alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of the Assignment of Simon Rindskopf *et al.*to Jacob W. Mack for the Benefit of Creditors.

[Special Term],

(Decided January 6th, 1885).

An examination under the General Assignment Act, of the books of assignors, should not extend to an inquiry as to whether preferences in the assignment are fraudulent, or whether the assignors, either in making the assignment or in anterior transactions, did any act that was fraudulent. An examination, the object of which is to discover evidence that may be used in an action to set aside the assignment as fraudulent, cannot be had under the General Assignment Act.

Application for an order for the examination of the books of assignors in a general assignment for the benefit of creditors.

*27■ The facts are stated in the opinion.

Van Hoesen, J.

The order for the examination should be modified so as to provide that the examination of the books shall be under the control of a referee, and that the assignee or his representative may be present.

The examination should not extend to an inquiry as to whether the preferences are fraudulent, or as to whether the assignors, either in making the assignment or in transactions anterior to the assignment, did any act that was fraudulent in fact, or fraudulent in contemplation of law: No

inquiry as to what the assignors, prior to the assignment, did with borrowed money, or with their own property, should be permitted. Of course, their transactions subsequent to the assignment are not subjects of this examination.

There may be an examination as to the amount of property embraced in the assignment. There may also be an examination as to the amount of debts that appear on the books to be payable out of the assigned estate; but the referee should not permit the petitioners, under the pretense that they are ascertaining the amount of debts appearing on the books, to pursue an inquiry as to whether the book entries are fictitious, or whether the assignors were actually indebted to the amounts that appear on the books as claims against them.

As has been said before, an examination whose object is to discover evidence that may be used in an action (either already begun or merely in contemplation) to set aside the assignment as fraudulent, must be had under the Code of Civil Procedure, and not under the General Assignment Act.

Order accordingly.
#### § 137.16 What if more than 50 Indian Tribes apply to participate in self-governance?

The first Indian Tribes who apply and are determined to be eligible shall have the option to participate in self-governance. Any Indian Tribe denied participation due to the limitation in number of Indian Tribes that may take part is entitled to participate in the next fiscal year, provided the Indian Tribe continues to meet the financial stability and financial management capacity requirements.
# C_2005217EN.01003103.xml

| 3.9.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 217/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.9.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 217/31

---

Removal from the register of Case C-225/03 (1)

1

(2005/C 217/62)

(Language of the case: French)

(Language of the case: French)

By order of 7 July 2005, the President of the Court of Justice of the European Communities has ordered the removal from the register of Case C-225/03: Commission of the European Communities v French Republic.

---

(1)  OJ C 171 of 19.07.2003.

1

---
#### § 597.310 Funds.

The term *funds* includes coin or currency of the United States or any other country, traveler's checks, personal checks, bank checks, money orders, stocks, bonds, debentures, drafts, letters of credit, any other negotiable instrument, and any electronic representation of any of the foregoing. An electronic representation of any of the foregoing includes any form of digital or electronic cash, coin, or currency in use currently or placed in use in the future.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2966 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 2966

  To authorize law enforcement agencies to make arrangements for the 
            compensation of officers in their canine units.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 16, 1996

  Mr. Herger introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
          Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To authorize law enforcement agencies to make arrangements for the 
            compensation of officers in their canine units.

    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 ``Canine Unit Preservation Act of 
1996''.

SEC. 2. OVERTIME FOR OFFICERS IN CANINE UNITS.

