alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondents, *against*Henry Goltze *et al.,*Appellants.

(Decided February 10th, 1890.)

On an application to set aside a judgment on a forfeited recognizance, where it appears that the applicant is entitled to the relief asked, he will be allowed an order on the comptroller directing a repayment of the amount of the recognizance, but not of the costs of entering judgment; it appearing that the money was paid to the comptroller, though he produces no certificate to that effect from the comptroller^

Application to vacate a judgment on a forfeited recognizance,-and for a repayment of the moneys paid in satisfaction thereof.

The facts are stated in the opinion.

*Ashbel P.*Fitch, for the motion.

*John R.*Fellows, opposed.

Per Curiam.

[Present, Larremore, Ch. J., Bookstaver and Bischoff, JJ.]. Judgment on the'forfeited recognizance was vacated and directed to be cancelled of record, by the May, 1889, General Term of this court, but through inadvertence the defendant failed to incorporate in his order a direction to the comptroller to repay him the amount of the judgment. Discovering the mistake, an application was made to the November General Term to cure it, but on that application the defendant .failed to give notice to the district attorney, and also failed to produce a certified copy of the order discharging the recognizance. In a memorandum made at the time the defendant was also directed to procure a certificate of the comptroller that the amount had been deposited with him. The defendant has now complied with all of these requirements, except the production of the certificate from the comptroller, which he says the comptroller refuses because he has no authority to give the same, *63and it is not customary to do so, and in this, we think, he is right. The fact, however, of the payment of the money to him is apparent from the papers, and we think the plaintiff should have an order directing the comptroller to pay to the defendant or his attorney the amount of the forfeited recognizance, $300, but not the amount of the costs of entering judgment, $42.60.

Order accordingly.
40839.

#### STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT v. MANN et al.

*391Decided October 1, 1964.

*Eugene Cook, Attorney General, Richard L. Chambers, Horace E. Campbell, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General, John A. Smith,*for plaintiff in error.

*George Richard Jacob,*contra.

Felton, Chief Judge.

This proceeding was to condemn an interest in real property. The only questions before the special master concerning the value of property sought to be condemned were (1) the value of the land to be taken and the consequential damage to the remaining land (not taken). On appeal the issues were the same and under present provisions of the law no question of damage to personal property was at issue and the court erred in admitting evidence that the damage to personal property done in connection with the building of public improvements, for which the land was taken, was $2,300. It would seem that the remedy of the condemnee for damage to *392personal property is an action under the constitutional provision for damages to property or a suit in equity to settle all issues in one action to avoid a multiplicity of suits. We know of no law permitting the recovery of damages to personalty as such on appeal of a finding by the special master fixing value of real property alone. The fact that the appeal was tried at a time when the damage to personal property had become ascertainable does not alter the fact that there is no provision of law for claiming damages to personalty in such a proceeding. *McArthur v. State Hwy. Dept. 85*Ga. App. 500 (69 SE2d 781).

The verdict of the jury was excessive because the only legal evidence as to the value of the land taken and consequential damages to the remainder showed a maximum of $2,512.60. The jury found $11,000 for all damages, including that to personal property. The only evidence presented by the condemnee, insofar as the real property was concerned, was the evidence as to the value of the whole tract, including the land taken, before the taking, and the value of the whole tract after the taking. Such evidence has no probative value as to the actual value of the land taken and the consequential damage to the land not taken. *State Hwy. Dept. v. Weldon,*107 Ga. App. 98 (129 SE2d 396).

The court erred in overruling the motion for a new trial.

*Judgment reversed.*

*Frankum and Pannell, JJ., concur.*
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT 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 Paulson Capital Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2009 as 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 the Sarbanes-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) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, 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, 2010 

This certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and not for any other purpose. A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Paulson Capital Corp. and will be retained by Paulson Capital Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Meetings with South African Minister Pandor and Deputy Minister Botes

# 									Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Meetings with South African Minister Pandor and Deputy Minister Botes							

Readout

Office of the Spokesperson

May 4, 2022

Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman had warm and productive meetings with South African Minister of International Relations and Cooperation Naledi Pandor and Deputy Minister of International Relations and Cooperation Alvin Botes today in Pretoria.

Deputy Secretary Sherman and Minister Pandor discussed the importance of the U.S.-South Africa partnership and shared priorities including health, climate, and regional and global peace and security.

Deputy Secretary Sherman and Deputy Minister Botes, who was joined by Economic Advisor to President Ramaphosa Trudi Makhaya, discussed the growing partnership on mutual areas of interest, including trade, investment, and infrastructure.  Deputy Secretary Sherman also expressed condolences on the loss of life and destruction as a result of the weather disaster in KwaZulu-Natal in April.

