alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### NORTHERN BATTERY SERVICE COMPANY v. MIKE TSCHIDA.1

December 21, 1923.

No. 23,636.

Verdict sustained.

1. Verdict on conflicting evidence -will not be set aside, it having been confirmed by trial court.

Authority to contract for storage of truck.

2. “Night man” at garage *held*not to have implied or apparent authority to bind his employer by contract for protracted storage of a motor truck.

Action in the municipal court of St. Paul to recover $245.65 for storage charges on defendant’s truck. The case was tried before Finehout, J., and a jury which returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff for the amount demanded. From an order denying his motion for a new trial, defendant appealed.

Affirmed.

*Douglas, Kennedy & Kennedy,*for appellant.

*Drill é Drill,*for respondent.

1

 Reported in 196 N. W. 482.

Stone, J.

Appeal from an order denying a new trial after verdict for plaintiff in an action to recover for the storage of a motor truck. Plaintiff claims that there was no agreement fixing the storage charge and sues for the reasonable value, which he puts at $25 per month. The verdict sustained that claim. Defendant, on the other hand, contended that there was an express agreement, made with the “night man” at plaintiff’s garage, that the storage would be $10 per month. He duly tendered payment- at that rate. The “night man” was one Donlin. His testimony disagrees with that of defendant. The resulting issue of fact was for the jury. The evi-*402deuce would support a verdict either way and, therefore, we cannot interfere with the result which has been confirmed by the trial court.

The question is presented as to whether Donlin had implied or apparent authority to make the agreement claimed by defendant for storage at $10 per month. That question was submitted to the jury and their verdict cannot be interfered with, unless we can dispose of the question as a matter of law. That we cannot do. Certainly it cannot be laid down as a rule of law — and, in order to hold for defendant on this question, we would have to go that far — that the ordinary “night man” in charge of a public garage has either implied or apparent authority to bind his employer by such a contract as is claimed in this case.

The usual functions of- such an employe, whatever he may be called, are not such as to make applicable the rule applying where an agent is left in the exclusive charge of a place of business under circumstances which raise a presumption that he has authority to transact the ordinary business of the place. It cannot be presumed that Donlin had authority to make a contract for the protracted storage of defendant’s truck. His situation was not such as to shift from defendant the burden of proof as to his authority as plaintiff’s agent, and there is nothing in the evidence to give defendant the advantage of an apparent, as distinguished from an implied, authority on the one hand, or an actual authority on the other.

Order affirmed'.
Editorial Note on Part 25
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 25 appear at 88 FR 45065, July 14, 2023.

§ 25.34 Devices and electronic products. The classes of actions listed in this section are categorically excluded and, therefore, ordinarily do not require the preparation of an EA or an EIS: ( a ) Action on a device premarket notification submission under subpart E of part 807 of this chapter.
( b ) Classification or reclassification of a device under part 860 of this chapter, including the establishment of special controls, if the action will not result in increases in the existing levels of use of the device or changes in the intended use of the device or its substitutes.
( c ) Issuance, amendment, or repeal of a standard for a class II medical device or an electronic product, and issuance of exemptions or variances from such a standard.
( d ) Approval of a PMA or a notice of completion of a PDP or amended or supplemental applications or notices for a class III medical device if the device is of the same type and for the same use as a previously approved device.
( e ) Changes in the PMA or a notice of completion of a PDP for a class III medical device that do not require submission of an amended or supplemental application or notice.
( f ) Issuance of a restricted device regulation if it will not result in increases in the existing levels of use or changes in the intended uses of the product or its substitutes.
( g ) Action on an application for an IDE or an authorization to commence a clinical investigation under an approved PDP.
( h ) Issuance of a regulation exempting from preemption a requirement of a State or political subdivision concerning a device, or a denial of an application for such exemption.
( i ) Approval of humanitarian device exemption under subpart H of part 814 of this chapter.
[62 FR 40592, July 29, 1997, as amended at 70 FR 69277, Nov. 15, 2005]
# C_2019185EN.01000301.xml

| 29.5.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 185/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.5.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 185/3

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 27 May 2019

appointing a member and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work for Luxembourg

(2019/C 185/02)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to the Council Decision of 22 July 2003 setting up an Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work (1), and in particular Article 3 thereof,

Having regard to the lists of nominations for appointment submitted to the Council by the Governments of the Member States,

Whereas:

| (1) | By its Decision of 12 March 2019 (2), the Council appointed the members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work for the period from 1 March 2019 to 28 February 2022. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

