alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### BRIGANTE v. GEORGE RINGLER & CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.

June 18, 1914.)

Landlord and Tenant (§ 196*)—Occupation afteb Dispossession—Right to Rent.

After a landlord had dispossessed a tenant, the fixtures and furniture of the tenant remained in the premises, and in response to a request by the tenant that the property be allowed to remain until he could secure another customer, the landlord’s attorney wrote: “We shall look to you for the rental of these premises so long as your property is contained therein and we herewith fix the amount for use and occupation, etc., at the amount fixed under the lease.” *Held,*that the landlord was entitled to recover the rental for the use and occupation of the premises.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Landlord and Tenant, Cent. Dig. §§ 737-740; Dec. Dig. § 196.*]

*258Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, First District.

Action by Michael Brigante against George Ringler & Co. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.

Reversed, and new trial ordered.

Argued June term, 1914, before SEABURY, PAGE, and BIJUR, JJ.

Strasbourger, Eschwege & Schallek, of New York City, for appellant.

Phillips, Mahoney & Wagner, of New York City (Anthony A. De Cicco, of New York City, of counsel), for respondent.

PAGE, J.

This action was brought to recover for the use and occupation of certain saloon premises belonging to the plaintiff. The plaintiff dispossessed the tenant in December, 1913. The fixtures and furniture belonging to the defendant remained in the premises. Plaintiff’s agent called upon the defendant and requested the secretary to remove its property. Defendant’s secretary requested that the property be allowed to remain until they could get another customer, This request was repeated in a letter of the defendant to the plaintiff’s attorneys. In response thereto the plaintiff’s attorneys wrote:

> “We shall look to you for the rental of these premises so long as your property is contained therein and we herewith fix the amount for use and occupation of said premises at the amount fixed under the lease.”

Defendant did not reply to the letter, and the property remained in the premises during the month of January. The complaint was dismissed at the end of the plaintiff’s case. This was error. The evidence showed a cause of action against the defendant for the use and occupation of the premises.

Judgment reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. All concur.
116 STAT. 1478 PUBLIC LAW 107–232—OCT. 1, 2002

Public Law 107–232

107th Congress

An Act

To amend section 5307 of title 49, United States Code, to allow transit systems

in urbanized areas that, for the first time, exceeded 200,000 in population according

to the 2000 census to retain flexibility in the use of Federal transit formula

grants in fiscal year 2003, 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. URBANIZED AREA FORMULA GRANTS.

Section 5307(b) of title 49, United States Code, is amended—

(1) by striking the last sentence of paragraph (1);

(2) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs

(3) and (4), respectively;

(3) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:

‘‘(2) SPECIAL RULE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003.—

‘‘(A) INCREASED FLEXIBILITY.—The Secretary may make

grants under this section, from funds made available to

carry out this section for fiscal year 2003, to finance the

operating cost of equipment and facilities for use in mass

transportation in an urbanized area with a population of

at least 200,000 as determined under the 2000 decennial

census of population if—

‘‘(i) the urbanized area had a population of less

than 200,000 as determined under the 1990 Federal

decennial census of population;

‘‘(ii) a portion of the urbanized area was a separate

urbanized area with a population of less than 200,000

as determined under the 1990 Federal decennial census

of population; or

‘‘(iii) the area was not designated as a urbanized

area as determined under the 1990 Federal decennial

census of population.

‘‘(B) MAXIMUM AMOUNTS.—Amounts made available

pursuant to subparagraphs (A)(i) and (A)(ii) shall be no

more than the amount apportioned in fiscal year 2002

to the urbanized area with a population of less than 200,000

as determined in the 1990 Federal decennial census of

population. Amounts made available pursuant to subparagraph (A)(iii) shall be no more than the amount apportioned

under this section for fiscal year 2003.’’; and

Oct. 1, 2002

[H.R. 5157]

PUBLIC LAW 107–232—OCT. 1, 2002 116 STAT. 1479

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 5157

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 107–644 (Comm. on Transportation and Infrastructure).

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 148 (2002):

Sept. 9, considered and passed House.

Sept. 13, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

(4) in paragraph (3) (as redesignated by paragraph (2)

of this section) by aligning subparagraph (C) with subparagraphs (A) and (B).

Approved October 1, 2002.
#### § 51.1907 Mature.

