alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
40942, 40943, 40944, 40945.

#### MILES v. CITIZENS & SOUTHERN NATIONAL BANK (four cases).

Nichols, Presiding Judge.

1. These cases, except as to one ground, raise the identical questions decided in *Cravey v. Citizens &c. Nat. Bank,*110 Ga. App. ante, and are controlled by the decision there adverse to the plaintiff in error.

2. The contention is here made that the defendant employed a named licensed practicing attorney to defend each such action, but that such attorney through inadvertence and mistake failed to file defensive pleadings although the defendant made inquiry and was advised that such defensive pleadings were filed on his behalf by such attorney before the action became in default. It was also alleged that the defendant conferred with such attorney within a week of the time such actions were served, that such attorney took the service copies of the petitions and process for the purpose of filing defensive pleadings, advising the defendant that he would file them, and later advised the defendant that he had filed them, but through inadvertence, mistake of law and of fact, the defensive pleadings were not filed.

The additional ground of the motion seeking to arrest the judgments are not based on any alleged defects appearing on the *288face of the record but on extraneous matter, to wit: Either a misunderstanding between the defendant and his employed counsel or the negligence of such counsel. In *Moore v. Kelly & Jones Co.,*109 Ga. 798 (35 SE 168), the Supreme Court reversed a judgment of the trial court setting aside a judgment where no defense was filed because of a misunderstanding between client and counsel. See also *Bentley v. Finch,*86 Ga. 809 (13 SE 155). In *Kite v. Lumpkin,*40 Ga. 506, Justice McCay held: “As to "the ground taken in the affidavit that the defendant had a good defense to the plaintiff’s claim . . . but failed to bring it to the notice of the court, by reason of a misunderstanding between himself and his lawyers, we think that is no excuse. It would be indeed an extraordinary practice, to permit a solemn judgment of a Court to be set aside, and a new trial to be had, on such a ground as this. The well settled rule is, that the judgment concludes all disputes between the parties unless there be fraud, accident, or mistake, unmixed with any negligence of the party complaining. The misunderstanding between him and his lawyers, resulting in their failure to file a plea, was gross negligence. If he did employ them, they-were grossly negligent, and if he did not, the negligence is his. If a man manage his affairs so badly, that he leaves it in doubt whether he has employed an attorney to defend his suit, he must take the consequences.” The trial court did not err in overruling the motions seeking to arrest the judgments.

Decided September 21, 1964.

*Sumner & Boatright, J. Laddie Boatright,*for plaintiff in error.

*Wallace E. Harrell,*contra.

*Judgments affirmed.*

*Hall and Bussell, JJ., concur.*
Exhibit 31.2
                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Robert W. McMartin, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this Report on Form 10-QSB of Circuit Research Labs, Inc.;

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;

3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
    information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects
    the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
    registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
    establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
    in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

    (a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
         disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
         supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
         registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to
         us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
         which this report is being prepared;

    (b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
         and procedures presented in this report our conclusions about the
         effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end
         of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

    (c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
         control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's
         most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in
         the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
         reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal
         control over financial reporting; and

5.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on
    our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
    the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board
    of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

    (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
        operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
        reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to
        record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

    (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
        employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
        control over financial reporting.


Date: August 23, 2004


/s/ Robert W. McMartin
-------------------------
Robert W. McMartin
Vice President, Treasurer and
Chief Financial Officer
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Meeting with Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare and Select Cabinet Members

# 									Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Meeting with Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare and Select Cabinet Members							

Readout

Office of the Spokesperson

August 7, 2022

The below is attributable to Spokesperson Ned Price:

Deputy Secretary Wendy Sherman met today with Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare in Honiara, Solomon Islands. They discussed the U.S.-Solomon Islands bilateral relationship, including cooperation in areas such as provision of COVID-19 vaccines, reducing poverty, enhancing climate resilience, increasing tourism investment, and deepening efforts to mitigate unexploded explosive ordnance (UXO) in Solomon Islands, a legacy of the Second World War. They also discussed developments affecting regional and global security. The Deputy Secretary also highlighted recent developments in the process to open the U.S. Embassy in Honiara.

