    This notice is published in the exercise of authority delegated by 
the Secretary of the Interior to the Assistant Secretary--Indian 
Affairs by 209 Departmental Manual 8.1.

    Dated: November 12, 2010.
Larry Echo Hawk,
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2010-29387 Filed 11-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-4N-P
Description of Compensation Arrangement for Non-Employee Directors



 Exhibit 10.12 
  
 DESCRIPTION OF COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENT FOR NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS 
  
 Non-employee directors of Quest Software, Inc. receive an annual retainer of
$25,000 for serving on the board of directors, and are reimbursed for reasonable expenses incurred by them in attending board and committee meetings. In addition, the chairman of our Audit Committee receives an additional $10,000 annual fee, our
Audit Committee Financial Expert receives an additional $15,000 annual fee, and other members of the Audit Committee receive an additional $5,000 annual fee. The chairman of our Compensation Committee receives an additional $5,000 annual fee, and
each other member of the Compensation Committee receives an additional $2,500 annual fee. 
  
 Non-employee directors are permitted to elect to receive the annual board and committee fees described above in the form of stock options, in lieu of cash, pursuant to the director fee option grant program in our 1999
Stock Incentive Plan. Non-employee board members who have served on the board since the date of the prior year’s annual meeting of shareholders, also receive option grants pursuant to the provisions of the automatic option grant program under
our 1999 Stock Incentive Plan.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

JOE HENRY SCOTT, III,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:19cv3750-TKW-MJF 

DAVID MORGAN, et al.,

Defendants.

/

OR D E R

This case is before the Court based on the magistrate judge’s Report and 

Recommendation (Doc. 10). No objections were filed. Having reviewed the Report 

and Recommendation and the case file, I agree with the magistrate judge that this 

case is due to be dismissed based on Petitioner’s failure to pay the filing fee and 

failure to comply with court orders.

1

 Accordingly, it is 

ORDERED that:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted by the 

Court and incorporated into this Order.

2. This case is DISMISSED, and the Clerk shall close the file.

1

 The Court did not overlook the fact that the Orders with which Plaintiff did not comply 

were returned by the postal service as undeliverable. See Docs. 8, 9. However, that does not

necessarily excuse his noncompliance or preclude the dismissal of this case because Plaintiff was 

responsible for keeping the Court apprised of his current address and his failure to do so is 

tantamount to an abandonment of the case and a failure to prosecute.

Case 3:19-cv-03750-TKW-MJF Document 11 Filed 06/22/20 Page 1 of 2
2

DONE and ORDERED this 22nd day of June, 2020.

T. Kent Wetherell, II 

T. KENT WETHERELL, II

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:19-cv-03750-TKW-MJF Document 11 Filed 06/22/20 Page 2 of 2
#### In the Matter of Gerald L. Schulman, an Attorney.

The above-named attorney, who was admitted to the Bar by this court on December 20, 1961, has submitted to this court a paper dated April 11, 1969, signed by him, and acknowledged by him before a notary public on that day, which states that he no longer intends to practice law in this State and wishes to resign from the Bar of this State. This attorney was indicted by a New York County Grand Jury on October 21, 1968 in an 11-count indictment (No. 3148/68), charging him, *inter alia,*with grand larceny in the second degree (two counts), forgery in the second degree (two counts) and issuing a false financial statement. He pled guilty in the Supreme Court, New York County, on- March 10, 1969, to the crime of attempt to commit the crime of grand larceny in the second degree, a felony, under the first count of the indictment, which charged him with stealing $19,669.44; and he is scheduled for sentencing on June 16, 1969. The resignation is accepted and directed to be filed; and it is ordered that said attorney’s name be struck from the roll of attorneys and counselors at law, effective as of April 28, 1969, the date of this decision. Beldoek, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
#### § 29.3616 Rule 15.

The application of injury as an element of quality shall be expressed in terms of a percentage of tolerance. The appraisal of injury shall be based upon the percentage of affected leaf surface or the degree of injury. In appraising injury, consideration shall be given to the normal characteristics of the group as related to injury.
118 STAT. 1198 PUBLIC LAW 108–314—OCT. 5, 2004

Public Law 108–314

108th Congress

An Act

To authorize the exchange of certain lands within the Martin Luther King, Junior,

National Historic Site for lands owned by the City of Atlanta, Georgia, and

for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Martin Luther King, Junior,

National Historic Site Land Exchange Act’’.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following:

(1) Public Law 96–438 established the Martin Luther King,

Junior, National Historic Site, and allows acquisition, by donation only, of lands owned by the State.

(2) The National Park Service owns a vacant lot that has

no historic significance. The City of Atlanta has expressed

interest in acquiring this property to encourage commercial

development along Edgewood Avenue.

(3) The National Historic Site Visitor Center and Museum

is land-locked and has no emergency ingress or egress, making

it virtually impossible for firefighting equipment to reach.

(4) The acquisition of city-owned property would enable

the National Park Service to establish easy street access to

the National Historic Site Visitor Center and Museum, and

would benefit the City by exchanging a piece of property that

the City could develop.

(b) PURPOSE.—The purpose of this Act is to authorize the

exchange of certain lands within the Martin Luther King, Junior,

National Historic Site for lands owned by the City of Atlanta,

Georgia.

Martin Luther

King, Junior,

National Historic

Site Land

Exchange Act.

16 USC 461 note.

Oct. 5, 2004

[H.R. 1616]

PUBLIC LAW 108–314—OCT. 5, 2004 118 STAT. 1199

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 1616:

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 108–255 (Comm. on Resources).

SENATE REPORTS: No. 108–332 (Comm. on Energy and Natural Resources).

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD:

Vol. 149 (2003): Oct. 28, considered and passed House.

Vol. 150 (2004): Sept. 15, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

SEC. 3. LAND EXCHANGE.

Section 2(b)(1) of the Act of October 10, 1980 (Public Law

96–428; 94 Stat. 1839; 16 U.S.C. 461 note) is amended by striking

the period and inserting ‘‘or exchange.’’.

Approved October 5, 2004.
#### J. R. Jarrett *et al. v.*The City of Chicago.

*Opinion filed October 16, 1899.*

Public improvements—paying *ordinance must specify height of curb required. A*special assessment ordinance for paving a street is invalid which fails to indicate the height of the curbing required in the construction of the improvement. *(Holden*v. *City of Chicago,*172 Ill. 263, followed.)

Writ of Error *to the*County Court of Cook county; the Hon. C. M. Barickman, Judge, presiding.

Hillis & McCoy, (Charles S. McCoy, of.counsel,) for plaintiffs in error.

Charles S. Thornton, Corporation Counsel, and Armand F. Teefy, for defendant in error.

Mr. Justice Wilkin

delivered the opinion of the court:

This is a writ of error to review a judgment of the county court of Cook county confirming a special assessment levied to defray the cost of curbing, grading and paving a system of streets in Chicago known as the “St. Layrence avenue system.”

The principal' error assigned is, that the ordinance authorizing the street improvement, and upon which the assessment is predicated, is invalid, in that it fails to designate the height of the curbing required in the construction of the improvement. This same question was before this court in the case of *Holden*v. *City of Chicago,*172 Ill. 263, and several subsequent cases, and the contention of plaintiffs in error was there sustained. The same reasoning urged by defendant in error in this case was presented and considered in those cases. We find no sufficient reason now for changing the conclusion there reached. The judgment below must accordingly be reversed.

*Judgment reversed.*