*Mature* means that the tomato has reached the stage of development which will insure a proper completion of the ripening process.
P u g e t S o u n d

To Johnson Point

Transect

1

3

2

4

5

¥¦§5

Nisqually

R

vi er

McAll si et r Cre

e

k

P u g e t S o u n d

To Johnson Point

Transect

1

3

2

4

5

¥¦§5

Nisqually R

vi er

McAll si et r Cre

e

k

Waterfowl Survey Units

Figure 3.4-1

3-37

Source: USFWS, 2000; Ducks Unlimited, 1999; EDAW, 2002

Nisqually NWR Draft CCP/EIS

Chapter 3 Affected Environment

N

0 0.25 0.5 0.125 Miles

1:35,000

P:\0e01401 Nisqually\GIS\mxd\Figure3.4-1.mxd

Legend

Approved Nisqually NWR Boundary

Survey Unit Boundary

2 Waterfowl Survey Unit
---

CONSENT OF JOE C. NEAL & ASSOCIATES

DORAL ENERGY CORP.3300 N. "A" Street, Bldg 2, Suite 218
Midland, TX 79705

The undersigned hereby consents
to the references to our firm in the form and context in which they appear in
the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Doral Energy Corp. for the year ended July 31,
2010 (the Annual Report). We hereby further consent to the inclusion in the
Annual Report of estimates of oil and gas reserves contained in our report
Estimated Reserves and Future Net Revenue as of August 1, 2010, Attributable to
Interests Owned by Doral Energy, Corp. In Certain Properties Located in Texas
(SEC Case) and to the inclusion of our report dated August 24, 2010 as an
exhibit to the Annual Report. We further consent to the incorporation by
reference thereof into Doral Energy Corp.s Registration Statements on Form S-8
(Registration Nos. 333-168724 and No. 333-159480).

|/s/ Joe C. Neal
      & Associates | 
|---------------------------------- | 
|JOE C. NEAL & ASSOCIATES           | 

Midland, Texas November 15, 2010

---
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Mary Prue, Respondent, v. Empire Scrap Metals, Inc., et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

Reynolds, J.

Appeal by the employer and its carrier from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation benefits on the ground that there is no substantial evidence to support the board’s finding of accidental injury and compensable death. Initially appellants do not urge that the decedent’s work activities, particularly in shoveling snow from a four to five foot pile of tires, followed by a fall to the ground, would not meet the test of *Matter of Masse*v. *Robinson Co.*(301 N. Y. 34) and the cases which have followed it if such work were performed as claimant asserts and the board found, but rather contend that the record does not support the board’s finding that such activities in fact occurred. The occurrence of an accident is factual and thus for the board’s determination if its decision is supported by substantial evidence (e.g., *Matter of Nicotera*v. *Dorn’s Transp.,*30 A D 2d 735). Here the testimony of an eyewitness and members of decedent’s family provided a more than adequate basis for the board’s determination (e.g., *Matter of Janitz*v. *Evelyn Realty Co.,*11 A D 2d 822). The issue of credibility of these witnesses was within the sole province *of*the board and cannot be disturbed here (e.g., *Matter of Hemphill*v. *Presbyterian Hosp.,*27 A D 2d 600). Similarly the issue of causal relationship presents no more than the usual conflict of medical testimony and we cannot say that the board could not properly accept the medical testimony as to causal relationship (e.g., *Matter of Ernest*v. *Boggs Lake Estates,*12 N Y 2d 414) and in the exercise of its fact-finding power resolve the controversy as it did (e.g., *Matter of Palermo*v. *Gallucci & Sons,*5 N Y 2d 529). Finally we find no merit in appellants’ argument that decedent’s underlying heart condition should not have been considered. While the strenuous nature of the work is to be based upon normal efforts and not considered solely in regard to the condition of the particular worker (e.g., *Matter of Rollo*v. *Geneva Forge,*22 A D 2d 726) this does not preclude a finding of accident where admittedly arduous work precipitates or hastens the demise of one having an underlying heart condition (e.g., *Matter of Rothstein*v. *Fuller Brush Co.,*30 A D 2d 748). Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Aulisi and Greenblott, JJ., concur in memorandum by Reynolds, J.
52.211-18 Variation in Estimated Quantity.       As prescribed in 11.703(c), insert the following clause in solicitations and contracts when a fixed-price construction contract is contemplated that authorizes a variation in the estimated quantity of unit-priced items:          Variation in Estimated Quantity (Apr 1984)          If the quantity of a unit-priced item in this contract is an estimated quantity and the actual quantity of the unit-priced item varies more than 15 percent above or below the estimated quantity, an equitable adjustment in the contract price shall be made upon demand of either party. The equitable adjustment shall be based upon any increase or decrease in costs due solely to the variation above 115 percent or below 85 percent of the estimated quantity. If the quantity variation is such as to cause an increase in the time necessary for completion, the Contractor may request, in writing, an extension of time, to be received by the Contracting Officer within 10 days from the beginning of the delay, or within such further period as may be granted by the Contracting Officer before the date of final settlement of the contract. Upon the receipt of a written request for an extension, the Contracting Officer shall ascertain the facts and make an adjustment for extending the completion date as, in the judgement of the Contracting Officer, is justified.          (End of clause)    **Parent topic:** 52.211 [Reserved]
52.214-10 Contract Award-Sealed Bidding.       As prescribed in 14.201-6(e), insert the following provision:          Contract Award-Sealed Bidding (July 1990)                                       (a) 						            The Government will evaluate bids in response to this solicitation without discussions and will award a contract to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming to the solicitation, will be most advantageous to the Government considering only price and the price-related factors specified elsewhere in the solicitation.                                          (b) 						            The Government may-                                                         (1) 								                Reject any or all bids;                                                            (2) 								                Accept other than the lowest bid; and                                                            (3) 								                Waive informalities or minor irregularities in bids received.                                                                             (c) 						            The Government may accept any item or group of items of a bid, unless the bidder qualifies the bid by specific limitations. Unless otherwise provided in the Schedule, bids may be submitted for quantities less than those specified. The Government reserves the right to make an award on any item for a quantity less than the quantity offered, at the unit prices offered, unless the bidder specifies otherwise in the bid.                                          (d) 						            A written award or acceptance of a bid mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful bidder within the time for acceptance specified in the bid shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party.                                          (e) 						            The Government may reject a bid as nonresponsive if the prices bid are materially unbalanced between line items or subline items. A bid is materially unbalanced when it is based on prices significantly less than cost for some work and prices which are significantly overstated in relation to cost for other work, and if there is a reasonable doubt that the bid will result in the lowest overall cost to the Government even though it may be the low evaluated bid, or if it is so unbalanced as to be tantamount to allowing an advance payment.                                 (End of provision)    **Parent topic:** 52.214 [Reserved]
#### § 58.211 Packaging room for bulk products.