    (a) Agreement.--The head of each law enforcement agency and fire 
department which has a canine unit may enter into an agreement with the 
officers assigned to such unit for the payment to such officers of 
overtime compensation in accordance with section 7 of the Fair Labor 
Standards Act of 1938 for the hours spent by such officers in the care 
and training of the dogs in such unit. Such an agreement shall be 
entered into before the expiration of 6 months after the date of the 
enactment of this Act and shall be submitted to the Secretary of Labor 
for approval.
    (b) Exemption.--Beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, 
an officer assigned to a canine unit in a law enforcement agency or 
fire department shall not be paid such overtime compensation for hours 
spent by such officer in the care and training of the officer's dog in 
such unit until such date as an agreement authorized by subsection (a) 
has been entered into for such officer and approved under subsection 
(d) or 6 months from the date of the enactment of this Act has expired, 
whichever occurs first.
    (c) Guidelines.--Before the expiration of 90 days from the date of 
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor shall issue 
guidelines for the preparation of agreements authorized by subsection 
(a).
    (d) Approval.--The Secretary of Labor shall approve any agreement 
submitted to the Secretary under subsection (a) which is prepared in 
accordance with the guidelines issued under subsection (c). If such an 
agreement is approved by the Secretary payment of overtime compensation 
for an officer covered by such agreement shall be in accordance with 
such agreement.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATIONS**  I, Michael C. Mayer, certify that: 1) I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Bank of Commerce Holdings (the“registrant”); 2) Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this annual report; 3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisannual report; 4) The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13-a-14 and15d-14) for the registrant and we have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this annual report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date ofthis annual report (the “Evaluation Date”); and  (c) Presented in this annual report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluationas of the Evaluation Date.5) The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors; (a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation ofinternal controls which could adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified forthe registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls: and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrols; and6) The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have indicated in this annual report whetheror not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that couldsignificantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation,including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses.   */s/*MICHAEL C. MAYER   Michael C. Mayer  President & Chief Executive Officer  (Principal Executive Officer)  Dated March 6, 2006
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Celebrating International Women’s Day

# 									Celebrating International Women’s Day							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

March 8, 2023

On International Women’s Day, the United States stands with the international community in celebrating the tenacity, determination, and leadership of women and girls around the world and the immense contributions and accomplishments they achieve toward more peaceful and democratic societies.  The Department of State is committed to empowering and amplifying the voices of women and girls in all their diversity, and we will continue to demand that their human rights be respected.

Today, I join First Lady Jill Biden in hosting the 17th annual International Women of Courage (IWOC) Awards, as we honor 11 women leaders from around the world.  In their local communities and countries, the 2023 IWOC awardees are promoting the human rights of members of marginalized communities, protecting the rule of law, informing the public from the center of conflicts, and advancing women’s leadership and gender equality.  The 2023 IWOC awardees join a cohort of more than 180 women, from more than 80 countries, who live their lives in the service of others – regardless of the personal risks and sacrifices – as International Women of Courage.

The U.S. commitment and work to advance gender equity and equality are not prioritized just today; it is our commitment every day.  We have strengthened and renewed our commitment to advancing the inclusion and the empowerment of women and girls as a strategic, moral, and human rights imperative.

We know that by reinforcing gender equity and equality, countries strengthen their stability, prosperity, security, and democracy.   Working with our international and civil society partners, the United States recently announced numerous strategies and initiatives to advance this reality across the globe.  For example, in November 2022, President Biden released the Presidential Memorandum on Promoting Accountability for Conflict-Related Sexual Violence. In January, I launched the first-ever interagency U.S. Strategy on Global Women’s Economic Security.  We also remain committed to doubling State and USAID foreign assistance investments that promote gender equality worldwide, to $2.6 billion in FY 2023, consistent with the President’s Budget Request.

Today, and every day, the United States celebrates women and girls across the globe and continues to advance our efforts to promote gender equity and equality for the benefit of all.

Tags

International Women of CourageOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3021

AN ACT

To guarantee the continuing full investment of Sotions of the United States. cial Security and other Federal funds in obliga-
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3021

AN ACT

To guarantee the continuing full investment of Social Security and other Federal funds in obligations of the United

States.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 3021 EH

1 SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN OBLIGATIONS OF

2 THE UNITED STATES.

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—In addition to any other authority

4 provided by law, the Secretary of the Treasury may issue

5 to each Federal fund obligations of the United States

6 under chapter 31 of title 31, United States Code, before

7 March 30, 1996, in an amount not to exceed the sum of—

8 (1) the amounts deposited in such fund on or

9 after the earlier of—

10 (A) the date on which such Secretary

11 would not otherwise be able to issue such obli12 gations to such fund, or

13 (B) March 15, 1996,

14 and before March 30, 1996, and

15 (2) the face amount of obligations held by such

16 fund which mature during such period.