Tags

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsDeputy Secretary TripDeputy Secretary of StateOffice of the SpokespersonSolomon Islands

## Related Articles

-  											 									
Read more
 

Back to Top
# C_2005217EN.01001702.xml

| 3.9.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 217/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.9.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 217/17

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 16 June 2005

in Case C-138/04: Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Denmark (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 83/183/EEC - Transfer of residence from one Member State to another - Fee charged on registration of motor vehicles - Tax exemption)

(2005/C 217/33)

Language of the case: Danish

In Case C-138/04: action for failure to fulfil obligations under Article 226 EC, brought on 15 March 2004, Commission of the European Communities (Agents: R. Lyal and T. Fich) v Kingdom of Denmark (Agents: J. Molde and A. Rahbøl Jacobsen) the Court (First Chamber), composed of P. Jann, President of the Chamber, K. Lenaerts (Rapporteur), J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, E. Juhász and M.Ilešič, Judges; M. Poiares Maduro, Advocate General; H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 16 June 2005, in which it:

Commission of the European Communities

Kingdom of Denmark

| 1. | Dismisses the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action.

| 2. | Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 168 of 26.06.2004.

1

---
§ 1005.15 The hearing and burden of proof. ( a ) The ALJ will conduct a hearing on the record in order to determine whether the petitioner or respondent should be found liable under this part.
( b ) With regard to the burden of proof in civil money penalty cases under part 1003, in Quality Improvement Organization exclusion cases under part 1004, and in exclusion cases under §§ 1001.701, 1001.901 and 1001.951 of this chapter— ( 1 ) The respondent or petitioner, as applicable, bears the burden of going forward and the burden of persuasion with respect to affirmative defenses and any mitigating circumstances; and
( 2 ) The IG bears the burden of going forward and the burden of persuasion with respect to all other issues.
( c ) Burden of proof in all other exclusion cases. In all exclusion cases except those governed by paragraph (b) of this section, the ALJ will allocate the burden of proof as the ALJ deems appropriate.
( d ) The burden of persuasion will be judged by a preponderance of the evidence.
( e ) The hearing will be open to the public unless otherwise ordered by the ALJ for good cause shown.
( f ) ( 1 ) A hearing under this part is not limited to specific items and information set forth in the notice letter to the petitioner or respondent. Subject to the 15-day requirement under § 1005.8, additional items and information, including aggravating or mitigating circumstances that arose or became known subsequent to the issuance of the notice letter, may be introduced by either party during its case-in-chief unless such information or items are— ( i ) Privileged;
( ii ) Disqualified from consideration due to untimeliness in accordance with § 1004.130(a)(2)(ii); or
( iii ) Deemed otherwise inadmissible under § 1005.17.
( 2 ) After both parties have presented their cases, evidence may be admitted on rebuttal even if not previously exchanged in accordance with § 1005.8.
[57 FR 3350, Jan. 29, 1992, as amended at 63 FR 46691, Sept. 2, 1998; 65 FR 24418, Apr. 26, 2000]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This Schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet at September 30, 1998 and the Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the nine months ended September 30,
1998 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                       5,847,976
<SECURITIES>                                15,601,491
<RECEIVABLES>                               11,247,660
<ALLOWANCES>                                   234,559
<INVENTORY>                                  5,516,599
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            42,368,359
<PP&E>                                      28,694,352
<DEPRECIATION>                               9,656,333
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              65,449,769
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,685,143
<BONDS>                                      3,038,057
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       406,464
<OTHER-SE>                                  53,545,277
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                65,449,769
<SALES>                                     61,199,104
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            61,199,104
<CGS>                                       35,473,693
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               16,671,970
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               182,133
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                19,920
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             182,133
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              8,625,380
<INCOME-TAX>                               (3,528,637)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          4,985,203
<DISCONTINUED>                             (5,730,197)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (744,994)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.09)


