alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial  information extracted from the balance
sheet of CNL Income Fund VIII,  Ltd. at March 31,  1999,  and its  statement  of
income for the three  months  then ended and is  qualified  in its  entirety  by
reference  to the Form 10Q of CNL Income Fund VIII,  Ltd.  for the three  months
ended March 31, 1999.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         1,876,769
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  29,553
<ALLOWANCES>                                   28,474
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0<F1>
<PP&E>                                         17,454,788
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1,760,557
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 31,661,070
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0<F1>
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     30,542,649
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   31,661,070
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               787,492
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  169,525
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                674,843
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            674,843
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   674,843
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<FN>
<F1>Due  to the  nature of its  industry,  CNL Income  Fund  VIII,  Ltd.  has an
unclassified  balance  sheet;  therefore,  no values are shown above for current
assets and current liabilities.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 2
Editorial Note: The regulations contained in this part have been recodified in 46 CFR part 287.

§ 2.1-14 Deposit of earnings and receipts. ( a ) *Earnings.* A citizen may deposit all or any part of earnings derived from the operation, within the scope of § 2.1-3, of a vessel or vessels owned either by himself or any other person, if such earnings are intended for construction or acquisition of new vessels. Such earnings may include payments received by an owner, as compensation for use of his vessel, from other persons by whom it is so operated. Earnings from other sources may not be deposited. The earnings from operation of vessels which are eligible for deposit are the net earnings determined without regard to any deduction for depreciation, obsolescence, or amortization with respect to such vessels.
( b ) *Receipts.* Receipts from deposited funds, in the form of interest or otherwise, may be deposited.
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

RITA STAUFFER, * No. 13-093V

* Special Master Christian J. Moran

Petitioner, *

v. * Filed: May 8, 2015

*

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Attorneys’ fees and costs; award

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * in the amount to which respondent

* does not object.

Respondent. *

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Danielle Strait, Maglio, Christopher & Toale, PA, Washington, DC, for Petitioner;

Michael Milmoe, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

UNPUBLISHED DECISION ON FEES AND COSTS1

On May 8, 2015, petitioner filed a stipulation of fact concerning final 

attorneys’ fees and costs in the above-captioned matter. Previously, petitioner 

informally submitted a draft application for attorneys’ fees and costs to respondent 

for review. Upon review of petitioner’s application, respondent raised objections 

to certain items. Based on subsequent discussions, petitioner amended her 

application to request $24,490.00, an amount to which respondent does not object. 

The Court awards this amount. 

On February 1, 2013, Rita Stauffer filed a petition for compensation alleging 

that the influenza (“flu”) vaccine, which she received on September 6, 2011, 

caused her to suffer Guillain-Barré Syndrome (“GBS”). Petitioner received 

compensation based upon the parties’ stipulation. Decision, filed Dec. 18, 2014. 

Because petitioner received compensation, she is entitled to an award of attorneys’ 

fees and costs. 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e). 

 

1 The E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (Dec. 17, 

2002), requires that the Court post this decision on its website. Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 18(b), 

the parties have 14 days to file a motion proposing redaction of medical information or other 

information described in 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4). Any redactions ordered by the special 

master will appear in the document posted on the website.
2

Petitioner seeks a total of $24,490.00 in attorneys’ fees and costs for her 

counsel. Additionally, in compliance with General Order No. 9, petitioner states 

that she incurred no out-of-pocket litigation expenses while pursuing this claim. 

Respondent has no objection to the amount requested for attorneys’ fees and costs. 

After reviewing the request, the Court awards the following:

A lump sum of $24,490.00 in the form of a check made payable to 

petitioner and petitioner’s attorney, Danielle A. Strait, Esq., of the law 

firm Maglio, Christopher & Toale, PA, 1605 Main Street, Suite 710, 

Sarasota, Florida 34236, for attorneys’ fees and other litigation costs 

available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e).

The Court thanks the parties for their cooperative efforts in resolving this 

matter. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly.

Any questions may be directed to my law clerk, Christina Gervasi, at (202) 

357-6360.