17 (b) OBLIGATIONS EXEMPT FROM PUBLIC DEBT

18 LIMIT.—

19 (1) IN GENERAL.—Obligations issued under

20 subsection (a) shall not be taken into account in ap21 plying the limitation in section 3101(b) of title 31,

22 United States Code.

23 (2) TERMINATION OF EXEMPTION.—Paragraph

24 (1) shall cease to apply on the earlier of—

25 (A) the date of the enactment of the first

26 increase in the limitation in section 3101(b) of
3

•HR 3021 EH

1 title 31, United States Code, after the date of

2 the enactment of this Act, or

3 (B) March 30, 1996.

4 (c) FEDERAL FUND.—For purposes of this section,

5 the term ‘‘Federal fund’’ means any Federal trust fund

6 or Government account established pursuant to Federal

7 law to which the Secretary of the Treasury has issued or

8 is expressly authorized by law directly to issue obligations

9 under chapter 31 of title 31, United States Code, in re10 spect of public money, money otherwise required to be de11 posited in the Treasury, or amounts appropriated.

12 (d) EXTENSION OF EXISTING AUTHORITY.—Sub13 paragraph (B) of section 1(c)(2) of Public Law 104–103

14 is amended by striking ‘‘March 15, 1996’’ and inserting

15 ‘‘March 30, 1996’’.

Passed the House of Representatives March 7,

1996.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### Helen Alharado REINHARD v. CITY OF NEW ORLEANS and South Central Bell Telephone Co.

No. 65115.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 4, 1979.

In re City of New Orleans, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit. Parish of Orleans. 371 So.2d 286.

Denied.

BLANCHE, J., would grant the writ.
#### § 569.501 General and specific licensing procedures.

For provisions relating to licensing procedures, see part 501, subpart E, of this chapter. Licensing actions taken pursuant to part 501 of this chapter with respect to the prohibitions contained in this part are considered actions taken pursuant to this part. General licenses and statements of licensing policy relating to this part also may be available through the Syria-related sanctions page on OFAC's website: *www.treasury.gov/ofac.*
HomeSection 231 of the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act of 2017...CAATSA Section 231(e) Defense and Intelligence Sectors of the Government of the Russian Federation

# 									CAATSA Section 231(e) Defense and Intelligence Sectors of the Government of the Russian Federation							

## CAATSA Section 231(e) List Regarding the Defense Sector of the Government of the Russian Federation

## 

## 

## CAATSA Section 231(e) List Regarding the Intelligence Sector of the Government of the Russian Federation

Back to Top
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
                              This   Schedule    contains   summary    financial
                              information    extracted    from   the   Condensed
                              Consolidated  Balance  Sheet at June 30,  1996 and
                              the   Condensed    Consolidated    Statements   of
                              Operations  and is  qualified  in its  entirety by
                              reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                         1
<CURRENCY>                                U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                    JUN-30-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                           1
<CASH>                                            6,868,236    
<SECURITIES>                                      2,279,188    
<RECEIVABLES>                                             0    
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0    
<INVENTORY>                                       3,401,210    
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 18,679,627    
<PP&E>                                            6,046,711    
<DEPRECIATION>                                    3,777,727    
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   26,858,565    
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             3,151,667    
<BONDS>                                           1,311,656    
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               436,000    
<PREFERRED>                                               0    
<COMMON>                                            221,002    
<OTHER-SE>                                       22,103,320    
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     26,858,565    
<SALES>                                          19,359,822    
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 19,359,822    
<CGS>                                            10,347,795    
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    10,347,795                 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          0    
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0    
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                        0    
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   3,498,197    
<INCOME-TAX>                                      1,693,000    
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               1,867,485    
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0    
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0    
<CHANGES>                                                 0   
<NET-INCOME>                                      1,867,485   
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          0.35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          0.32
                                                               
                                                   

</TABLE>
40463.

