alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
40533.

#### FARRIS v. CITY OF COLUMBUS.

Hall, Judge.

The defendant was tried before the Recorder of the City of Columbus for the offense of disorderly conduct. He was pronounced guilty and sentenced to “serve 32 days in jail or pay a fine of $32.” An appeal was taken to the City Court of Columbus where the defendant entered a plea of not guilty and demanded trial by jury. Ga. L. 1952, pp.' 2155, 2156 provides: “In all cases appealed from the recorder’s or mayor’s court of the City of Columbus to the City Court of Columbus, where no jail sentence is imposed and the fine does not exceed $50.00, the appeal shall be heard and tried by the judge of the city court without the intervention of a jury; but in all other such appeals, the defendant shall be given a trial by jury, unless such jury trial is waived.” The trial judge overruled the demand and, after hearing evidence without a jury, found the defendant guilty and sentenced him to serve 52 days or pay a fine of $52. Error is assigned on the overruling of ground 4 of the motion for new trial based upon the court’s refusal to allow the defendant a trial by jury. *Held:*

*3Decided January 23, 1964.

*Roberts & Thornton, Jack M. Thornton,*for plaintiff in error.

*Neal B. Littlejohn, Assistant Solicitor, W. B. Skipworth, Jr., Solicitor,*contra.

A sentence to “serve 32 days in jail or pay a fine of $32” is in the alternative; therefore, the imprisonment of “32 days” is part of the punishment. *Hathcock v. State,*88 Ga. 91 (5) (13 SE 959); *Davis v. State,*30 Ga. App. 183 (117 SE 267); *Williams v. Sewell,*121 Ga. 665 (49 SE 732). In *Lee v. State,*103 Ga. App. 161 (118 SE2d 599), relied on by the city, the sentence imposed a fine and provided for imprisonment merely as a means of enforcing its payment.

This being an appeal to the City Court of Columbus from a jail sentence imposed by the Recorder of the City of Columbus, the defendant had the right upon demand to a trial by jury in the City Court of Columbus. Ga. L. 1952, pp. 2155, 2156, supra.

The trial court erred in overruling ground 4 of the defendant's motion for new trial.

*Judgment reversed.*

*Nichols, P. J., and Russell, J., concur.*
Air Products Internal Use Only

POLYCAT SA8 PMN_Attachment #4 - Site Controlled by Other _Sanitized
# The Gambia

59 items

        -    Report  		Gambia, The	  June 29, 2017 
        -    Report  		The Gambia	  June 27, 2017 
        -    Report  		The Gambia	  March 3, 2017 
        -    Foreign Assistance Evaluations: Program Management  		Sub-Saharan Africa – Women, Peace and Security (WPS) Small Grants (Summary)	  August 7, 2016 
        -    TIAS  		Gambia (11-1010) – Agreement Concerning Cooperation to Suppress Illicit Transnational Maritime Activity	  November 10, 2011 
        -    TIAS  		Gambia (03-818) – Agreement Regarding Grants Under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as Amended, and the Furnishing of Defense Articles, Related Training, and Other Defense Services from the US to The Gambia	  August 18, 2003 
        -    TIAS  		Gambia (03-627) – Agreement Regarding the Surrender of Persons to the International Criminal Court	  June 27, 2003 
        -    TIAS  		Gambia (02-813) – Agreement Relating to the Employment of Dependents of Official Government Employees	  August 13, 2002 
        -    TIAS  		Gambia (13099) – Air Transport Agreement	  January 18, 2001 

previous page1…456

Back to Top
Order entered August 27, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00510-CR

SHATTO BREONLEE COLEMAN, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 003-80528-2013

ORDER

The Court REINSTATES the appeal.

On August 6, 2014, we ordered the trial court to make findings regarding why appellant’s 

brief has not been filed. We ADOPT the findings that: (1) appellant appeared at the hearing; (2) 

appellant indicated that he would like to pursue the appeal, but could not afford an attorney; (3) 

the trial court allowed appellant to apply for court-appointed counsel with the Collin County 

Indigent Defense Office; (4) after appellant completed an Indigency Flow Sheet, he was found to 

not be indigent; and (5) when appellant learned he was no indigent, he stated he would abandon 

the appeal. 

