alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Lon CONNOR v. Jack FARMER et al.

No. 11477.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.

April 17, 1980.

Gerard M. Dillon, M. H. Gertler, Craig R. Nelson, Stanley E. Loeb, New Orleans, for relator.

Warren M. Schultz, Jr., New Orleans, James L. Donovan, Metairie, Edward Rice, Jr., New Orleans, for respondents.

Before REDMANN, CHEHARDY and BARRY, JJ.

REDMANN, J.

Cotton Belt Insurance Company applies for relief under our supervisory jurisdiction against the district judge’s denial of applicant’s motion for summary judgment based on an exclusion in its insurance policy. We deem the exclusion inapplicable.

Plaintiff contracted silicosis after several years of employment in sandblasting. He sued his former employers’ executive officers and their insurers.

Applicant’s policy makes its insurance inapplicable:

> F. To bodily injury or property damage arising our of the discharge, dispersal, release or escape of smoke, vapors, soot, fumes, acids, akalides, toxic chemicals, liquids or gases, waste materials or other irritants, contaminants or pollutants into or upon the land, the atmosphere or any water course or body of water; but this exclusion does not apply if such discharge, dispersal, release or escape is sudden and accidental.

Construing that exclusion strictly, as we must; we would not aPP^ j* to an ofWs liability arising out of failure to provide appropriate protective apparel when send-ln£ workmen into an area known to be affected by the discharge of irritants. We view the worker’s injury in such a case as arising not from the *discharge*of sandblasting matter into the atmosphere but from *1070the failure to provide appropriate protective masks and other apparel. Liability (if any) for the injury arises not from polluting the atmosphere but from obliging others to work with inadequate protection in an atmosphere known to be polluted.

Perhaps it could be argued that such an injury “arises out of” *two*causative circumstances: the pollution and the inadequacy [or absence] of protective equipment. We do not construe the exclusion as applicable when the pollution is only one of two or more liability-imposing circumstances out of .which the injury arises.

Writs are therefore refused.
§ 578.304 Effective date. ( a ) The term *effective date* refers to the effective date of the applicable prohibitions and directives contained in this part as follows: ( 1 ) With respect to a person listed in the Annex to E.O. 13694, as amended by E.O. 13757, 12:01 eastern standard time, December 29, 2016.
( 2 ) With respect to a person whose property and interests in property are otherwise blocked pursuant to § 578.201, the earlier of the date of actual or constructive notice that such person's property and interests in property are blocked.
( b ) For the purposes of this section, c*onstructive notice* is the date that a notice of the blocking of the relevant person's property and interests in property is published in the Federal Register.
```

[106th Congress Public Law 415]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

<DOC>
[DOCID: f:publ415.106]

[[Page 114 STAT. 1810]]

Public Law 106-415
106th Congress

                                 An Act

 
       To amend the Hmong Veterans' <<NOTE: Nov. 1, 2000 -  [H.R. 
 5234]>> Naturalization Act of 2000 to extend the applicability of that 
        Act to certain former spouses of deceased Hmong veterans.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF HMONG VETERANS' NATURALIZATION ACT OF 2000 TO 
            CERTAIN FORMER SPOUSES OF DECEASED HMONG VETERANS.

    (a) In General.--Section 2 of the Hmong Veterans' Naturalization Act 
of 2000 (Public Law 106-207; 114 Stat. 316; 8 U.S.C. 1423 note) is 
amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``or'' at the end;
            (2) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end and 
        inserting ``; or''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
            ``(3) who--
                    ``(A) satisfies the requirement of paragraph (1)(A); 
                and
                    ``(B) is the surviving spouse of a person described 
                in paragraph (1)(B) which described person was killed or 
                died in Laos, Thailand, or Vietnam.''.

    (b) Conforming <<NOTE: 8 USC 1423 note.>> Amendment.--Section 3 of 
such Act is amended by striking ``or (2)'' and inserting ``, (2), or 
(3)''.

SEC. 2. <<NOTE: 8 USC 1423 note.>> DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION.

    Section 6 of such Act is amended by adding at the end the following 
new sentence: ``In the case of a person described in section 2(3), the 
application referred to in the preceding sentence, and appropriate fees, 
shall be filed not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment 
of this sentence.''.

    Approved November 1, 2000.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 5234:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 146 (2000):
            Sept. 25, considered and passed House.
            Oct. 19, considered and passed Senate.
WEEKLY COMPILATION OF PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS, Vol. 36 (2000):
            Nov. 1, Presidential statement.

                                  <all>
```
#### § 525.901 Paperwork Reduction Act notice.

For approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507) of information collections relating to recordkeeping and reporting requirements, licensing procedures, and other procedures, see § 501.901 of this chapter. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid control number assigned by OMB.
40758.

#### McKINNEY v. PITTS.

Eberhardt, Judge.

This was a personal injury action arising out of an auto-truck collision. The jury found for the defendant. The plaintiff moved for a new trial on the general grounds and three special grounds. The motion was overruled and plaintiff excepts. *Held:*

1. The general grounds are not argued and are therefore abandoned.

2. A charge giving the improper measure of damages for plaintiff’s recovery is harmless where there is a verdict for the defendant. *Carter v. Hutchinson,*106 Ga. App. 68 (1) (126 SE2d 458); *Patillo v. Thompson,*106 Ga. App. 808 (6) (128 SE2d 656).

3. Plaintiff objected to certain testimony by a physician who examined plaintiff almost two years after the collision. The testimony was a part of the history taken down by the physician and was to the effect that plaintiff told him that as she was “slowing down to make a left turn, she heard a horn [but did] not know why she continued to turn left. . .” The objection was that the evidence was irrelevant and immaterial. Assuming that the objection was sufficient to raise the point (but see *Isley v. Little,*219 Ga. 23, 28 (7), 131 SE2d 623), the testimony was admissible to impeach plaintiff, who had previously answered “No, sir, he didn’t ask me any questions like that,” when asked if she remembered giving the physician this information. This prior testimony certainly laid the founda*867tion for subsequent impeachment, *Code*§ 38-1803, and was admissible for that purpose, notwithstanding its general inadmissibility as hearsay. Green, Georgia Law of Evidence, 335, § 135, and 607, §§ 310, 311.

Decided June 19, 1964.

*Walter B. Fincher,*for plaintiff in error.

*Haas, Dunaway, Shelfer & Haas, William S. Shelfer,*contra.

4. Complaint is made of the exclusion of photographs of a truck similar to that driven by the plaintiff at the time of the collision. The photographs were admittedly not of the same truck, which was not repaired after the wreck, and there were certain differences between the two trucks. The admission of admittedly different photographs is within the discretion of the trial judge, which will not be controlled unless abused. See *Johnson v. State,*158 Ga. 192, 197 (2) (123 SE 120); *Southeastern Engineering &c. Co. v. Lyda,*100 Ga. App. 208 (2) (110 SE2d 550); *Owensby v. Jones,*109 Ga. App. 398 (8) (136 SE2d 451). We find no abuse of discretion, and this special ground is without merit.

The motion for new trial was properly overruled.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Bell, P. J., and Jordan, J., concur.*
#### § 566.307 Financial services.

The term *financial services* includes loans, transfers, accounts, insurance, investments, securities, guarantees, foreign exchange, letters of credit, and commodity futures or options.
#### In re James LOCKHART, Petitioner.

No. 659.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Feb. 7, 2001.

Before MAYER, Chief Judge, BRYSON and DYK, Circuit Judges.

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

DYK, Circuit Judge.

ORDER

James Lockhart petitions for a writ of mandamus requesting, *inter alia,*that this court vacate “its own decisions in Miscellaneous Docket No. 504, No. 98-5045, and Miscellaneous Docket No. 633,” vacate the decisions of other courts, “find the United States in contempt of court,” and grant other relief.

