alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
38870.

#### DENNIS v. WEAVER.

Decided May 25, 1961

Rehearing denied June 12, 1961.

*Morton P. Levine, Charlie Franco,*for plaintiff in error.

*Joan Larsen, Woodruff, Latimer, Saveli, Lane & Williams, Benj. B. Blackburn III,*contra.

Eberhardt, Judge.

Bartow Dennis held a number of tickets which were given to him on the purchase of gasoline from a filling station, entitling him to participate in a drawing to be held for an automobile which the filling station was giving away. Elizabeth Weaver, his girl friend, alleged that Dennis gave the tickets to her, that one of them turned out to be the “lucky” one, and that he thereafter took the winning ticket from her pocketbook and claimed the prize for himself, refusing to deliver it to her. She brought trover for the ticket, or its value, which she alleged to have been the value of the automobile. The case was tried before Judge Thomas L. Camp of the Fulton Civil Court, without a jury, and after the close of the evidence judgment was rendered for the plaintiff.

Under the plaintiff’s testimony, the defendant had given her the ticket “two weeks before the car was raffled off.” She referred to it numerous times as having been the “winning ticket,” by virtue of which she had “won the car.” And, as to how the defendant had obtained the ticket before giving it to her, she testified that “he got it from the service station there; you buy gas and they give you a ticket. He bought gas to get the ticket.” There was similar testimony by the defendant. Clearly, under this testimony the ticket was a part of a gift enterprise, or lot*825tery. *Bloodworth v. Gay,*213 Ga. 51 (96 S. E. 2d 602); *Standridge v. Williford-Burns-Rice Co.,*148 Ga. 283 (96 S. E. 498).

Such an enterprise is against the laws and the public policy of this State, and the courts will not lend their aid in determining the title to a ticket issued in such a scheme or enterprise, or the rights of an alleged holder thereof to the prize, or the value thereof.

Here the plaintiff’s right to prevail was dependent upon her title to the ticket, which, under the pleadings and the evidence, she had acquired by gift from the defendant some two weeks prior to the drawing, when it was determined that the ticket was the “lucky” one, or the winning one. Thus, both the plaintiff and defendant were participants in and parties to the gift enterprise, or lottery, and neither is in position to invoke the aid of the court in connection therewith. It follows that the trial judge erred in overruling the motion for a new trial on the general grounds which was filed by the defendant after the entry of judgment against him.

*Judgment reversed.*

*Carlisle, P. J., and Nichols, J., concur.*
<PAGE>





                                                                    Exhibit 23.1





INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Level 8 Systems, Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Numbers
333-44598, 333-64637, 333-33122, and 333-86303 of Level 8 Systems, Inc. on form
S-8 of our report dated March 28, 2002, (which report expresses an unqualified
opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the Company's ability
to continue as a going concern) appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of
Level 8 Systems, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2002.



/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
-------------------------
Raleigh, North Carolina
March 31, 2003
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7422 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7422

  To amend the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 to provide cost-recovery 
             authority for the Department of the Interior.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 20, 2024

Ms. Ocasio-Cortez introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                   the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 to provide cost-recovery 
             authority for the Department of the Interior.

    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 ``Geothermal Cost-Recovery Authority 
Act of 2024''.

SEC. 2. COST RECOVERY FROM GEOTHERMAL LEASING, PERMITTING, AND 
              INSPECTIONS.