By its Decision of 12 March 2019 (2), the Council appointed the members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work for the period from 1 March 2019 to 28 February 2022.

| (2) | By its Decisions of 15 April 2019 (3) and 14 May 2019 (4), the Council appointed further members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work for some Member States. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

By its Decisions of 15 April 2019 (3) and 14 May 2019 (4), the Council appointed further members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work for some Member States.

| (3) | The Government of Luxembourg has submitted further nominations for several posts to be filled, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The Government of Luxembourg has submitted further nominations for several posts to be filled,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following are hereby appointed members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work for the period ending on 28 February 2022:

I.   GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVES

| Country | Member | Alternate members |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Luxembourg | Mr Marco BOLY | Ms Patrice FURLANI
  Mr Armin KOEGEL |

Country

Member

Alternate members

Luxembourg

Mr Marco BOLY

Ms Patrice FURLANI

Mr Armin KOEGEL

Article 2

The Council shall appoint the members and alternate members not yet nominated at a later date.

Article 3

This Decision shall be published for information in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 27 May 2019.

For the Council

The President

N. HURDUC

---

(1)  OJ C 218, 13.9.2003, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ C 100, 15.3.2019, p. 1.

2

(3)  OJ C 142, 23.4.2019, p. 20.

3

(4)  OJ C 169, 17.5.2019, p. 2.

4

---
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

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

 

The undersigned officer of Altris Software, Inc. (the “Company”) herebycertifies to his knowledge that the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q forthe period ended June 30, 2003 (the “Report”), as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.  Thiscertification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not bedeemed to be a part of the Report or “filed” for any purpose whatsoever.

 

Dated: August 14, 2003

 
| /s/ John Low            |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
|                    |
| John Low                |
| Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to Altris Software, Inc. and will be retainedby Altris Software, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

----
#### Josephine D. Ginise et al. *v.*Planning and Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Greenwich et al.

*Sidney Vogel,*in support of the motion.

Submitted. September 22

decided September 29, 1969

The motion by the defendant Everett P. Sherwood, trustee, to strike certain assignments of error in the appeal from the Court of Common Pleas in Fairfield County is denied.
exv10w2



 








EXHIBIT 10.2




Amendment to Ethanol Marketing Agreement




Effective Date: June 18, 2006




     VeraSun Fort Dodge, LLC (“VeraSun Fort Dodge”) and Aventine Renewable Energy (“AREI”) are
parties to that certain Ethanol Marketing Agreement dated as of February, 22, 2005 (the
“Agreement”). The parties have discussed certain amendments to the Agreement as set forth below.



     Accordingly, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein and in the
Agreement, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is
hereby acknowledged, VeraSun Fort Dodge and AREI agree as follows:


1. Section 5 of the Agreement is hereby amended to include the following paragraph F:





	 	F.	 	Unit Trains. In addition to any other payments due to VeraSun
Fort Dodge under this Agreement, AREI shall pay VeraSun Fort Dodge $(**) per
gallon of ethanol purchased from VeraSun Fort Dodge and shipped by means of a
Unit Train to a Unit Train Receiving Facility. The payment cycle for Unit
Train shipments shall begin at the time the relevant Unit Train has been loaded
and is ready to be moved from VeraSun Fort Dodge’s facility. For purposes of
this paragraph F, a “Unit Train” shall mean any train assembled at VeraSun Fort
Dodge consisting of a minimum of 60 ethanol cars destined to be offloaded at a
Unit Train Receiving Facility, and a “Unit Train Receiving Facility” shall mean
any destination that receives Unit Trains for the purposes of offloading
ethanol.




2. Except as provided above, all other terms of the Agreement shall remain in full force and
effect until its termination on March 31, 2007.




     The parties have executed this Amendment to the Agreement effective as of date indicated
above.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	VeraSun Fort Dodge, LLC	 	Aventine Renewable Energy
	1930 Hayes Ave	 	P.O. Box 10
	Fort Dodge, IA 50501	 	Pekin, IL 61555
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	/s/ William L. Honnef
	 	By:
	 	/s/ John R. Gray
	 

	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	Title:

	 	SVP Sales and Marketing
	 	Title:
	 	VP Logistics & Development
	 

	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	Date:

	 	June 19, 2006
	 	Date:
	 	June 26, 2006
	 

	 	 
	 	 	 	 







 




			
	1)	 	This confidential information has been omitted pursuant to a request for confidential treatment.
	 
