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

# Uruguay

83 items

        -    TIAS  		Uruguay (06-913) – Memorandum of Understanding Concerning the Inter-American Naval Telecommunications Network	  September 13, 2006 
        -    TIAS  		Uruguay (06-616) – Air Transport Agreement	  June 16, 2006 
        -    TIAS  		Uruguay (94-415) – Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters	  April 15, 1994 

previous page1…789

Back to Top
#### James STURDIVANT v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 67757.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 23, 1980.

In re James Sturdivant, applying for petition for supervisory writs of review and certiorari. Parish of Jefferson. No. 173430.

Denied.
| (1) | the                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or                15 (d) of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;                and |
|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (2) | the                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | BY                /s/                Connie Woods Hawkins  |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Name:                Connie Woods Hawkins                       |
|   | Title:                Chief Financial Officer                   |
|   | Date:                August 11, 2006                            |
#### VENUS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a Florida corporation, Petitioner, v. Irving S. PHILIPSON et al., Respondents.

No. 74-1210.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 24, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Certiorari dismissed.
693 A.2d 198

#### OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner, v. Arthur A. ASTI, Jr., Respondent.

No. 46 Disciplinary Docket No. 3.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

May 5, 1997.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 5th day of May, 1997, on certification by the Disciplinary Board that the respondent, ARTHUR A. ASTI, Jr., who was suspended by Order of this Court dated March 13, 1996, for a period of one year, has filed a verified statement showing compliance with all the terms and conditions of the Order of Suspension and Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E., and there being no other outstanding order of suspension or disbarment, ARTHUR A. ASTI, JR. is hereby reinstated to active status, effective immediately.
§ 403.318 Approval of State systems. ( a ) *Approval agreement.* If CMS approves a State system, a written agreement will be executed between CMS and the Chief Executive Officer of the State. The agreement must incorporate any terms of the State's application for approval of the system as agreed to by the parties and, as a minimum, must contain provisions that require the following: ( 1 ) The system is operated directly by the State or an entity designated by State law.
( 2 ) For purposes of the Medicare program, the State's system applies only to Medicare payments for inpatient, and if applicable, outpatient hospital services.
( 3 ) The system conforms to applicable Medicare law and regulations other than those relating to the amount of reimbursement for inpatient hospital services, or for inpatient and outpatient services, whichever the State system covers. Applicable regulations include, for example, those describing Medicare benefits and entitlement requirements for program beneficiaries, as explained in parts 406 and 409 of this chapter; the requirements at part 405, subpart J of this chapter specifying conditions of participation for hospitals; the requirements at part 405, subparts A, G, and S of this chapter on Medicare program administration; and all applicable fraud and abuse regulations contained in titles 42 and 45 of the CFR.
( 4 ) The State must obtain CMS's approval of the State's reporting forms and of provider cost reporting forms or other forms that have not been approved by CMS but that are necessary for the collection of required information.
( b ) *Effective date.* An approved State system may not be effective earlier than the date of the approval agreement, which may not be retroactive.
#### § 594.514 Concluding activities with the Palestinian Authority.

Effective April 12, 2006, all transactions and activities with the Palestinian Authority otherwise prohibited under this part are authorized through May 12, 2006, provided that they are necessary to conclude ongoing contracts or programs with the Palestinian Authority, and further provided that no payment pursuant to this license may involve a debit to an account of the Palestinian Authority on the books of a U.S. financial institution or to any account blocked pursuant to this part.

[71 FR 27200, May 10, 2006]
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

#### § 351.7 May Series EE savings bonds be called for redemption prior to final maturity?

The Secretary of the Treasury may not call Series EE bonds for redemption prior to final maturity.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF AMARILLO MESQUITE GRILL, INC. FOR THE THREE
MONTHS ENDED JULY 26, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-25-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-27-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-26-1998
<CASH>                                         573,347
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   39,456
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    153,686
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,075,563
<PP&E>                                       9,267,001
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,763,394
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,421,188
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,874,551
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        76,369
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,717,554
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,421,188
<SALES>                                      5,080,117
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,080,117
<CGS>                                        1,988,353
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,042,554
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             173,476
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (160,373)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (160,373)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.02)
        

</TABLE>
# C_2005271EN.01001401.xml

| 29.10.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 271/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.10.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 271/14