</TABLE>
HomeSenegal

# Senegal

106 items

        -    TIAS  		Senegal (10-923) – Millennium Challenge Compact	  September 23, 2010 
        -    TIAS  		Senegal (13134) – Air Transport Agreement	  August 11, 2003 
        -    TIAS  		Senegal (03-627.3) – Agreement Regarding the Surrender of Persons to the International Criminal Court	  June 27, 2003 
        -    TIAS  		Senegal (12947) – Agreement Relating to Employment of Dependents of Staff Members of Diplomatic and Consular Missions	  April 28, 1998 
        -    TIAS  		Senegal (95-317) – Agreement for Cooperation in the GLOBE Program	  March 17, 1995 
        -    TIAS  		Senegal (90-1025) – Treaty Concerning the Reciprocal Encouragement and Protection of Investment	  October 25, 1990 

previous page1…91011

Back to Top
# C_2005322EN.01002101.xml

| 17.12.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 322/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 322/21

---

Amendments to Calls for proposals for indirect RTD actions under the specific programme for research, technological development and demonstration: ‘Integrating and strengthening the European Research Area’

(
  Official Journal of the European Communities C 315 of 17 December 2002
  )

(
  Official Journal of the European Communities C 315 of 17 December 2002

(2005/C 322/13)

The following amendments have been decided by the Commission on 7 July 2005 (1):

1

| — | On page 51 (Annex 25) under point 7: call identifier: FP6-2002-INCO-DEV/SSA-1 |
| --- | --- |

—

On page 51 (Annex 25) under point 7: call identifier: FP6-2002-INCO-DEV/SSA-1

for:

‘Total indicative budget: EUR 1 million in 2003. Total indicative budget for 2004, 2005 and 2006 will be given in periodic updates of the work programme.’

read:

‘Total indicative budget: EUR 2,4 million in 2006 (6 March deadline).’

| — | On page 52 (Annex 26) under point 7: call identifier: FP6-2002-INCO-MPC/SSA-2 |
| --- | --- |

—

On page 52 (Annex 26) under point 7: call identifier: FP6-2002-INCO-MPC/SSA-2

for:

‘Total indicative budget: EUR 0,6 million in 2003. Total indicative budget for 2004, 2005 and 2006 will be given in periodic updates of the work programme.’

read:

‘Total indicative budget: EUR 1 million in 2006 (6 March deadline).’

| — | On page 53 (Annex 27): call identifier: FP6-2002-INCO-WBC/SSA-3 |
| --- | --- |

—

On page 53 (Annex 27): call identifier: FP6-2002-INCO-WBC/SSA-3

For 2006 this call is cancelled and replaced by a new specific SSA call FP6-2005-INCO-WBC/SSA-3. Deadline 6 March 2006, published in this Official Journal of the European Union.

Official Journal of the European Union

| — | On page 54 (Annex 28) under point 7: call identifier: FP6-2002-INCO-Russia+NIS/SSA-4. |
| --- | --- |

—

On page 54 (Annex 28) under point 7: call identifier: FP6-2002-INCO-Russia+NIS/SSA-4.

for:

‘Total indicative budget: EUR 0,6 million in 2003. Total indicative budget for 2004, 2005 and 2006 will be given in periodic updates of the work programme.’

read:

‘Total indicative budget: EUR 0,7 million in 2006 (6 March deadline).’

| — | On page 55 (Annex 29) under point 7: call identifier: FP6-2002-INCO-COMultilatRTD/SSA-5. |
| --- | --- |

—

On page 55 (Annex 29) under point 7: call identifier: FP6-2002-INCO-COMultilatRTD/SSA-5.

for:

‘Total indicative budget: EUR 0,6 million in 2003. Total indicative budget for 2004, 2005 and 2006 will be given in periodic updates of the work programme.’

read:

‘Total indicative budget: EUR 2,3 million in 2006 (6 March deadline).’