	2)	 	The material has been filed separately with the SEC.
###### Editorial Note on Part 570

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part appear at 88 FR 45066, July 14, 2023.

#### § 570.240 Part 4 of a GRAS notice: Self-limiting levels of use.

In circumstances where the amount of the notified substance that can be added to animal food is limited because animal food containing levels of the notified substance above a particular level would become unpalatable or technologically impractical, in Part 4 of your GRAS notice you must include data and information on such self-limiting levels of use.
Exhibit
15.1




Board of
Directors and Partners of


Icahn
Enterprises L.P.





We have
reviewed, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the unaudited consolidated interim financial
statements of Icahn Enterprises L.P. and Subsidiaries as of March 31, 2010, and
for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, as indicated in our
report dated May 6, 2010; because we did not perform an audit, we expressed no
opinion on that information.





We are
aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 is incorporated by
reference in Registration Statement on Form S-3 (File No.
333-143930).





We also
are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the
Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration Statement
prepared or certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11
of that Act.








/s/ GRANT
THORNTON LLP





New York,
New York


May 6,
2010
§ 582.5195 Calcium citrate. ( a ) *Product.* Calcium citrate.
( b ) *Conditions of use.* This substance is generally recognized as safe when used in accordance with good manufacturing or feeding practice.
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the use of our report dated June 24, 2010, with respect to the financial statements of Digital Link II, LLC
included in Form 10-K/A and incorporated by reference in the Registration Statements No. 333-153408 on Form S-8,
No. 333-139177 on Form S-8, No. 333-116739 on Form S-8 and No. 333-03849 on Form S-8 of Ballantyne
Strong, Inc. filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

/s/
ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Los
Angeles, California
June 24, 2010

---



QuickLinks
Editorial Note on Part 341
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 341 appear at 69 FR 13717, Mar. 24, 2004.

§ 341.16 Bronchodilator active ingredients. The active ingredients of the product consist of any of the following when used within the dosage limits established for each ingredient: ( a ) Ephedrine.
( b ) Ephedrine hydrochloride.
( c ) Ephedrine sulfate.
( d ) Epinephrine.
( e ) Epinephrine bitartrate.
( f ) Racephedrine hydrochloride.
( g ) Racepinephrine hydrochloride.
[51 FR 35339, Oct. 2, 1986]
#### § 500.29 Gentian violet for use in animal feed.

The Food and Drug Administration has determined that gentian violet is not generally recognized as safe for use in animal feed and is a food additive subject to section 409 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act), unless it is intended for use as a new animal drug, in which case it is subject to section 512 of the act. The Food and Drug Administration has determined that gentian violet is not prior sanctioned for any use in animal feed.

[56 FR 40506, Aug. 15, 1991]
§ 556.70 Bacitracin. ( a ) *Acceptable daily intake (ADI).* The ADI for total residue of bacitracin is 0.05 mg/kg of body weight per day.
( b ) *Tolerances.* The tolerances for bacitracin are: ( 1 ) *Cattle.* Edible tissues: 0.5 ppm.
( 2 ) *Chickens, turkeys, pheasants, quail.* Edible tissues: 0.5 ppm.
( 3 ) *Swine.* Edible tissues: 0.5 ppm.
( c ) *Related conditions of use.* See §§ 520.154a, 520.154c, 558.76, and 558.78 of this chapter.
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed June 29, 2022

. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D21

- 1766 Lower Tribunal No. 20

- 13216 SP

________________ 

### Alliance JJ Miami, LLC , Appellant,

vs. 

### Josiah Coates , Appellee.

An a ppeal from the County Court for Miami

- Dade County, Gisela Cardonne Ely , Senior Judge. Ainsworth + Clancy , PLLC, and Yamila Lorenzo, and Ryan M. Clancy , for appellant

. Josiah Coates, in proper person

.
Before LOGUE, MILLER, and GORDO, JJ. MILLER, J

.2 Appellant, Alliance JJ Miami, LLC, challenges a final judgment entered in favor of appellee, Josiah Coates, in the underlying small claims action. As relevant to this appeal, the underlying dispute concerned whether Coates was entitled to reimbursement of a $350 “ early cancellation fee ” assessed purportedly pursuant to a ma rtial arts membership agreement. Following a bench trial, the lower tribunal determined that the fee was unauthorized under the circumstances

. Our de novo review of the contract yields the identical conclusion. See D & E Real Est

. , LLC v. Vitto , 260 So. 3d 429 , 433 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (“The interpretation of a contract is a question of law which is .