In miscellaneous docket no. 633, this court on November 2, 2000 denied Lock-hart’s request for similar relief. In miscellaneous docket no. 504, this court on May 6, 1997 denied Lockhart’s petition for a writ of mandamus to direct the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington to transfer his case to the Court of Federal Claims. In appeal no. 98-5045, this court on May 4, 1998 affirmed an order of the Court of Federal Claims dismissing a different case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

The remedy of mandamus is available only in extraordinary situations to correct a clear abuse of discretion or usurpation of judicial power. *In re Calmar, Inc.,*854 F.2d 461, 464 (Fed.Cir.1988). A party seeking a writ bears the *878burden of proving that it has no other means of attaining the relief desired, *Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Court for the Southern Dist. of Iowa,*490 U.S. 296, 309, 109 S.Ct. 1814, 104 L.Ed.2d 318 (1989), and that the right to issuance of the writ is “clear and indisputable,” *Allied Chemical Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc.,*449 U.S. 33, 35, 101 S.Ct. 188, 66 L.Ed.2d 193 (1980). Lockhart has not shown entitlement to the various relief requested.

This mandamus petition is repetitious of the mandamus petition filed by Lockhart in miscellaneous docket no. 633. Future filings by Lockhart will be reviewed and, if they pertain to the same matter, will be placed in the file without response.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

Lockhart’s petition for a writ of mandamus is denied. Future filings by Lockhart will be reviewed and, if they pertain to the same matter, will be placed in the file without response.
§ 583.505 Entries in certain accounts for normal service charges. ( a ) A U.S. financial institution is authorized to debit any blocked account held at that financial institution in payment or reimbursement for normal service charges owed it by the owner of that blocked account.
( b ) As used in this section, the term *normal service charges* shall include charges in payment or reimbursement for interest due; cable, telegraph, internet, or telephone charges; postage costs; custody fees; small adjustment charges to correct bookkeeping errors; and, but not by way of limitation, minimum balance charges, notary and protest fees, and charges for reference books, photocopies, credit reports, transcripts of statements, registered mail, insurance, stationery and supplies, and other similar items.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF EARNINGS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000724969
<NAME>MINNTECH CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-01-2000
<CASH>                                           9,635
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,308
<ALLOWANCES>                                       438
<INVENTORY>                                     13,044
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                41,694
<PP&E>                                          38,034
<DEPRECIATION>                                (22,365)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  61,880
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,777
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           334
<OTHER-SE>                                      51,882
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    61,880
<SALES>                                         17,033
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                17,033
<CGS>                                           10,992
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   17,116
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              14,030
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (31)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (10)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (21)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (21)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .00


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 21
 SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY
 Name
    
    Jurisdiction of IncorporationAssembly Component Systems, Inc.
    
    IllinoisAutomatic Screw Machine Products Company, Inc. *
    
    AlabamaC.B. Lynn Company **
    
    IllinoisCronatron Welding Systems LLC
    
    North CarolinaDrummond American LLC
    
    IllinoisLawson Products de Mexico S. de RL. de C.v.
    
    MexicoLawson Products, Inc. **
    
    GeorgiaLawson Products, Inc.
    
    IllinoisLawson Products, Inc. **
    
    NevadaLawson
Products, L.L.C. **
    
    New JerseyLawson Products, Inc. **
    
    TexasLawson Products Inc. (Ontario)
    
    Ontario, CanadaLP Service Co. **
    
    IllinoisLPI Holdings, Inc. **
    
    IllinoisRutland
Tool & Supply Company, Inc.
    
    Nevada
 *
    
    Subsidiary of Assembly Component Systems, Inc.**
    
    On January 1, 2010 these subsidiaries were merged into Lawson Products, Inc. (Illinois)
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2767

To extend au pair programs.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

DECEMBER 13, 1995

Mr. GILMAN (for himself, Mr. HAMILTON, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr.

DAVIS, Mr. BAKER of California, Mrs. MORELLA, Mr. MORAN, and Mr.

WOLF) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on International Relations

A BILL

To extend au pair programs.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF AU PAIR PROGRAMS.

4 (a) REPEAL.—Section 8 of the Eisenhower Exchange

5 Fellowship Act of 1990 (Public Law 101–454) is repealed.

6 (b) AUTHORITY FOR AU PAIR PROGRAMS.—The Di7 rector of the United States Information Agency is author8 ized to continue to administer an au pair program, operat9 ing on a world-wide basis, through fiscal year 1997.

10 (c) REPORT.—Not later than October 1, 1996, the

11 Director of the United States Information Agency shall
2

•HR 2767 IH

1 submit a report regarding the continued extension of au

2 pair programs to the Committee on Foreign Relations of

3 the Senate and the Committee on International Relations

4 of the House of Representatives. This report shall specifi5 cally detail the compliance of all au pair organizations

6 with regulations governing au pair programs as published

7 on February 15, 1995.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 165 (Thursday, August 27, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 43679]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-20690]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XR18


North Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meetings

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of public meetings.