    Section 6 of the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 (30 U.S.C. 1005) is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(j) Cost Recovery.--
            ``(1) In general.--The Secretary may require an applicant 
        for, or a holder of, a geothermal lease to reimburse the United 
        States for all reasonable administrative and other costs 
        incurred by the United States from--
                    ``(A) processing the application for the geothermal 
                lease, including any application for an operations 
                plan, geothermal drilling permit, utilization plan, 
                site license, facility construction permit, commercial 
                use permit, and any other approval associated with a 
                geothermal lease; and
                    ``(B) inspecting and monitoring--
                            ``(i) geophysical exploration activities;
                            ``(ii) the drilling, plugging, and 
                        abandonment of wells; and
                            ``(iii) the construction, operation, 
                        termination, and reclamation of any well site 
                        or facility for the utilization of geothermal 
                        resources pursuant to the geothermal lease.
            ``(2) Considerations.--In determining whether to require 
        reimbursement under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall consider 
        whether there is in existence a cooperative cost share 
        agreement between the United States and the holder of a 
        geothermal lease.''.
                                 <all>
```
p110226.en1 INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 11-0226 Post-Focus Draft Revision 1 6/24/2013 ENGINEER: Macek \ BCS \ JAS

Page 1p110226.en1

SAT (concerns) (03/05/2011): Related Cases and Related Cases and Misc SAT Info: Ecotox: Migration to groundwater: Negligible PBT rating: P1B1T2 . Health: 2-3 Dermal, Drinking Water, Inhalation Eco: 1 No releases to Water (CoC = 1000 ppb) OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: 1-2C NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS: Generated by the 06/07/2005 version of ChemSTEER.

Page 2p110226.en1 standard 3% model is more conservative. Per the amendment, the drums will be cleaned with water and the water disposed by incineration or deep-well injection. CEB assumes incineration or deepwell injection assuming compliance with proposed consent order.
RELEASE TOTAL 6.3E+2 kg/yr - all sites

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 11-0226 USE1: Number of Sites/ Location: 10 unknown site(s) Days/yr: 50

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES ESTIMATE SUMMARY IRER Note: The daily releases listed for any source below may coincide with daily releases from the other sources to the same medium. Due to the small amount of PMN residual PMN present after polymerization, CEB uses the submission estimates for releases as a basis for all releases subsequent to polymerization. Incineration Output 2: 3.0E-3 kg/site-day over 50 days/yr from 10 sites or 1.5E+0 kg/yr
Page 4p110226.en1

Incineration Output 1: 8.0E-4 kg/site-day over 50 days/yr from 10 sites or 4.0E-1 kg/yr Output 2: 4.0E-3 kg/site-day over 50 days/yr from 10 sites or 2.0E+0 kg/yr

Other High End: 1.2E-3 kg/site-day over 50 days/yr from 10 sites or 6.0E-1 kg/yr

RELEASE TOTAL 4.1E+0 kg/yr - all sites

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

Page 5p110226.en1

RELEASE TOTAL 6.3E+2 kg/yr - all sites

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 11-0226 USE2: Water-Soluble Polymer for Hair Cosmetics Number of Sites/ Location: 10 unknown site(s) Days/yr: 50

Page 7p110226.en1

Page 9
EXHIBIT
32.2
 
 CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 
 Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)
and
 Rules
13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 
  I,
Dominick Ragone, Chief Financial Officer of Icahn Enterprises G.P. Inc., the
general partner of Icahn Enterprises L.P. (the “Registrant”), certify that, to
the best of my knowledge, based upon a review of the Icahn Enterprises L.P.
quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010 of the
Registrant (the “Report”):
  (1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
  (2) The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the
Registrant.
  /s/  Dominick
      RagoneDominick
      RagoneChief
      Financial Officer of Icahn Enterprises G.P. Inc., the general partner of
      Icahn Enterprises L.P.
 
 Date:
August 4, 2010
U. S. Department of Homeland Security 

 

 Office for Domestic Preparedness

 

 Washington, D.C. 20531 

ODP Information Bulletin 

No. 107 April 15, 2004 

TO: All State Administrative Agency Heads 

 All State Administrative Agency Points of Contact 

All State Homeland Security Directors 

FROM: C. Suzanne Mencer 

 Director

SUBJECT: Submission of Required Documentation 

Information Bulletin #97, dated January 23, 2004, requested a report of actual expenses that were 

incurred by state agencies and local jurisdictions for critical infrastructure protection during the 

last Orange level period, which began on December 21, 2003 and ended on January 9, 2004. To 

date, ODP has not received all of the expense reports requested, and some that were received 

were incomplete. SAAs should coordinate submission of this information with their respective 

Preparedness Officers as soon as possible. 

Additionally, SAAs are reminded that required documentation, such as budget detail worksheets, 

does not need to be submitted all at once. ODP Preparedness Officers will work with grantees to

allow for the submission of select critical infrastructure protection expense reimbursements or 

select budget detail worksheets at periodic intervals to relieve the burden of compiling, 

reviewing, and submitting the worksheets to ODP for approval all at once. This will also allow 

for the periodic release of funding for immediate draw down and expenditure where applicable, 

thus enhancing the availability of funds and expediting the state and local procurement process. 

 

Thank you for your continued efforts and cooperation.