#### ROBERTS v. GWINNETT COUNTY.

Decided February 11, 1964.

*110
      *Merritt & Pruitt, J. Ray Merritt,*for plaintiff in error.

*Edward S. White, Allen E. Lockerman, Dudley S. Hancock,*contra.

*111Felton, Chief Judge.

1. The gist of the original petition was that the payment of $92,000 to defendant Roberts under the circumstances alleged was so excessive and unreasonable as to constitute an abuse of discretion and a violation of trust by the defendant county commissioners in which Roberts participated. The gravamen of the cause of action was not that the commissioners authorized Roberts to fix or settle the amount of attorney’s fees due the law firm of the late Sumter Kelley and R. F. Duncan. The substituted petition is based on the same theory and principle as the original, and the new allegation that Roberts paid out of a check payable to his firm definite amounts due to the firm above referred to and R. F. Duncan a definite amount due them by the commissioners does not affect the theory, principle and rationale of the original petition. The only questions under the original petition and the substituted petition are whether the commissioners were guilty of an abuse of discretion and a violation of their trust by the payment of $92,000 in fees to Roberts which were alleged to be so excessive as to constitute an abuse of discretion and a violation of trust, and whether Roberts aided and assisted in such misconduct with knowledge thereof. *Code*§ 108-423. There are no new facts alleged in the substituted petition which change or affect the ruling made by this court on the former appearance of the case where we held (102 Ga. App. 318): “In spite of the lack of such a standard, if the proof shows that unreasonable and excessive fees were paid to Roberts under the circumstances a recovery is in order if a jury finds the fact of excessiveness to exist to the extent of showing a breach of discretion and trust.” No reason is urged or pleaded why the fact that the contract was completely executed by all parties four years prior to the filing of the action precludes this action.

The court did not err in overruling the general and special demurrers to the petition.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Frankum and Pannell, JJ., concur.*
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-17-0000917

14-FEB-2018

12:02 PM
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
Regarding Annual Report on Form 10-K for the quarter ended December 31, 2003 Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section
1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Bank of
Commerce Holdings, a California Corporation (the Company), does certify that:  1.
    The Companys Amendment to Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 fully
complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended, and2.
    The information contained in the Amendment to Form 10-K fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and operating results of the Company. Dated: May 26, 2005 /s/ Michael C. Mayer
    
    /s/ Linda J. MilesMichael C. Mayer
    
    Linda J. MilesPresident & Chief Executive Officer
    
    Executive VP & Chief Financial Officer
 6
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 19

- 3377

_____________________________
K EYAVIS K ENAUNTRA S MILEY , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County

. W. Joel Boles , Judge

. September 4, 2020

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
R OBERTS , R OWE , and K ELSEY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Tyler Payne, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee
, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tal lahassee
, for Appellee.
EXHIBIT 10(d)

IB's DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLANS FOR DIRECTORS
            In 1983,  1984,  and 1986,  the  Board of  Directors  of IB  adopted
unfunded  Outside  Directors'  Deferred  Compensation  Plans  which were open to
directors  of IB  who  are  not  full-time  bank  employees  and  who  chose  to
participate. Under these plans, a participating director had the option to defer
up to 100 percent of his quarterly fee.  Benefit  payment  amounts relate to the
fee deferred and accrual of interest at an above market rate. At retirement (age
70),  benefits  will  be paid on a  monthly  basis  for  120  months,  with  any
installments  not  paid  prior  to a  participant's  death  being  paid  to  his
designated beneficiary. If a director ceases to serve as such prior to attaining
age 70, the participating director will receive reduced benefit payments related
to the fees deferred and the duration of his participation.