 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Christian J. Moran

Christian J. Moran

Special Master
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

ROBERT L. MARTIN,

Appellant,

v.

LAKESIDE AT TAMARAC CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC.,

Appellee.

No. 4D21-2137

[April 21, 2022]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; John B. Bowman, Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE19-005199.

Robert L. Martin, Tamarac, pro se.

Daniel C. Lopez of Frank Perez-Siam, P.A., Miami, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

CONNER, C.J., FORST and Artau, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 187

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to

recent church burnings.
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 187

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Whereas more than 30 African-American churches have been

burned over the last 18 months;

Whereas arrests have been made in only 5 of the cases currently under investigation;

Whereas the African-American community deserves the full

support of Congress in solving these cases in an expedi-
2

•HCON 187 EH

tious manner and it is important for Congress to speak

out against the recent incidents of arson; and

Whereas several measures which would expedite the investigation into these incidents and assist in the prosecution of

individuals found guilty of involvement in these incidents

are now pending before Congress: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that—

3 (1) attacks on places of worship because of the

4 race, color, denomination, or ethnicity of the con5 gregation undermine fundamental American ideals;

6 (2) these fires appear to be hate crimes and

7 also implicitly interfere with the First Amendment

8 rights and other civil rights of the victims;

9 (3) the arson of a place of worship is repulsive

10 to us as a society;

11 (4) the Congress condemns, in the strongest

12 possible terms, these abhorrent actions against freely

13 worshipping American citizens and the African14 American community in particular;

15 (5) the Congress sends its sincere condolences

16 to those individuals who have been affected by these

17 acts of cowardice;

18 (6) the Congress fully supports the activities of

19 local law enforcement officials, the Department of
3

•HCON 187 EH

1 Justice, and the Department of the Treasury in in2 vestigating these incidents;

3 (7) the Congress urges the United States Attor4 ney General and local prosecutors to seek the maxi5 mum penalty available under law to punish the per6 petrators of these craven acts;

7 (8) it is important that Congress enact appro8 priate legislation to ensure that Federal law enforce9 ment has the necessary tools to punish and deter

10 these shameful, vile acts, including the bipartisan

11 legislation introduced by Representatives Hyde and

12 Conyers which would facilitate the prosecution of

13 persons responsible for these acts;

14 (9) the President is urged to make the fullest

15 possible use of all available law enforcement re16 sources to bring the culprits in these crimes to jus17 tice;

18 (10) Congress encourages the people of the

19 United States to work within their own communities

20 to prevent arson against African-American or any

21 other house of worship; and

22 (11) Congress encourages American citizens to

23 observe a national week of prayer beginning June

24 16, 1996, and ending June 23, 1996, in their

25 churches, synagogues, mosques, and other places of
4

•HCON 187 EH

1 worship for racial harmony, religious tolerance and

2 respect for the civil and human rights of all Ameri3 cans.

Passed the House of Representatives June 13, 1996.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### § 1.871-5 Loss of residence by an alien.

An alien who has acquired residence in the United States retains his status as a resident until he abandons the same and actually departs from the United States. An intention to change his residence does not change his status as a resident alien to that of a nonresident alien. Thus, an alien who has acquired a residence in the United States is taxable as a resident for the remainder of his stay in the United States.
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A16D0255. BYRON KAREEN COAST v. THE STATE.

Byron Kareen Coast pled guilty to possession of marijuana with intent to

distribute. He was represented by an attorney during the plea, and his attorney

subsequently filed a motion to withdraw the plea, which is pending below. In the

meantime, Coast filed a pro se application for discretionary appeal in the Supreme

Court, which transferred it to us. We lack jurisdiction to consider Coast’s application.

 A criminal defendant does not have the right to represent himself while also

being represented by an attorney. See Tolbert v. Toole, 296 Ga. 357, 361-363 (3)

(767 SE2d 24) (2014); Jacobsen v. Haldi, 210 Ga. App. 817, 818-819 (1) (437 SE2d

819) (1993). The record indicates that Coast is still represented by counsel.