We ORDER the appeal submitted without briefs as of September 2, 2014 to a panel 

consisting of Justices Bridges, Lang, and Evans. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b)(4).
We DIRECT the Clerk to send a copy of this order, by first-class mail, to Shatto 

Coleman, 3009 Misty Way, Wylie, Texas 75908.

We DIRECT the Clerk to send a copy of the order, by electronic transmission, to the 

Collin County District Attorney’s Office.

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT

CHIEF JUSTICE
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2759 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2759

To prevent paid furloughs of Federal and District of Columbia employees 
                during periods of lapsed appropriations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 12, 1995

   Mr. Bono introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
              Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To prevent paid furloughs of Federal and District of Columbia employees 
                during periods of lapsed appropriations.

    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 ``Furlough Prevention Act of 1995''.

SEC. 2. PREVENTION OF PAID FURLOUGHS OF FEDERAL AND DISTRICT OF 
              COLUMBIA EMPLOYEES DURING PERIODS OF LAPSED 
              APPROPRIATIONS.

    Notwithstanding sections 1341 and 1342 of title 31, United States 
Code--
            (1) no officer or employee of the United States Government 
        or of the District of Columbia government may be furloughed due 
        to any period of lapsed appropriations; and
            (2) the employment of any such officer or employee during 
        any such period shall create an obligation by the government 
        involved to compensate the officer or employee, after the end 
        of the period, at the standard rate of compensation for the 
        officer or employee immediately before the period.

SEC. 3. DEFINITION.

    For purposes of this Act, the term ``period of lapsed 
appropriations'', when used with respect to any officer or employee, 
means any period during which appropriations are not available due to 
the absence of the timely enactment of any Act or joint resolution 
appropriating funds for the department or agency in which the officer 
or employee is employed.

SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    Section 2 shall apply to any period of lapsed appropriations (or 
portion of such a period) that occurs after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 11

                     PARLEX CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
                 Computation of Net Income Per Common Share

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                         Three Months Ended                 Nine Months Ended
                                    -----------------------------     -----------------------------
                                    Mar 28, 1999     Mar 29, 1998     Mar 28, 1999     Mar 29, 1998
                                    ------------     ------------     ------------     ------------

<S>                                  <C>              <C>              <C>              <C>
Basic Earnings Per Share:
  Basic Earnings Per Share                $.20             $.18             $.36             $.51

  Weighted Average
   Number of Shares Outstanding      4,651,506        4,620,229        4,644,652        4,180,671

  Diluted Earnings Per Share              $.20             $.17             $.35             $.49

Weighted Average Number
 of Shares Outstanding               4,651,506        4,620,229        4,644,652        4,180,671

Effective of Dilutive Stock
 Options                               117,376          168,677          127,844          195,697

Adjusted Weighted Average
 Number of Shares Outstanding        4,768,882        4,788,906        4,772,496        4,376,368
</TABLE>
FAA Home
Regulations & Policies
Advisory Circulars (ACs)

# AC 20-146 - Methodology for Dynamic Seat Certification by Analysis for Use in Part 23, 25, 27, and 29 Airplanes and Rotorcraft (Cancelled)

- ShareShare
- 

- Facebook					Share on Facebook
- Twitter					Tweet on Twitter

## Document Information

- Number
- 20-146
- Title
- Methodology for Dynamic Seat Certification by Analysis for Use in Part 23, 25, 27, and 29 Airplanes and Rotorcraft
- Date cancelled
- 2018-06-29
- Cancellation notes
- AC 20-146A
- Date issued
- 2003-05-19
- Office of Primary Responsibility
- ANM-100, Aircraft Certification Service, Transport Airplane Directorate
- Description
-  	This advisory circular (AC) sets forth an acceptable means, but not the only means, for demonstrating compliance to the following by computer modeling analysis techniques validated by dynamic tests: • Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) parts 23, 25, 27, and 29, §§ 23.562, 25.562, 27.562, and 29.562. • The Technical Standard Order (TSO) associated with the above regulations, TSO-C127/C127a. 
- Content
-    -  AC 20-146  (PDF) 
  -  AC20-146App1.pdf  (PDF) 
  -  ac20-146App2.pdf  (PDF) 