---

(1)  Commission Decision C(2005)2076 of 7 July, unpublished.

1

---
§ 405.1042 The administrative record. ( a ) *Creating the record.* ( 1 ) OMHA makes a complete record of the evidence and administrative proceedings on the appealed matter, including any prehearing and posthearing conferences, and hearing proceedings that were conducted.
( 2 ) The record will include marked as exhibits, the appealed determinations, and documents and other evidence used in making the appealed determinations and the ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's decision, including, but not limited to, claims, medical records, written statements, certificates, reports, affidavits, and any other evidence the ALJ or attorney adjudicator admits. The record will also include any evidence excluded or not considered by the ALJ or attorney adjudicator, including, but not limited to, new evidence submitted by a provider or supplier, or beneficiary represented by a provider or supplier, for which no good cause was established, and duplicative evidence submitted by a party.
( 3 ) A party may request and review a copy of the record prior to or at the hearing, or, if a hearing is not held, at any time before the notice of decision is issued.
( 4 ) If a request for review is filed or the case is escalated to the Council, the complete record, including any prehearing and posthearing conference and hearing recordings, is forwarded to the Council.
( 5 ) A typed transcription of the hearing is prepared if a party seeks judicial review of the case in a Federal district court within the stated time period and all other jurisdictional criteria are met, unless, upon the Secretary's motion prior to the filing of an answer, the court remands the case.
( b ) *Requesting and receiving copies of the record.* ( 1 ) While an appeal is pending at OMHA, a party may request and receive a copy of all or part of the record from OMHA, including any index of the administrative record, documentary evidence, and a copy of the audio recording of the oral proceedings. The party may be asked to pay the costs of providing these items.
( 2 ) If a party requests a copy of all or part of the record from OMHA or the ALJ or attorney adjudicator and an opportunity to comment on the record, any adjudication period that applies in accordance with § 405.1016 is extended by the time beginning with the receipt of the request through the expiration of the time granted for the party's response.
( 3 ) If a party requests a copy of all or part of the record and the record, including any audio recordings, contains information pertaining to an individual that the requesting party is not entitled to receive, such as personally identifiable information or protected health information, such portions of the record will not be furnished unless the requesting party obtains consent from the individual.
[82 FR 5118, Jan. 17, 2017]
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Notice Improvement Issue Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Thursday, October 8, 2009.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sallie Chavez at 1-888-912-1227, or 954-423-7979.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 10(a) (2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Notice Improvement Issue Committee will be held Thursday, October 8, 2009, at 2 p.m. Eastern Time via telephone conference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate must be made with Sallie Chavez. For more information please contact Ms. Chavez at 1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7979, or write TAP Office, 1000 South Pine Island Road, Suite 340, Plantation, FL 33324, or post comments to the                     *Web site: http://www.improveirs.org.*

The agenda will include various IRS issues.

Dated: August 31, 2009.

Shawn F. Collins,

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. E9-21448 Filed 9-4-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
#### Exhibit 99.2

Certification
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

Pursuant
to the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Sections
1350(a) and (b)), the undersigned hereby certify as follows:

1.    
          Patrick J. Mitchell is the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of
          Ascent Assurance, Inc. (the Company).

2.    
          Cynthia B. Koenig is the Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
          the Company.

3.    
          To the best of our knowledge:

| | (A) |  | The Companys Form 10-K for the annual period ended December 31, 2002
               accompanying this Certification, in the form filed with the Securities and
               Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies with the
               requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
               (the Exchange Act); and
| | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Dated: March 6, 2003

| |                                                         
| | --------------------------------------------------------
| | By: /s/ Patrick J. Mitchell                             
| | Name: Patrick J. Mitchell                               
| | Title: Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
|
|
| | By: /s/Cynthia B. Koenig                                
| | Name: Cynthia B. Koenig                                 
| | Title: Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|