Accordingly, his pro se application for discretionary appeal is a nullity, see id., and

this application is hereby DISMISSED. 

 

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

03/02/2016

March 02, 2016
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON D.C., 20460

OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION

PC Code: 080808 DP Barcode: 432884 Date: April 21, 2016

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Propazine: Addendum to “Preliminary Risk Assessment for Registration Review of Propazine” for Update on ECOTOX Database Query

TO: Steven Snyderman, Chemical Review Manager Avivah Jakob, Team Leader Kelly Sherman, Branch Chief Risk Management and Implementation Branch 3 Pesticide Re-evalua tion Division (7508P)

FROM: Brian D. Kiernan, Biologist Environmental Risk Branch 6 Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P)

THRU: Monica Wait, Risk Assessment Process Leader Mark Corbin, Branch Chief Environmental Risk Branch 6 Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P)

The Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) is providing an addendum to the preliminary environmental fate and ecological risk assessment (PRA) conducted in support of the Registration Review of the triazi ne herbicide, propazine (PC Code: 080808) 1 . This addendum clarifies the role of open literature in the assessmen t. The ECOTOX database section was inadvertently left out of the October 2015 PRA for propazine.

A comprehensive open literature query by the ORD-Duluth contract or of the ECOTOX database was not conducted for propazine. However, queries of the publically av ailable version of the ECOTOX database were conducted on Ma y 28, 2015 and again on April 12, 2016.

1 Preliminary Risk Assessment for Registration Review of Propazine. October 28, 2015. Colletti, M. and Kiernan,

B. DP 428090.The query was limited to open literature article s containing information regarding propazine apical endpoints reflecting survival, growth a nd reproduction. The resul ting searches provided no reported endpoints that were more sensitive than those used in the October 2015 PRA, and thus those results did not alter the PRA’s risk co nclusions. EFED notes that some endpoints, for atypical test species, may be useful for char acterization in a future endangered species

assessment.

For terrestrial species, 126 endpoints were re ported in ECOTOX while only 22 aquatic endpoints were reported. Many of the endpoints are simply reproduced from Office of Pesticide Programs’ reports while some others are taken from studies that have durations or reported exposure in units incompatible with EFED’s risk assessment process.
§ 1.6664-4T Reasonable cause and good faith exception to section 6662 penalties. ( a ) - ( e ) [Reserved]
( f ) *Transactions between persons described in section 482 and net section 482 transfer price adjustments.* For purposes of applying the reasonable cause and good faith exception of section 6664(c) to net section 482 adjustments, the rules of § 1.6662-6(d) apply. A taxpayer that does not satisfy the rules of § 1.6662-6(d) for a net section 482 adjustment cannot satisfy the reasonable cause and good faith exception under section 6664(c). The rules of this section apply to underpayments subject to the transactional penalty in § 1.6662-6(b). If the standards of the net section 482 penalty exclusion provisions under § 1.6662-6(d) are met with respect to such underpayments, then the taxpayer will be considered to have acted with reasonable cause and good faith for purposes of this section.
[T.D. 8656, 61 FR 4885, Feb. 9, 1996]
#### State of Connecticut *v.*Theodore L. Brown

*Joseph M. Shortall,*in support of the petition.

Submitted January 22

decided December 3, 1968

The petition by the defendant for certification for appeal from the Appellate Division of the Circuit Court is denied.
§ 1.927(d)-2T Temporary regulations; definitions and special rules relating to Foreign Sales Corporation. ( a ) *Definition of related supplier.* For purposes of sections 921 through 927 and the regulations under those sections, the term “related supplier” means a related party which directly supplies to a FSC any property or services which the FSC disposes of in a transaction producing foreign trading gross receipts, or a related party which uses the FSC as a commission agent in the disposition of any property or services producing foreign trading gross receipts. A FSC may have different related suppliers with respect to different transactions. If, for example, X owns all the stock of Y, a corporation, and of F, a FSC, and X sells a product to Y which is resold to F, only Y is the related supplier of F. If, however, X sells directly to F and Y also sells directly to F, then, as to the transactions involving direct sales to F, each of X and Y is a related supplier of F.
( b ) *Definition of related party.* The term “related party” means a person which is owned or controlled directly or indirectly by the same interests as the FSC within the meaning of section 482 and § 1.482-1(a).
[T.D. 8126, 52 FR 6465, Mar. 3, 1987]
Editorial Note on Part 2
Editorial Note: The regulations contained in this part have been recodified in 46 CFR part 287.