## View All

      - Current ACs
      - Cancelled ACs
      - Series 150 ACs
      - Draft Series 150 ACs

## Export All

      - Current ACs  (CSV)
      - Cancelled ACs  (CSV)

## Contact Information

      - Advisory Circulars Administrator
      - Other Points of Contact  (MS Excel)
10/18/2011 15:28 4043055223 FAA REGIONAL COUNSEL PAGE 01/02 

' \ 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATFON 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

era 

^_. J • — 

IN THE MATTER OF cr. :'^'g4] 

SUNSTATE PROPELLER, INC. ^ '•^^e.v^ 

ro 

PAA Docket No. [TO BE ASSIGNED] " S^ S 

(Civil Penalty Action) ^ —S O 

(-•J Q ~'Z ~ " 

FDMS NO. FAA-20ir-0780 

WITHDRAWAL OF COMPLAINT 

Pursuant to a settlement reached by ±e parties and to the provisions of 14 C.F.R. 

^13.215, the Federal Aviation Administraiion (FAA), by counsel, hereby withdraws its 

Complaint dated July 27, 2011. 

Submitted this W day of October, 2011. 

ANDREA MIC] 

Attorney 

Office of the Regional.Counsel 
.rlQ/ia/2011 15:2B 4043055223 FAA REGIONAL COUNSEL PAGE 02/02 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Withdrawal of Complaint In the Matter of Sunstate 

Propeller. FDMS NO. F.AA-2011 -0780, was served via regular mai] to: 

The Honorable J. E. Sullivan 

DOT, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washiugton. DC 20590 

FAX: (202) 366-7536 

Federal Aviation Administration • (Original + copy) 

Hearing Docket, AGC-430 

ATTN: Stephanie McClain 

800 Independence Ave., SW 

Wilbur Wright Buildmg, Suite 2W1000 

Washington, DC 20591 

FAX: (202) 493-5020 

Michael A. Hanson, Esq. 

Hanson Law Office 

2501 North Orient Road, Suite D 

Tampa, FL 33619 

(813)621^(5901 

As a convenience, tlie foregoing document was also provided this date to the above-named 

parties by facsimile. 

^ GERALD A. JENHgBGS 

Program Analyst 

OCT I s lou 

Date
-80 -78 -76 -74 -72 -70

 38

 40

 42

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★

▲ ▲ ▲

▲

 1000

 1500

 2000

 1000

18 12 06 00

08/18

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 18 Aug 06

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 39.44 N 77.04 W Meters AGL
Exhibit 12.2



Certification



I, Didier Mena Campos, certify that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F/A of Banco Santander (México), S.A., Institución
de Banca Múltiple, Grupo Financiero Santander México; and
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or
omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: May 14, 2018



| | By: | /s/ Didier Mena Campos
| | --- | ----------------------
| |     | Name:                 
| |     | Title:
HomeKey Topics – Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs...C5+1 Joint Statements and Releases

# 									C5+1 Joint Statements and Releases							

Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs

-  C5+1 Joint Statements-  October 30, 2023  														Joint Statement on the C5+1 Regional Connectivity Ministerial in Samarkand																													 
-  September 21, 2023  														C5+1 Leaders’ Joint Statement																													 
-  August 11, 2023  														Joint Statement on the C5+1 Special Session on Afghanistan																											 
-  March 9, 2023  														Joint Statement on the C5+1 Ministerial in Astana																											 
-  September 28, 2022  														Joint Statement on the C5+1 Meeting during UNGA 77																											 
-  September 29, 2021  														Joint Statement on the C5+1 Ministerial during UNGA 76																											 
-  September 21, 2021  														Joint Statement of the C5+1 on Addressing the Climate Crisis																											 
-  July 16, 2021  														Joint Statement of the C5+1 on the International Conference “Central and South Asia: Regional Connectivity, Challenges and Opportunities”																											 
-  May 4, 2021  														Joint Statement on the C5+1 Virtual Ministerial																											 
 