§ 520.2045 Pyrantel tartrate powder. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each gram of powder contains 106 milligrams (10.6 percent) or 113 milligrams (11.3 percent) pyrantel tartrate.
( b ) *Sponsor.* See No. 054771 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter for use of 11.3 percent powder as in paragraph (d)(1) and 10.6 percent powder as in paragraph (d)(2) and of this section.
( c ) *Related tolerances.* See § 556.560 of this chapter.
( d ) *Conditions of use* — ( 1 ) *Horses* — ( i ) *Amount.* Administer as a single dose at 0.57 gram of pyrantel tartrate per 100 pounds of body weight mixed with the usual grain ration. Do not administer by stomach tube or dose syringe.
( ii ) *Indications for use.* For the removal and control of infections from the following mature parasites: Large strongyles (*Strongylus vulgaris, S. edentatus,* *S. equinus*), small strongyles (*Trichonema* spp., *Triodontophorus*), pinworms (*Oxyuris*), and large roundworms (*Parascaris*).
( iii ) *Limitations.* Do not treat severely debilitated animals with this drug. Do not use in horses intended for human consumption.
( 2 ) *Swine* — ( i ) *Amount.* Add to feed at 0.4 gram pyrantel tartrate per pound of non-pelleted ration. The ration is administered as a single treatment as the sole ration at the rate of 1 pound per 40 pounds of animal weight for animals up to 200 pounds. Animals 200 pounds and over are administered 5 pounds of ration per animal.
( ii ) *Indications for use.* For the removal and control of large roundworms (*Ascaris suum*) and nodular worm (*Oesophagostomum*) infections.
( iii ) *Limitations.* Consult veterinarian before using in severely debilitated animals. Do not treat within 24 hours of slaughter.
[79 FR 28827, May 20, 2014]
EXHIBIT 10.56

                              Note to Exhibit 10.56



         The following Purchase Agreement Assignment is substantially identical
in all material respects to five additional Purchase Agreement Assignments
except as follows:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


Owner Participant                                        Date                                          Aircraft (Tail No.)
-----------------                                        ----
<S>                                                      <C>                                           <C>
NCC Charlie Company*                                     September 10, 1998*                           N575ML*
NCC Charlie Company                                      September 10, 1998                            N576ML
General Electric Capital Corporation                     November 10, 1998                             N577ML
General Electric Capital Corporation                     November 10, 1998                             N578ML
Castle Harbour Leasing Inc.                              December 10, 1998                             N579ML                      
NCC Charlie Company                                      January 25, 1999                              N580ML                     
</TABLE>





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

*          Filed document
Editorial Note on Part 184
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 184 appear at 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001; 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001; 68 FR 15355, Mar. 31, 2003; 69 FR 13717, Mar. 24, 2004; 70 FR 40880, July 15, 2005; 70 FR 67651, Nov. 8, 2005; and 81 FR 49897, July 29, 2016.

§ 184.1807 Sodium thiosulfate. ( a ) Sodium thiosulfate (Na2S2O3·5H2O, CAS Reg. No. 010102-0917-097) is also known as sodium hyposulfite. It is prepared synthetically by the reaction of sulfides and sulfur dioxide (SO2), the reaction of sulfur and sulfite, or the oxidation of metal sulfides and hydrosulfides.
( b ) The ingredient meets the specifications of the “Food Chemicals Codex,” 3d Ed. (1981), p. 304, which is incorporated by reference. Copies may be obtained from the National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20418, or may be examined at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html .*
( c ) The ingredient is used as a formulation aid as defined in § 170.3(o)(14) of this chapter and reducing agent as defined in § 170.3(o)(22) of this chapter.
( d ) The ingredient is used in alcoholic beverages and table salt in accordance with § 184.1(b)(1) at levels not to exceed good manufacturing practice. Current good manufacturing practice results in a maximum level, as served, of 0.00005 percent for alcoholic beverages as defined in § 170.3(n)(2) of this chapter and 0.1 percent for table salt as defined in § 170.3(n)(26) of this chapter.
( e ) Prior sanctions for this ingredient different from the uses established in this section do not exist or have been waived.
[43 FR 22938, May 30, 1978, as amended at 49 FR 5613, Feb. 4, 1984]
[No. 40387-7-I.

Division One.

November 3, 1997.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. L.L., *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 96-8-08313-7, Charles V. Johnson, J., entered February 25, 1997. *Affirmed in part*and *remanded*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
U. S. Department of Homeland Security

 Office for Domestic Preparedness

 Washington, D.C. 20531

ODP Information Bulletin

No. 86 November 5, 2003

TO: All State Administrative Agency Heads

All State Administrative Agency Points of Contact

All Urban Areas Security Initiative Points of Contact

All ODP Training Partners

FROM: C. Suzanne Mencer

Director

SUBJECT: Additional Guidance on Allowable Management and Administration Funds

The Office for Domestic Preparedness has recently reviewed requests from several State

Administrative Agencies (SAAs) seeking additional clarification on allowable Management and

Administrative (M&A) costs under the Fiscal Year 2003 State Homeland Security Grant

Program (SHSGP) II.

States may use no more than 3% of the overall grant award to pay for M&A activities associated

with the implementation of the State assessment. This 3% administrative allowance does not

relieve States of the SHSGP II requirement to pass through 80% of the total grant award to local