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

SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Council) Crab 
Plan Team will meet September 14-16, 2009. The Crab Plan Team will meet 
jointly with the Council's Groundfish Plan Teams on September 16.

DATES: The meetings will be held September 14-16, 2009.

ADDRESSES: The meetings will be held at the Alaska Fishery Science 
Center, 7600 Sand Point Way, NE, Bldg 4, Traynor Room, Seattle, WA.
    Council address: North Pacific Fishery Management Council, 605 W. 
4th Ave., Suite 306, Anchorage, AK 99501-2252.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diana Stram, North Pacific Fishery 
Management Council; telephone: (907) 271-2809.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The primary purpose of the meeting is to 
review final stock assessment chapters for 8 BSAI crab stocks and make 
final OFL recommendations. Other agenda items include: review Crab 
Economic SAFE chapter; review boundaries of the St. Matthew habitat 
conservation zone and Northern Bering Sea Research Area, provide 
recommendations regarding additional controls on crab bycatch in 
groundfish fisheries; review and revise research priorities; provide 
EFH and HAPC recommendations; review proposed ABC control rules for 
crab species to comply with ACL regulations. The agenda for both 
meeting will be posted at http://www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/npfmc/
    Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come 
before these groups for discussion, in accordance with the Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), 
those issues may not be the subject of formal action during these 
meetings. Actions will be restricted to those issues specifically 
identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of 
this notice that require emergency action under Section 305(c) of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the 
Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.

Special Accommodations

    These meetings are physically accessible to people with 
disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other 
auxiliary aids should be directed to Gail Bendixen, (907) 271-2809, at 
least 5 working days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: August 24, 2009.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E9-20690 Filed 8-26-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
## IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

December 15, 2023
1210056 City of Orange Beach v. Ian Boles. (Appeal from Baldwin Circuit Court: CV-17-900361). CERTIFICATE OF JUDGMENT WHEREAS, the ruling on the application for rehearing filed in this case and indicated below was entered in this cause on December 15, 2023: Application Overruled. No Opinion. Shaw, J. -- Parker, C.J., and Mendheim and Stewart, JJ., concur. Wise, Bryan, and Sellers, JJ., dissent. Mitchell and Cook, JJ., recuse themselves. WHEREAS, the appeal in the above referenced cause has been duly submitted and considered by the Supreme Court of Alabama and the judgment indicated below was entered in this cause on June 16, 2023: REVERSED AND REMANDED. Shaw, J. -- Stewart, J., concurs. Shaw, J., concurs specially, with opinion, which Mendheim, J., joins. Parker, C.J., concurs in the result, with opinion. Sellers, J., dissents, with opinion, which Wise and Bryan, JJ., join. Mitchell and Cook, JJ., recuse themselves.. NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Rule 41, Ala. R. App. P., IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this Court's judgment in this cause is certified on this date. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, unless otherwise ordered by this Court or agreed upon by the parties, the costs of this cause are hereby taxed as provided by Rule 35, Ala. R. App. P.

I, Megan B. Rhodebeck, certify that this is the record of the judgment of the Court, witness my hand and seal.

Clerk, Supreme Court of Alabama
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                         135,928
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  180,660
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (21,913)
<INVENTORY>                                  1,072,252
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,393,248
<PP&E>                                         884,432
<DEPRECIATION>                               (788,173)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,922,525
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          678,671
<BONDS>                                        580,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    600,000
<COMMON>                                    11,917,768
<OTHER-SE>                                (10,853,914)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,922,525
<SALES>                                        996,718
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               996,718
<CGS>                                          759,257
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  759,257
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,038,587
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              (16,467)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              35,624
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (819,428)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (819,428)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (819,428)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.10)
        



</TABLE>
#### § 547.901 Paperwork Reduction Act notice.

For approval by the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507) of information collections relating to record keeping and reporting requirements, licensing procedures (including those pursuant to statements of licensing policy), and other procedures, see § 501.901 of this chapter. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid control number assigned by OMB.