-  C5+1 Joint Statements and Releases from the State.gov Archives-  February 5, 2020  														Joint Statement on the Ministerial Meeting in the C5+1 Format																											 
-  September 24, 2019  														Joint Statement on the Fourth C5+1 Ministerial																											 
-  September 22, 2017  														Secretary Tillerson’s Meeting With the C5+1 Leaders																											 
-  August 3, 2016  														Joint Statement for C5+1 Ministerial of August 3, 2016																											 
-  November 1, 2015  														Joint Declaration of Partnership and Cooperation by the Five Countries of Central Asia and The United States of America, Samarkand, Uzbekistan																											 
 

Tags

Bureau of South and Central Asian AffairsKazakhstanKyrgyzstanTajikistanTurkmenistanUzbekistan

## Related Articles

-  											 									
Read more
 

Back to Top
### NUMBER 13 - 11 - 00 204 - CV 

## COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI
- EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________ MORRELL MASONRY SUPPLY INC., ET AL. , APPELLANTS,

v. SEAN FERGUSON AND TIFFANY FERGUSON , APPELLEE S

.

____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 9 th District Court of Montgomery County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________



## MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Be navides, Vela, and Perkes Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam This cause is before the Court on the record and the parties’ joint motion to dismiss appeal. The parties request that this Court dismiss the appeal and cross

- appeal on grounds that the parties have reached an agreement to settle and compromise their
differences.2

The Court, having considered the documents on file and the parties’ motion , is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42.1(a ). The joint
motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal and cross

- appeal are hereby DISMISSED. In accordance with the agreement of the parties, costs are taxed against the party incurring same. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42.1(d) ("Absent agreement of the par ties, the court will tax costs against the appellant."). Having dismissed the appeal and cross

- appeal at joint request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue
forthwith.

PER CURIAM
D elivered and filed the 4th day of August , 20 11

.
CEHR-E

Engineer Pamphlet

690-1-11(16)

Department of the Army

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Washington, DC 20314-1000

EP 690-1-11(16)

1 January 1996

Command-wide Recruitment and 

Outreach Materials

CAREER PROFILE SUPPLEMENT -

REAL ESTATE

Distribution Restriction Statement

Approved for public release; distribution is 

unlimited.
mivi_ex41.htm


EXHIBIT 4.1


 


 


PROMISSORY NOTE


 


$65,000 April 14, 2010


 


Bellingham, Washington


 


Modern International Ventures, Inc., a Nevada corporation (“Maker”), hereby promises to pay to the order of Patrick Shao Long Li (“Holder”) up to the sum of Sixty Five Thousand Dollars ($65,000) together with interest thereon at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum on any unpaid balance, upon demand by Holder.   If not paid  at the demand of Holder or its assigns, all principal shall become immediately due and payable.  Maker shall pay upon demand any and all expenses, including reasonable attorney fees, incurred or paid by Holder of this Note without suit or action in attempting to collect funds due under this Note.  In the event an action is instituted to enforce or interpret any of the terms of this Note including but not limited to any action or participation by Maker in, or in connection with, a case or proceeding under the Bankruptcy Code or any successor statute, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all expenses reasonably incurred at, before and after trial and on appeal or review, whether or not taxable as costs, including, without limitation, attorney fees, witness fees (expert and otherwise), deposition costs, copying charges and other expenses.


 


This Note shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the state of Washington without regard to conflict of law principles.


 


MODERN INTERNATIONAL VENTURES, INC.