A separate room or area shall be provided for filling bulk containers, and shall be constructed in accordance with § 58.126. The number of control panels and switch boxes in this area should be kept to a minimum. Control panels shall be mounted a sufficient distance from the walls to facilitate cleaning or satisfactorily sealed to the wall, or shall be mounted in the wall and provided with tight fitting removable doors to facilitate cleaning. An adequate exhaust system shall be provided to minimize the accumulation of product dust within the packaging room and where needed, a dust collector shall be provided and properly maintained to keep roofs and outside areas free of dry product. Only packaging materials that are used within a day's operation may be kept in the packaging area. These materials shall be kept on metal racks or tables at least six inches off the floor. Unnecessary fixtures, equipment, or false areas which may collect dust and harbor insects, should not be allowed in the packaging room.
#### Peter Dohr Construction Co., Inc., Appellant, v. Mercury Development Corp., Respondent.

Order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: It may well be that in denying the motion for summary judgment without stating the reasons therefor, Special Term felt that the contract was ambiguous and a trial was neccessary to receive evidence which would make clear the intention of the parties *(Spencer*v. *Childs,*1 N Y 2d 103, 107; *Lachs*v. *Fidelity & Cas. Co.,*306 N. Y. 357, 364). We would also likf to point out that in an action for specific performance with abatement, a judg ment for the plaintiff may be denied if the vendee had knowledge of the unremovable incumbrance at the time of execution of the contract (49 Am. Jur., Specific Performance, § 106). Proof of such knowledge would be admissible on trial, not as varying the terms of the contract, but as establishing the conditions existing at the time of execution relevant to whether the equitable remedy should be denied *(Warren*v. *Hall,*41 Hun 466). (Appeal from order of Monroe Special Term denying plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, in an action for specific performance.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Del Vecchio- and Marsh, JJ.
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

SHELDON LEE HUTCHINS,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:20cv5952-MCR-HTC

DAVID MICHAEL ROWELL, et al.,

Defendants.

______________________________/

ORDER

Plaintiff Sheldon Lee Hutchins has filed a motion requesting appointment of 

counsel. Doc. 209. Considering the parties’ motions for summary judgment have

been denied, Doc. 198, and this case is moving toward trial, the Court will grant 

Plaintiff’s motion and direct the clerk to issue a notice to all attorneys registered with 

the Court’s electronic filing system inviting an attorney to represent Plaintiff.

This Order is merely a request for an attorney to represent Plaintiff; an 

attorney may decline to appear in this case. Plaintiff, therefore, should continue to 

prosecute his case and continue to comply with all Court orders at this time.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. Hutchins’ motion requesting appointment of counsel, Doc. 209, is 

GRANTED to the extent set forth in this Order.

Case 3:20-cv-05952-MCR-HTC Document 210 Filed 10/21/24 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 3:20cv5952-MCR-HTC

2. The clerk shall issue a notice to all attorneys registered with the Court’s 

electronic filing system, and publish on the Court’s website, the notice soliciting an 

attorney set forth below. The notice must state:

This is a notice of an opportunity to provide representation in the case 

of Hutchins v. Rowell, et al., Case No. 3:20cv5952-MCR-HTC.

