alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
38390.

#### DAVIS v. HULSEY *et al.*

Nichols, Judge.

1. “The act of March 10, 1933 (Ga. L. 1933, p. 290 et seq.), which by amendment is now applicable to the Civil Court of Fulton County, provides, in part: Sec. 42 (c) ‘In all cases wherein the amount involved, exclusive of interest, attorney's’ fees, and costs, is less than three hundred dollars, an appeal shall lie from the order overruling or refusing the motion for a new trial or the final order or judgment of the trial judge, as the case may be, to the Appellate Division of said court.’ Sec. 42 (h) ‘In all cases wherein the amount involved, exclusive of interest, attorneys’ fees, and costs, is three hundred dollars or more, the order overruling or refusing the motion for new trial or the final order or judgment of the trial court, as the case may be, shall be subject to review by bill of exceptions to the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court, in the same manner judgments and orders of the superior courts are now reviewed.’ See *Milikin v. Johnson,*78 Ga. App. 479 (51 S. E. 2d 561), and citations.” *Atlanta Laundricoin Corp. v. Hunnicutt,*93 Ga. App. 87 (1) (91 S. E. 2d 127). See also *General Assurance Corp. v. Roberts,*92 Ga. App. 834 (90 S. E. 2d 70).

2. Applying the above law to the facts in the present case this court is without jurisdiction of the writ of error and the same must be dismissed. The plaintiff sued for $295 plus stated attorneys’ fees. The amount involved, exclusive of attorneys’ fees, costs, etc. was less than $300 and no appeal was made to the Appellate Division of the Civil Court of Fulton County. A direct appeal to this court will not lie in such a case.

*Writ of error dismissed.*

*Felton, C. J., and Bell, J. concur.*

*318Decided September 7, 1960.

*Everett L. Almon,*for plaintiff in error.

*Sheats, Parker & Webb, Guy Parker,*contra.
# EUR-Lex - 31994D0077 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31994D0077

**94/77/EC: Commission Decision of 7 February 1994 amending Council Decision 90/424/EEC on expenditure in the veterinary field **

*
Official Journal L 036 , 08/02/1994 P. 0015 - 0015 Finnish special edition: Chapter 3 Volume 56 P. 0033 Swedish special edition: Chapter 3 Volume 56 P. 0033 *

COMMISSION DECISION of 7 February 1994 amending Council Decision 90/424/EEC on expenditure in the veterinary field (94/77/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Decision 90/424/EEC of 26 June 1990 on expenditure in the veterinary field (1), as last amended by Decision 93/439/EEC (2), and in particular Article 24 (1) thereof,

Whereas Article 24 of Decision 90/424/EEC provides for the possibility of a Community financial measure for the eradication and monitoring of the diseases listed in the Annex thereto;

Whereas heartwater, babesiosis and anaplasmosis transmitted by vector insects are present in the French overseas departments;

Whereas the specific health situation of the French overseas departments justifies the addition of the abovmentioned diseases to the Annex to Decision 90/424/EEC;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following indents are hereby added to Group 1 of the disease list in the Annex to Decision 90/424/EEC:

'- heartwater transmitted by vector insects in the French overseas departments

- babesiosis transmitted by vector insects in the French overseas departments

- anaplasmosis transmitted by vector insects in the French overseas departments'.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 7 February 1994.

For the Commission

René STEICHEN

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ No L 224, 18. 8. 1990, p. 19.

(2) OJ No L 203, 13. 8. 1993, p. 34.
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.01
 
                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
 
   
We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Prospectus
constituting part of the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-22735 and
No. 333-46419) of HNC Software Inc. of our report dated January 29, 1998, except
as to Note 11 which is as of February 13, 1998, appearing on page 36 of this
Form 10-K/A-1. We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the
Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No. 33-92902, No. 333-14323, No. 333-18871
and No. 333-46875) of HNC Software Inc. of our report dated January 29, 1998,
except as to Note 11 which is as of February 13, 1998, appearing on page 36 of
this Form 10-K/A-1. We also consent to the incorporation by reference of our
report on the Financial Statement Schedule, which appears on page 62 of this
Form 10-K.
    