§ 2.1-2 Scope of section 511 of the Act and the regulations in this part. ( a ) *Applicability of regulations.* ( 1 ) The regulations prescribed in this part— ( i ) Apply to gain realized from the sale or loss of vessels, earnings from the operation of vessels, and interest (or otherwise) with respect to amounts previously deposited in the construction reserve fund, for a taxable year beginning after December 31, 1964, and
( ii ) Apply to the expenditure, obligation, or withdrawal, during a taxable year beginning after December 31, 1964, of any deposits of gain, earnings, and interest (or otherwise) of the character referred to in subdivision (i) of this subparagraph without regard to the taxable year in which the deposits were made.
( 2 ) As to gain, earnings, or interest (or otherwise) described in subparagraph (1)(i) of this paragraph and as to an expenditure, obligation, or withdrawal described in subparagraph (1)(ii) of this paragraph, the regulations in this part supersede Treasury Decision 5330, as amended (26 CFR (1939) part 32).
( b ) *Nonrecognition and accumulation.* Section 511 of the Act provides, under conditions specified, for the nonrecognition, for income and excess-profits tax purposes, of the gain realized from the sale or indemnification for loss of certain vessels including certain vessels in the course of construction, or shares therein. It also permits the accumulation of the proceeds of such sales or indemnification and of certain earnings without liability under Part I (section 531 and following), Subchapter G, Chapter I of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, and the regulations thereunder (§§ 1.531-1 through 1.537-3 of this chapter (Income Tax Regulations)).
( c ) *Availability of benefits.* The benefits of section 511 of the Act are available to any citizen as defined in paragraph (a)(4) of § 2.1-1, who, during any taxable year owns, in whole or in part, a vessel or vessels within the scope of § 2.1-3. A citizen operating such a vessel or vessels owned by any other person or persons can derive no benefit from the provisions relating to the nonrecognition of gain from the sale or loss of such vessel or vessels so owned, but may establish a construction reserve fund in which he may deposit earnings from the operation of such vessel or vessels.
( d ) *Applicability of section 511.* Section 511 of the Act applies only with respect to sales or losses of vessels within the scope of § 2.1-3 or in respect of earnings derived from the operation of such vessels. A loss to be within section 511 of the Act must be an actual or constructive total loss. Whether there is a total loss, actual or constructive, will be determined by the Administration.
Docket Number FAA - 2013 - 0630
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-8081
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus GREGORY VONZELL COMER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CR-95-69) Submitted: February 21, 2002 Decided: March 7, 2002 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gregory Vonzell Comer, Appellant Pro Se. Lisa Blue Boggs, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Gregory Vonzell Comer appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C.A. §3582(c)(2) (West 2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Comer , No. CR-95-69 (M.D.N.C. Nov. 21, 2001). We dispense withoral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### § 1.565-4 Consent dividends and other distributions.

Section 565(d) provides a rule applicable where a distribution is made in part in consent dividends and in part in money or other property. With respect to such a distribution the entire amount specified in the consents and the amount of such money or other property shall be considered together. Thus, if as a part of the same distribution consents are filed by some of the shareholders and cash is distributed to other shareholders, for example, those who may be unwilling to sign consents, the total amount of the cash and the amounts specified in the consents will be viewed as a single distribution to determine the tax effects of such distribution. For example, the total of such amounts must be considered to determine whether the distribution (including the amounts specified in the consents) is preferential and whether any part of such distribution would not be dividends if the total amounts specified in the consents were distributed in cash. See paragraph (b)(2) of § 1.565-2 for examples illustrating the treatment of distributions which consist in part of consent dividends and in part of other property.