. . subject to de novo review.”)

. The agreement contains no early cancellation fee provision. Instead, it only allows for the imposition of a $350 fee “[i] f the payment responsibilities stipulated in this contract are not fulfilled.” Declining to engraft an additional obligation into the contract and further finding that the conclusion by the trial court that the parties rescinded the original term of the c ontract in favor of a month

- to

- month option , rendering Coates compliant with payment obligations , is amply supported by competent, substantial evidence, we affirm in all respects. See Fed. Nat’l Mortg. Ass’n v. Morton , 196 So. 3d 428, 431 (Fla. 2d DCA 201 6) (“[W]hether a party has substantially complied with or performed a contract term remains a question of fact.”).3 Affirmed.
# C_2014421EN.01001801.xml

| 24.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 421/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 421/18

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte dei Conti — Sezione Giurisdizionale per la Regione Puglia (Italy) of 21 May 2014 — Vittoria De Bellis and Others v Istituto Nazionale di Previdenza dei Dipendenti dell’Amministrazione Pubblica (INPDAP)

(Case C-246/14)

2014/C 421/25

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Corte dei Conti — Sezione Giurisdizionale Per la Regione Puglia

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Vittoria De Bellis, Diana Perrone, Cesaria Antonia Villani

Applicants:

Defendant: Istituto Nazionale di Previdenza dei Dipendenti dell’Amministrazione Pubblica (INPDAP)

Defendant:

By order of 15 October 2014, the Court (Fifth Chamber) declared that it clearly has no jurisdiction to answer the questions referred.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated financial statements for VRB Bancorp and subsidiary, and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          14,513
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           3,100
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                23,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     57,264
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          17,454
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            18,247
<LOANS>                                        178,727
<ALLOWANCE>                                      3,539
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 311,217
<DEPOSITS>                                     274,122
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,859
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        21,584
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      13,652
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 311,217
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 19,100
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                4,812
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                23,912
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               7,666
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   5
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           16,241
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 10,489
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,893
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       7,893
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,927
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .58
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    .086
<LOANS-NON>                                        266
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,780
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      189
<RECOVERIES>                                        50
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,539
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             3,539
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
§ 522.1008 Frunevetmab. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each milliliter (mL) of solution contains 7 milligrams (mg) frunevetmab.
( b ) *Sponsor.* See No. 054771 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Conditions of use* — ( 1 ) *Cats* — ( i ) *Amount.* Administer once a month by subcutaneous injection the full contents of one or two 1-mL vials to achieve a minimum dosage of 0.45 mg/lb (1 mg/kg) body weight.
( ii ) *Indications for use.* For the control of pain associated with osteoarthritis in cats.
( iii ) *Limitations.* Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
( 2 ) [Reserved]
[87 FR 58962, Sept. 29, 2022]
#### § 558.633 Tylvalosin.

(a) *Specifications.* Type A medicated articles containing 77.12 grams tylvalosin per pound as tylvalosin tartrate.

(b) *Sponsor.* See No. 066916 in [§ 510.600(c) of this chapter](/on/2024-09-17/title-21/section-510.600#p-510.600(c)).

(c) *Related tolerances.* See [§ 556.748 of this chapter](/on/2024-09-17/title-21/section-556.748).

(d) *Special considerations.*

(1) Federal law restricts medicated feed containing this veterinary feed directive (VFD) drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian. See [§ 558.6](/on/2024-09-17/title-21/section-558.6) for additional requirements.

(2) VFDs for tylvalosin shall not be refilled.

(3) Crumbled Type C medicated feeds must bear an expiration date of 7 days after the date of manufacture.

(e) *Conditions of use.*

| Tylvalosin in grams/ton | Indications for use | Limitations | Sponsor |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| (i) 38.6 | Swine: For the control of porcine proliferative enteropathy (PPE) associated with *Lawsonia intracellularis* infection in groups of swine in buildings experiencing an outbreak of PPE. | Feed continuously as the sole ration for 14 consecutive days. | 066916 |
| (ii) [Reserved] | | | |

[[81 FR 36790](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/81-FR-36790), June 8, 2016, as amended at [81 FR 67153](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/81-FR-67153), Sept. 30, 2016; [84 FR 12504](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/84-FR-12504), Apr. 2, 2019; [87 FR 17948](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/87-FR-17948), Mar. 29, 2022; [87 FR 58968](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/87-FR-58968), Sept. 29, 2022]