units of government. The administrative allowance can be used at the State or local level, but the

combined administrative allowance can not exceed 3% of the overall grant award.

For example, if a State received a SHSGP II award of $1,000,000, the State must pass through at

least $800,000 to local units of government. The total M&A funds available statewide would be

$30,000. If the State retains the entire $30,000, no additional SHSGP II funds may be used for

M&A by sub-grantees. In this case, the State was eligible to retain $200,000 (20%) of the total

grant award for SHSGP II programs at the State level. After subtracting M&A funds retained by

the State, the State would have $170,000 for other program activities. Similarly, if the State

retained only $15,000 of M&A funds, then the remaining $15,000 of funds allowable for M&A

costs would be available to sub-grantees, as part of the total $800,000 sub-awarded, and as

determined by the SAA.

Should you have any additional questions, please contact the ODP Helpline at: 1-800-368-6498.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent certified public accountants, we hereby consent to the
incorporation by reference of our report dated January 25, 2002 on the
consolidated financial statements of SportsLine.com, Inc. and subsidiaries into
the Company's previously filed registration statements on Form S-3 (Registration
Nos. 333-39618, 333-62685 and 333-78921) and Form S-8 (Registration Nos.
333-43746, 333-46021, 333-46023, 333-46029 and 333-57821, 333-33650 and
333-33654).

Arthur Andersen LLP

Fort Lauderdale, Florida,
 March 25, 2002.
§ 310.519 Drug products marketed as over-the-counter (OTC) daytime sedatives. ( a ) Antihistamines, bromides, and scopolamine compounds, either singly or in combinations, have been marketed as ingredients in over-the-counter (OTC) drug products for use as daytime sedatives. The following claims have been made for daytime sedative products: “occasional simple nervous tension,” “nervous irritability,” “nervous tension headache,” “simple nervousness due to common every day overwork and fatigue,” “a relaxed feeling,” “calming down and relaxing,” “gently soothe away the tension,” “calmative,” “resolving that irritability that ruins your day,” “helps you relax,” “restlessness,” “when you're under occasional stress . . . helps you work relaxed.” Based on evidence presently available, there are no ingredients that can be generally recognized as safe and effective for use as OTC daytime sedatives.
( b ) Any OTC drug product that is labeled, represented, or promoted as an OTC daytime sedative (or any similar or related indication) is regarded as a new drug within the meaning of section 201(p) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act for which an approved new drug application under section 505 of the act and part 314 of this chapter is required for marketing.
( c ) Clinical investigations designed to obtain evidence that any drug product labeled, represented, or promoted as an OTC daytime sedative (or any similar or related indication) is safe and effective for the purpose intended must comply with the requirements and procedures governing the use of investigational new drugs set forth in part 312 of this chapter.
( d ) Any OTC daytime sedative drug product introduced into interstate commerce after December 24, 1979, that is not in compliance with this section is subject to regulatory action.
[44 FR 36380, June 22, 1979; 45 FR 47422, July 15, 1980, as amended at 55 FR 11579, Mar. 29, 1990]
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 328 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 328

 Commemorating the 50th anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 16, 2017

 Mr. Suozzi (for himself and Mr. Francis Rooney of Florida) submitted 
   the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 
                            Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Commemorating the 50th anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem, 
                        and for other purposes.

Whereas June 2017 marks the 50th anniversary of the Six Day War and the 
        reunification of Jerusalem;
Whereas Jerusalem has been the focal point of Jewish religious devotion and the 
        site of a continuous Jewish presence for over three millennia, with a 
        Jewish majority since at least 1896;
Whereas Jerusalem is also a holy city for the Christian and Muslim faiths;
Whereas from 1948 to 1967 Jerusalem was a divided city, and Israeli citizens of 
        all faiths as well as Jews of all nationalities were denied access to 
        holy sites in eastern Jerusalem, including the Old City, in which the 
        Western Wall is located;
Whereas since 1967, the rights of all faiths have been respected, and people of 
        all faiths have been permitted to visit their holy sites;
Whereas Israel has continued to be one of America's closest and most reliable 
        allies; and
Whereas it is the long-standing policy of the United States to see a durable and 
        sustainable peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians 
        resulting in two states: a Jewish, democratic state living side by side 
        next to a demilitarized Palestinian state in peace and security: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) recognizes the 50th anniversary of the reunification of 
        Jerusalem;
            (2) re-affirms its support for Israel's commitment to 
        religious freedom and protection of holy sites in Jerusalem;
            (3) continues to support strengthening the mutually 
        beneficial American-Israeli alliance;
            (4) commends Egypt and Jordan, former combatant states of 
        the Six Day War, who in subsequent years had the wisdom and 
        courage to embrace a vision of peace and coexistence with 
        Israel and have continued to respect their respective peace 
        agreements; and
            (5) urges all parties in the Middle East to rededicate 
        themselves to finding a sustainable solution to the Israeli-
        Palestinian conflict that results in two states living side by 
        side in peace and security.
                                 <all>
```