 
PRICE WATERHOUSE LLP
 
San Diego, California
February 25, 1998
#### Aldrich et al. *v.*Bordner.

[No. 17,100.

Filed April 3, 1943.]

*■Atkinson & Sanders,*of Auburn, for appellants.

*Howard S. Grimm,*of Auburn, for appellee.

Flanagan, P. J. —

Appellants’ brief does not comply with the rules of this court and therefore no question is presented to us.

Rule 2-17 (e) provides that appellants’ brief must contain “A concise statement of so much of the record as fully presents every error and exception relied on, referring to the pages and lines of the transcript.” Appellants’ brief here contains only the evidence and the judgment. There are no rulings of the court and no pleadings, and no references to the transcript.

The judgment is for appellee in the sum of $150 on appellee’s cross-complaint and agaihoC appellants on their complaint. But neither the complaint or cross-*231complaint or their substance are set out. The error relied upon for reversal is the overruling of appellants’ motion for a new trial, but the motion is not set out. Judgment affirmed.

Blessing, C. J., not participating.

Note. — Reported in 47 N. E. (2d) 828.
#### § 1.661 What is the duration of accreditation by a recognized accreditation body?

A recognized accreditation body may grant accreditation to a third-party certification body under this subpart for a period not to exceed 4 years.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### Foreign-Trade Zones Board

          - [Order No. 1728]

Pursuant to the authority granted in the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), and the Foreign-Trade Zones Board Regulations (15 CFR part 400), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board has adopted the following order:

*Whereas,*                     on April 27, 1984, the Foreign-Trade Zones Board issued a grant of authority to the St. Louis County Port Authority (grantee of FTZ 102) authorizing the establishment of Foreign-Trade Subzone 102A at the Ford Motor Corporation plant in Hazelwood, Missouri (Board Order 252, 49 FR 19541, 5/8/84);                

*Whereas,*                     the St. Louis County Port Authority has advised that zone procedures are no longer needed at the facility and requested voluntary termination of Subzone 102A (FTZ Docket 66-2010);                

*Whereas,*                     the request has been reviewed by the FTZ Staff and Customs and Border Protection officials, and approval has been recommended;                

*Now, therefore,*                     the Foreign-Trade Zones Board terminates the subzone status of Subzone 102A, effective this date.                

Signed at Washington, DC, this 20th day of December 2010.

Ronald K. Lorentzen,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.

Andrew McGilvray,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2010-33125 Filed 12-30-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
#### § 1201.313 Equipment.

Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.313, subrecipients of States shall follow such policies and procedures allowed by the State with respect to the use, management and disposal of equipment acquired under a Federal award.
**Exhibit 23.1**

  

**Consent of Independent Registered PublicAccounting Firm**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the RegistrationStatement (Form N-2 No. 333-230336) of Capitala Finance Corp. and in the related Prospectus of our reports dated March 2, 2020,with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Capitala Finance Corp. and the effectiveness of internal control overfinancial reporting of Capitala Finance Corp. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2019.

 

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

 