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Münster by order of that court of 5 July 2005 in Columbus Container Services B.V.B.A. & Co. v Finanzamt Bielefeld-Innenstadt

(Case C-298/05)

(2005/C 271/25)

Language of the case: German

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Finanzgericht Münster of 5 July 2005, received at the Court Registry on 26 July 2005, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings between Columbus Container Services B.V.B.A. & Co. and Finanzamt Bielefeld-Innenstadt on the following question:

Is it contrary to the provisions of Article 52 of the EC Treaty (now Article 43 EC) and Article 73(b) to 73(d) of the EC Treaty (now Articles 56 to 58 EC) for the legislation contained in Paragraph 20(2) and (3) of the Außensteuergesetz (Foreign Transaction Tax Law, hereinafter: the ‘AStG’) as amended by the Missbrauchsbekämpfungs- und Steuerbereinigungsgesetz (Law combating abuse and streamlining taxation) of 21 December 1993 (BGBl 1993 I, p. 2310) to exempt from double taxation the designated passive income of a foreign permanent establishment of a party with unlimited liability to tax in Germany, which would be liable to tax as controlled-foreign-corporation (CFC) income if the permanent establishment were a foreign corporation, by offsetting the foreign tax on earnings levied on the income rather than by exempting the income from taxation in Germany contrary to the double taxation convention between the Federal Republic of Germany and the Kingdom of Belgium of 11 April 1967?

---
KEEPING BUTCHER SHOPS OPEN ON SUNDAY.

Court of Appeals for Hamilton County.

#### Charles Derrick v. State of Ohio.*

Decided, March 27, 1918.

*Criminal ■Laic*— Prosecution *for' Keeping Open on Sunday*— Supplying *'■ ' Meat to the Tenement Class on the First Day of the Week Not a "Work of Necessity, When.*

The keeping cpen Of a place for the sale of meat on Sunday, iii a •thickly populated district where thé people are of the tenement class, and not financially able to provide themselves with-ice boxes or other means .for preserving meats, where such opening , occurs during that part of the year when, the weather is sufficiently cold to preserve meat and other vegetables, is not a wcrk of necessity and, therefore, does not fall within the exception provided in Section 12045.

*112*Miller & Foster,*for plaintiff in error.

*E. J. Siebenth.aUr*and *E. S. Morrissey,*Assistant Prosecutors, contra.

*

In the subsequent case of *State*v. *Besl*the court held that keeping open fcr the sale of meat cn Sunday in March was not a work of necessity for the same reason given in the above opinion. Motions to require the Court of Appeals to certify its records in both of these cases were overruled by the Supreme Court July 16, 1918.

By the Court.

. The ease here presented involves a charge of the violation of Section 13044, General Code, providing against the keeping dpen.of.a :pla.Ce 'for-.the transaction of business, upon the first day of the week commonly called Sunday. .

The specific charge is that the defendant unlawfully and knowingly caused to be open, for the transaction, of- business, to-wit,.th.e sale of meats, a. certain place in the city of Cincinnati, Hamilton county,. Ohio. •

Defendant was tried and convicted in the municipal court of Cincinnati, without the intervention of a jury.

The defendant contends that the keeping open of the place for the sale of meats was. a workjof necessity, and came within the exception provided in Section 13045, General Code; and that it was made such a work of necessity by the fact that the place was located in a thickly populated tenement district of the city where the'-inhabitants were-not able-financially to maintain ice-boxes or other methods of preserving meats.

The evidence discloses that the transaction took place in January, and the court is of the opinion that at that season of the. year-it can not be considered such a work of necessity, as the nature of the.weather is such .that it is not a difficult matter to preserve meats — the court taking judicial notice of the fact that' at that'time, of the year the weather is sufficiently cold to preserve meat and other food' stuffs. We therefore hold that under the • evidence this wag not such a work of necessity as would avoid liability under the statute.

■ Finding no error in the record, the judgment will be affirmed.

Jones, P. J., Gorman, J., and Hamilton, J., .all concur.
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Willie A. THOMAS v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 80-KH-2795.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 9, 1981.

In re Willie A. Thomas, applying for writ of certiorari. Parish of DeSoto. No. 39582.