Plaintiff Sheldon Lee Hutchins is currently serving a sentence in the 

Florida Department of Corrections. Plaintiff brings Fourth Amendment

excessive force and failure to intervene claims against the Defendants, 

who are deputies with the Santa Rosa County Sheriff’s Office. The 

incident forming the basis of the claims occurred while Plaintiff was 

being booked into the Santa Rosa County Jail. Further detail is 

provided in the fifth amended complaint (Doc. 30), and the order and 

report and recommendation denying the parties’ motions for summary 

judgment (Docs. 193 & 198). The parties are currently preparing for 

trial. 

Members of the district’s bar will be afforded access to the electronic 

docket without charge for the purpose of considering whether to 

undertake the representation of Plaintiff. An attorney who wishes to 

provide representation may contact Plaintiff1 directly, work out a fee 

arrangement that is satisfactory to both Plaintiff and counsel,2 and may 

enter the case by filing a notice of appearance. Limited funds are 

sometimes available from the district’s Bench and Bar Fund for the 

payment of out-of-pocket expenses incurred by an attorney providing 

pro bono representation. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 21st day of October, 2024.

s/ Hope Thai Cannon

HOPE THAI CANNON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1 Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at Santa Rosa Correctional Institution in Milton, Florida.

2 The Court encourages attorneys to consider representing Hutchins pro bono.

Case 3:20-cv-05952-MCR-HTC Document 210 Filed 10/21/24 Page 2 of 2
#### § 614.13 Appealability review.

If NRCS states that a decision is not adverse to the individual participant, and thus, no right to appeal exists, NRCS will notify the participant that he may seek review of that determination from the NAD Director.
**U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Good Neighbor Environmental Board**  

## Meeting Day 2 **March 19**  **- 20**  **, 2008** W ashington Hilton Towers Cabinet Room 1919 Connecticut Ave. NW Washington, DC 20009 Phone: (202) 483 - 3000 

### AGENDA **Thursday , March**  **20 , 2008** 

**Bu siness Meeting and Strategic Planning Session**  7:30 A.M. **Registration** 8:00 **Business Meeting**

- New Member Self Introductions, Goal s for Board Membership - Approval of Minutes from Last Meeting - Dissemination Pl an for El eventh Report 8:30 **Discussion of**  **Twelfth Report** 

- Determine St ruct ure -Setup workgroups, including coordinators -Setup firstworkgroup t eleconference calls - Ot her logist ics 9:30 **Performance Measures**

**-** Review of existing performance measures - Syst em fo r t racking effectiv eness during 2008 10:00 **Break** 10:15 **Strategic Planning Session –**  **Part 1:**

-Successes, lessons learned during 2007- Goal s for 2008

11:30 – **Lunch** 12:30 P.M. **Strategic Planning Session –**  **Part 2 : Next Steps** 

**-** Follow- up to rel ease of El eventh Report (tracking system for dissemination, for receiving response from CEQ) - Tool s, t echniques t o develop Twelfth Report - Cal exico meeting preparations - Ot her st eps 2:00 **Report -**  **Outs (continued)**  3:00 **Meeting Ends** ### 3/1 3 /08
---

EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Jiyong He, the Chief Financial Officer of
CHINA FORESTRY INDUSTRY GROUP, INC. (the Company), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:

1.     The Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2010 (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.     Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this statement
this 12th day of April, 2011.

/s/ Jiyong
HeJiyong He Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and
Accounting Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to China Forestry Industry Group, Inc. and will be
retained by China Forestry Industry Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being
filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the
Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general
incorporation language in such filing.

---
§ 52.1847 Colors of golden seedless raisins. The color of Golden Seedless Raisins is not a factor of quality for the purpose of these grades. The color requirements applicable to the respective color designations are as follows: ( a ) “Well colored” means that the raisins are practically uniform in color and may range from yellow or golden to light amber color with a predominating yellow or golden color and that not more than 1 ⁄ 2 of 1 percent, by weight, of all the raisins may be definitely dark berries.
( b ) “Reasonably well colored” means that the raisins are reasonably uniform in color and may range from yellow or golden or greenish yellow to light amber wherein the predominating color may be greenish yellow or light amber and that not more than 3 percent, by weight, of all the raisins may be definitely dark berries.
( c ) “Fairly well colored” means that the raisins are fairly uniform in color and may range from yellow or greenish yellow to amber or light greenish amber and that not more than 6 percent, by weight, of all the raisins may be definitely dark berries.
( d ) “Colored” means that the raisins may be variable in color and may range from yellowish green to dark amber or dark greenish amber; that not more than 20 percent, by weight, of all the raisins may be definitely dark berries.
( e ) “Definitely dark berries” means raisins which are definitely darker than dark amber and characteristic of naturally “raisined” grapes.