Charlotte, North Carolina

March 2, 2020
§ 422.6 Notification of USDA of allegations of research misconduct. ( a ) Research institutions that conduct USDA-funded extramural research must promptly notify OIG and the USDA RIO of all allegations of research misconduct involving USDA funds when the institution inquiry into the allegation warrants the institution moving on to an investigation.
( b ) Individuals at research institutions who suspect research misconduct at the institution should report allegations in accordance with the institution's research misconduct policies and procedures. Anyone else who suspects that researchers or research institutions performing Federally-funded research may have engaged in research misconduct is encouraged to make a formal allegation of research misconduct to OIG. ( 1 ) OIG may be notified using any of the following methods: ( i ) Via the OIG Hotline: Telephone: (202) 690-1622, (800) 424-9121, (202) 690-1202 (TDD).
( ii ) Email: *usda_hotline@oig.usda.gov .*
( iii ) U.S. Mail: United States Department of Agriculture, Office of Inspector General, P.O. Box 23399, Washington, DC 20026-3399.
( 2 ) The USDA RIO may be reached at: USDA Research Integrity Officer, 214W Whitten Building, Washington, DC 20250; telephone: 202-720-5923; Email: *researchintegrity@usda.gov .*
( c ) To the extent known, the following details should be included in any formal allegation: ( 1 ) The name of the research projects involved, the nature of the alleged misconduct, and the names of the individual or individuals alleged to be involved in the misconduct;
( 2 ) The source or sources of funding for the research project or research projects involved in the alleged misconduct;
( 3 ) Important dates;
( 4 ) Any documentation that bears upon the allegation; and
( 5 ) Any other potentially relevant information.
( d ) Safeguards for informants give individuals the confidence that they can bring allegations of research misconduct made in good faith to the attention of appropriate authorities or serve as informants to an inquiry or an investigation without suffering retribution. Safeguards include protection against retaliation for informants who make good faith allegations, fair and objective procedures for the examination and resolution of allegations of research misconduct, and diligence in protecting the positions and reputations of those persons who make allegations of research misconduct in good faith. The identity of informants who wish to remain anonymous will be kept confidential to the extent permitted by law or regulation.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 59 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                      February 2, 2005.
    Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to 
consider in the House the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 36) expressing the 
continued support of Congress for equal access of military recruiters to 
institutions of higher education. The concurrent resolution shall be considered 
as read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the concurrent 
resolution and preamble to final adoption without intervening motion or demand 
for division of the question except: (1) one hour of debate on the concurrent 
resolution equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Armed Services; and (2) one motion to recommit.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 525 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 525

    Designating September 16, 2017, as ``Isaac M. Wise Temple Day''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 14, 2017

 Mr. Chabot submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
            the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Designating September 16, 2017, as ``Isaac M. Wise Temple Day''.