Granted. An evidentiary hearing is ordered to determine whether relator waived his right to appeal.
# Guinea

68 items

        -    Report  		2022 Fiscal Transparency Report: Guinea	  August 18, 2022 
        -    Report  		2022 Investment Climate Statements: Guinea	  July 28, 2022 
        -    Report  		2022 Trafficking in Persons Report: Guinea	  July 19, 2022 
        -    Report  		2021 Report on International Religious Freedom: Guinea	  June 2, 2022 
        -    Report  		2021 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Guinea	  April 12, 2022 
        -    Media Note  		The U.S. Strategy to Prevent Conflict and Promote Stability: Priority Countries and Region	  April 1, 2022 
        -    Press Statement  		The Spirit of Partnership:  Implementing the U.S. Strategy to Prevent Conflict and Promote Stability	  Antony J. BlinkenApril 1, 2022 
        -    Press Statement  		Sanctioning Hizballah Financiers in Guinea	  Ned PriceMarch 4, 2022 
        -    Media Note  		Joint U.S.-EU Statement on the Global Methane Pledge	  October 11, 2021 
        -    Press Statement  		Guinea National Day	  Antony J. BlinkenOctober 2, 2021 

previous page12345…7next page

Back to Top
#### The TELOPHASE SOCIETY OF FLORIDA, INC., a Florida corporation, et al., Appellants, v. STATE BOARD OF FUNERAL DIRECTORS AND EMBALMERS, an agency of the State of Florida, Appellee.

Nos. 74-611, 74-612.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 31, 1974.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Oscar SARMIENTO, Appellant, v. STOCKTON, WHATLEY, DAVIN & CO., Appellee.

No. 80-2246.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 16, 1981.

Stern & Kneski, Miami, for appellant.

Stephen I. Wiener and James M. Fish-man, Miami, for appellee.

Before HUBBART, C. J., and BARK-DULL and HENDRY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is taken from a final summary judgment which held that the appellant’s judgment lien was inferior to the appellee’s mortgage.

On January 11,1977, the appellant recovered a judgment in the amount of $3,822.00 against one Emmie Turner. The judgment was recorded that same day. On November 15, 1979, Turner purchased certain real *1058property in Dade County from a third party, executing a mortgage thereon in the amount of $24,950.00 in favor of the appel-lee herein.’ Thereafter, Turner sold the property to Kathleen Faulkner, who defaulted on the mortgage. On or about July 11, 1980, the appellee herein filed a mortgage foreclosure action against Faulkner, the appellant herein and certain others. Notice of lis pendens was also filed. The appellant answered this foreclosure action, contending his prior recorded lien takes priority over the appellee’s mortgage. Both the appellant and the appellee moved for summary judgments, each contending their claim was prior to the other’s. After hearing thereon, the final summary judgment appealed herein was entered.

On appeal, the appellant contends the trial court erred in holding that a mortgage executed in favor of a party other than the vendor, in order to finance a part of the purchase price, is superior in dignity to a prior recorded judgment lien against the mortgagor-vendee. The reason therefor being that the mortgage lien is not a true purchase money mortgage, in that the mortgage was not executed in favor of the vendor but in favor of a third party.

The appellant’s contention is without merit and this case will be affirmed on the authority of *Associates Discount Corporation v. Gomes,*338 So.2d 552 (Fla.3d DCA 1976); *Shilling v. Bank of Sulphur Springs,*147 So. 218 (Fla.1933); *Cheves v. First National Bank of Gainesville,*79 Fla. 34, 83 So. 870 (1920); 2 Boyer, Florida Real Estate Transactions, § 32.04(1). In the latter authority, the following is found:

> “As long as it is executed in conjunction with the purchase and given as security for a portion of the purchase price, it is a purchase money mortgage, although the money is advanced by a third party and the mortgage is executed in his favor.” page 32-27.

Affirmed.
Document

           
 

Exhibit 10.59


March 2, 2021            




Ms. Bonnie R. Brooks




Dear Bonnie: 




Per the approval of the Human Resources Compensation and Benefits Committee of the Board of Directors on February 22, 2021, your offer letter dated July 18, 2019, as amended April 24, 2020 (your “Amended Offer Letter”) is hereby amended effective as of February 22, 2021, to provide that you are eligible to receive equity awards in your role as Executive Chair.


All other aspects of your compensation and benefits remain the same as outlined in your Amended Offer Letter.