 


By: /s/ Shao Long Li


 


Name:  Patrick Shao Long Li


 


Title:  President and Chief Executive Officer
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CONSANDRA AMERSON,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

CLARK COUNTY, a political subdivision

and municipality including its

departments; et al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 11-17521

D.C. No. 2:10-cv-01071-RLH-RJJ

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Roger L. Hunt, Senior District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted May 6, 2013

San Francisco, California

Before: W. FLETCHER, GOULD, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

Consandra Amerson appeals from the district court’s Rule 12(c) dismissal of

her Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) claim against Clark County, Clark

FILED

MAY 16 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 County Department of Juvenile Services, and Clark County Department of Family

Services (Clark County). We review de novo a district court’s order granting a

Rule 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings. Fleming v. Pickard, 581 F.3d

922, 925 (9th Cir. 2009). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and

we reverse and remand.

Amerson and Clark County entered into a stipulated settlement agreement in

which Clark County agreed to pay Amerson a lump-sum buyout of her state

vocational benefits claim. The settlement stipulated that Clark County could not

accommodate Amerson’s work-related injury and resulting restrictions. The

stipulated admission “appear[s] to negate an essential element of [Amerson’s]

ADA case.” Cleveland v. Policy Mgmt. Sys. Corp., 526 U.S. 795, 806 (1999); see

42 U.S.C. § 12111(8) (to establish ADA claim, employee must prove she is “an

individual who, with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the

essential functions of the employment position”). 

Under Cleveland, Amerson must have an opportunity to provide a

“sufficient explanation” for the contradiction presented by the stipulated admission

and her ADA claim. 526 U.S. at 806; see also id. at 807 (“explanation must be

sufficient to warrant a reasonable juror’s concluding that, assuming the truth of, or

the plaintiff’s good-faith belief in, the earlier statement, the plaintiff could

nonetheless ‘perform the essential functions’ of her job, with or without
‘reasonable accommodation’”). Because the district court dismissed Amerson’s

complaint on the pleadings and Clark County’s motion to dismiss was based on

collateral estoppel, Amerson has not had an opportunity to provide the explanation

contemplated by Cleveland. We vacate the order granting the motion to dismiss

and remand to the district court for proceedings consistent with this opinion. 

REVERSED and REMANDED.
HomeEstonia

# Estonia

97 items

        -    TIAS  		Multilateral (04-227.1) – Protocol to the North Atlantic Treaty on the Accession on Estonia	  February 27, 2004 
        -    TIAS  		Estonia (03-722) – Agreement on the Protection and Preservation of Certain Cultural Properties	  July 22, 2003 
        -    TIAS  		Estonia (13121) – Agreement Concerning the Employment on a Reciprocal Basis of Dependents of Official Government Employees	  November 22, 2000 
        -    TIAS  		Estonia (12940) – Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters	  October 20, 2000 
        -    TIAS  		Estonia (13082) – Agreement Concerning Security Measures for Protection of Classified Military Information	  February 23, 2000 
        -    TIAS  		Estonia (12919) – Convention for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with Respect to Taxes on Income	  December 30, 1999 
        -    TIAS  		Estonia (97-216) – Treaty for the Encouragement and Reciprocal Protection Of Investment	  February 16, 1997 

previous page1…8910

Back to Top
#### § 592.403 Transshipment or transit through the United States.

The prohibitions in § 592.201 apply to the importation into, or exportation from, the United States, for transshipment or transit, of any rough diamond intended or destined for any country other than the United States, unless the shipment is sealed in a tamper-resistant container, accompanied by a Kimberley Process Certificate, and leaves the United States in the identical state in which it entered. The validation, recordkeeping, and reporting procedures applicable to importations and exportations do not apply in this case.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2000 TRAVERWOOD ROAD

ANN ARBOR, MI 48105-2498

 OFFICE OF

AIR AND RADIATION

July 18, 2011

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Meeting with Ford on May 12, 2011

FROM: Don Kopinski

TO: Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0162

This memorandum documents a meeting held at NVFEL on May 12, 2011 between Ford and

EPA staff. The following people attended:

Ford: Cynthia Williams, Ken McAlinden, Alyssa Werthman, Satish Atluri, Bob Thomas

EPA: Byron Bunker, Tony Fernandez, Cle Jackson, Angela Cullen, Bob Peavyhouse, 

Don Kopinski

The discussion focused on ADFEs, cross engine-vehicle credit averaging, and provisions for 

loose engine certification.