Whereas 2017 marks the 175th anniversary of the incorporation of the 
        congregation of the Isaac M. Wise Temple in Cincinnati, Ohio;
Whereas 2017 marks the 150th anniversary of the establishment of the current 
        site for the Isaac M. Wise Temple, also known as the ``Plum Street 
        Temple'';
Whereas Rabbi Isaac M. Wise led that congregation for nearly a half century, 
        establishing the congregation as the cradle of American Reform Judaism 
        and helping to make Cincinnati a center of Jewish life in the United 
        States;
Whereas Rabbi Isaac M. Wise founded the Union of American Hebrew Congregations 
        (now known as the ``Union for Reform Judaism'') in 1873 and the Central 
        Conference of Reform Rabbis in 1889 to help lead the United States 
        Jewish Reform movement;
Whereas Rabbi Isaac M. Wise founded the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati in 
        1875, now the oldest rabbinical school in continuous existence in the 
        United States; and
Whereas the Isaac M. Wise Plum Street Temple is listed on the National Register 
        of Historic Places for the significant role that the Temple played in 
        the history of Reform Judaism and for the unique Moorish architectural 
        style of the Temple: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) supports the designation of ``Isaac M. Wise Temple 
        Day''; and
            (2) recognizes the importance of the Isaac M. Wise Temple 
        in--
                    (A) United States Jewish history;
                    (B) establishing Cincinnati, Ohio, as a great 
                center of Jewish life; and
                    (C) contributing to religious life in the United 
                States.
                                 <all>
```
DIRECTORY•DESC•SRPID•CONSULTANT•PHASE•STATUS•TRANSMIT•SUBMITDATE•PACKNUM

DGW2H10•DUPONT CHAMBERS WORKS DGW 2H10•NJD002385730•URS•REMED ACTION•PACKAGED•A•04/29/11•
## NO. 12

- 1 2

- 00 419

- C V

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

IN RE: §

JEFFERY LEN JACKSON , § ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

RELATOR §

MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM In this original proceeding, Relator Jeffery Len Jackson seeks a writ of mandamus requiring Lori Oliver, District Clerk of Shelby County, Texas, to file certain documents he has presented to her in connection with his attempt to enforce a final divorce decree.
A court of a ppeals has the authority to issue writs of mandamus against a judge of a district or county in the court of appeals district and all writs necessary to enforce its jurisdiction.
T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN

. § 22.221 (Vernon 2004). In order for a district clerk t o fall within this court’s jurisdictional reach, it must be established that the issuance of the writ of mandamus is necessary to enforce its jurisdiction. See id .; In re Coronado , 980 S.W.2d 691, 692

- 93 (Tex. App.

– San Antonio 1998, orig. proceeding). Ja ckson has not demonstrated that the exercise of this court’s mandamus authority against the respondent is necessary to enforce its jurisdiction. Consequently, we have no authority to issue a writ of mandamus. See T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN

. § 22.221; In re Coro nado , 980 S.W.2d at 692

- 93. Accordingly, the petition for writ of
mandamus is dismissed for want of jurisdiction

. Opinion delivered May 31 , 20 1 3

. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

( PUBLISH )

## COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

MAY 31 , 201 3

NO. 12

- 1 2

- 00 419

- C V

JEFFERY LEN JACKSON ,

Relator

v. HON. CHARLES R. MITCHELL
,

Respondent



### O RIGINAL 

### P ROCEEDING

ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by JEFFERY LEN JACKSON , who is the relator in Cause No. D

- 04

- 26134 , pending on the
docket of the 273 rd Judicial District Court of Shelby County, Texas. Said petition for writ of
mandam us having been filed herein on December 11, 201 2 , and the same having been duly considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that it does not have jurisdiction of the petition, it is therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the said petition for writ of mandamus be, and the same is, hereby D ISMISSED FOR W ANT OF J URISDICTION

.

By per curiam opinion

. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.
§ 1134.120 Frequency, reporting periods, and due dates for interim performance reporting under non-construction awards. ( a ) *OMB guidance.* OMB guidance in 2 CFR 200.328(b)(1) addresses performance reporting frequency under grants and cooperative agreements and due dates. ( 1 ) *Reporting frequency.* The OMB guidance states that interim performance reports should be no less frequent than annually, nor more frequent than quarterly except in unusual circumstances (*e.g.,* when more frequent reporting is necessary for effective program monitoring).
( 2 ) *Due dates.* The OMB guidance states that due dates for interim performance reports must be: ( i ) 30 calendar days after the end of the reporting period if interim reports are required quarterly or semiannually; and
( ii ) 90 calendar days after the end of the reporting period if interim reports are required annually, unless the agency elects to require the annual reports before the anniversary dates of multiyear awards.
( b ) *DoD implementation.* DoD implements the OMB guidance in 2 CFR 200.328(b)(1) concerning frequency and due dates of interim performance reports through award terms and conditions, with the following clarifications and added specifications concerning reporting periods: ( 1 ) *Reporting frequency.* DoD Components rarely, if ever, should require recipients to submit interim performance reports more often than annually for basic research awards. Before requiring interim performance reports more frequently than annually for other research awards, DoD Components should carefully consider whether the benefits of more frequent reporting are sufficient to offset the potential for slowing the rate of research progress, due to diversion of researchers' time from research performance to report preparation.
( 2 ) *Reporting periods.* For research awards, a DoD Component should not require any recipient to submit interim performance reports on a cumulative basis—*i.e.,* the second and any subsequent performance report should address only the most recent reporting period and not also address previous reporting periods covered by earlier interim performance reports.
( 3 ) *Due dates.* If a DoD Component requires an interim report more frequently than quarterly due to unusual circumstances, as described in 2 CFR 200.328(a)(1) and paragraph (a)(1) of this section, the DoD Component must specify that the due date for the report is 30 days after the end of the reporting period. For all other interim reports, DoD Components must specify due dates in accordance with paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
( c ) *Award terms and conditions.* A DoD Component must insert wording in lieu of the reserved Section B of REP Article I of its general terms and conditions for non-construction awards to specify: ( 1 ) The frequency with which recipients must submit interim performance reports;
( 2 ) The reporting period each interim performance report must cover; and
( 3 ) The due date for each interim performance report, stated as the number of calendar days after the end of the reporting period.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           8,958
<SECURITIES>                                   917,415
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,202
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               975,708
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,348,119
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          267,116
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,081,003
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,348,119
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               116,391
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   19,781
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    74,474
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>