Please indicate your acceptance of the above by signing below and returning to my attention.


Sincerely,
 
/s/ Kristin Gwinner


Kristin Gwinner
EVP, CHRO
Chico’s FAS, Inc.


 
Accepted By:      /s/  Bonnie R. Brooks
               Bonnie R. Brooks 


Date:          March 8, 2021
# Turkey

396 items

        -    Report  		Turkey	  May 29, 2018 
        -    Report  		Turkey	  April 20, 2018 
        -    TIAS  		Turkey (17-918.1) – Arrangement for the Exchange of Technical Information and Cooperation in Nuclear Safety Matters	  September 18, 2017 
        -    Report  		Turkey	  August 15, 2017 
        -    Report  		Turkey	  June 29, 2017 
        -    Report  		Turkey	  June 27, 2017 
        -    Report  		Turkey	  March 3, 2017 
        -    Foreign Assistance Evaluations: Humanitarian Assistance  		Evaluating the Effectiveness of Shelter, Health, and Education Programs for Iraqi and Syrian Refugees in Lebanon [PDF]	  February 17, 2017 
        -    Foreign Assistance Evaluations: Humanitarian Assistance  		Evaluating the Effectiveness of Shelter, Health, and Education Programs for Iraqi and Syrian Refugees in Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan – Synthesis Report [PDF]	  February 1, 2017 
        -    Foreign Assistance Evaluations: Humanitarian Assistance  		Evaluating the Effectiveness of Shelter, Health, and Education Programs for Iraqi and Syrian Refugees in Turkey [PDF]	  December 1, 2016 

previous page1…353637383940next page

Back to Top
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: 2013-NM-143-AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific 

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of 

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
#### § 137.420 Does an Indian Tribe have any options besides an appeal?

Yes, the Indian Tribe may request an informal conference. An informal conference is a way to resolve issues as quickly as possible, without the need for a formal hearing. Or, the Indian Tribe may, in lieu of filing an administrative appeal under this subpart or upon completion of an informal conference, file an action in Federal court pursuant to section 110 of the Act [25 U.S.C. 450m-1].
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONOF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b)OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

In connection with the Annual Report of PaulsonCapital Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Chester L. F. Paulson, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

          (1)The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

          (2)The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
| /s/ Chester L. F. Paulson             |   |
|---------------------------------------|--------|
| Chester L. F. Paulson                 |   |
| President and Chief Executive Officer |   |
| Paulson Capital Corp.                 |   |
| March 30, 2007                        |   |

 

This certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section1350, and not for any other purpose. A signed original of this writtenstatement required by Section 906 has been provided to Paulson Capital Corp.and will be retained by Paulson Capital Corp. and furnished to the Securitiesand Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

----
§ 35.44 Delivery to legal representative; to other claimants if value is $1,000 or less. The money and effects of the deceased patient shall in all cases be delivered to the legal representative, if any, of his estate. If the value is $1,000 or less, and the officer in charge has neither notice nor other knowledge of the appointment or qualification of a legal representative, nor reason to believe that a legal representative will be appointed or qualified, he shall deliver all the money and effects, as soon as practicable after the expiration of 10 days from the sending of notices to one of the following in the indicated order of priority: ( a ) A person, if any, designated in writing by the patient to receive the same.
( b ) The patient's surviving spouse.
( c ) The patient's child or children in equal parts.
( d ) The patient's parent or parents in equal parts.
( e ) Any other person who would be entitled to receive the money and effects under the law of the patient's domicile: *Provided,* That delivery of such money and effects may be made immediately upon application by one of the persons specified above if the officer in charge has neither notice nor other knowledge that a person higher in the indicated order of priority exists.
#### Adam YOUNG, Appellant, v. JOHN F. KENNEDY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, Appellee.

No. 80-1397.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Dec. 2, 1981.

John R. Young of Hamilton, James, Mer-kle & Young, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Stephen McAliley and Robert T. Bergin of Brennan, McAliley, Hayskar & McAliley, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on the authority of *Aldana v. Holub,*381 So.2d 231 (Fla.1980); *Hernandez v. Garwood,*390 So.2d 357 (Fla.1980) and *Ruben v. Kelley,*402 So.2d 1165 (Fla.1981).

LETTS, C. J., and ANSTEAD and HERSEY, JJ., concur.