Tags

Bureau of African AffairsDeputy Secretary TripDeputy Secretary of StateOffice of the SpokespersonSouth Africa

Back to Top
Home2024 Treaties and Agreements...Cote d’Ivoire (24-206) – Agreement Concerning Counter Illicit Transnational Maritime Activity Operations

# 									Cote d’Ivoire (24-206) – Agreement Concerning Counter Illicit Transnational Maritime Activity Operations							

TIAS

Office of Treaty Affairs

February 6, 2024

Maritime Matters

Signed at Abidjan February 6, 2024; entered into force February 6, 2024.
Download Agreement						 [8 MB]

Tags

Côte d'IvoireMaritime MattersTreaties

Back to Top
###### Editorial Note on Subpart R of Part 405

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subpart R of part 405 appear at 79 FR 55031, Aug. 22, 2014.

#### § 405.1863 Administrative policy at issue.

Where a party to the Board hearing puts into issue an administrative policy which is interpretative of the law or regulations, the Board will promptly notify to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
VICORP RESTAURANTS, INC. CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND STATEMENTS OF
OPERATIONS AS OF OCTOBER 31, 1995 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000703799
<NAME> VICORP RESTAURANTS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1995
<CASH>                                           3,988
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,149
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      8,597
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                22,737
<PP&E>                                         279,894
<DEPRECIATION>                                 127,302
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 228,161
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           46,822
<BONDS>                                         42,178
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           452
<OTHER-SE>                                     122,646
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   228,161
<SALES>                                        370,116
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               373,838
<CGS>                                          124,028
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  124,028
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               229,655
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,855
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,064)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (4,532)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,532)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,532)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.49)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.49)
        

</TABLE>
HomeEl Salvador

# El Salvador

133 items

        -    Media Note  		Over 170 Business and Community Leaders from 49 Countries Convene in Washington, D.C. for the Spring Professional Fellows Congress, Advancing Governance and Society, Economic Empowerment, and Civic Engagement	  June 6, 2023 
        -    Report  		2022 Report on International Religious Freedom: El Salvador	  May 15, 2023 
        -    Report  		2022 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: El Salvador	  March 20, 2023 
        -    Fact Sheet  		Combating Global Corruption and Human Rights Abuses	  December 9, 2022 
        -    Remarks  		Protecting, Defending and Promoting Civic Space in Central America	  Uzra ZeyaDecember 5, 2022Wilson CenterWashington, DC 
        -    Remarks  		Under Secretary Fernandez’s Remarks at the HUGE (Honduras, USA, Guatemala, El Salvador) Business and Investment Council Annual Meeting	  Jose W. FernandezOctober 13, 2022Washington, D.C. 
        -    Remarks  		Ambassador-at-Large Beth Van Schaack’s Remarks to the Case Western Reserve University School of Law: "International Law & The New Cold War"	  Beth Van SchaackSeptember 30, 2022Case Western Reserve University School of LawCleveland, Ohio 
        -    Press Statement  		El Salvador National Day	  Antony J. BlinkenSeptember 15, 2022 
        -    Report  		2022 Fiscal Transparency Report: El Salvador	  September 9, 2022 
        -    Report  		2022 Investment Climate Statements: El Salvador	  July 28, 2022 

previous page12345…14next page

Back to Top
§ 8.3 Conference and practice requirements. Conference and practice requrements of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, including requirements for powers of attorney are set forth in: ( a ) 26 CFR part 601, subpart E (or those regulations as recodified in 27 CFR part 71 subsequent to the effective date of these regulations, 31 CFR part 8) with respect to all representations before the Bureau except those concerning license or permit proceedings;
( b ) 27 CFR part 200 with respect to proceedings concerning permits issued under the Federal Alcohol Administration Act or the Internal Revenue Code;
( c ) 27 CFR 47.44 with respect to proceedings concerning licenses issued under the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778);
( d ) 27 CFR part 178, subpart E, with respect to proceedings concerning licenses issued under the Gun Control Act of 1968 (18 U.S.C. Chapter 44); and
( e ) 27 CFR part 181, subpart E, with respect to proceedings concerning licenses or permits issued under the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970 (18 U.S.C. Chapter 40).
# C_2005242EN.01000901.xml

| 1.10.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 242/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.10.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 242/9

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3927 — Industri Kapital/Bonna Sabla)

(2005/C 242/08)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 20 September 2005, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3927. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3927. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

---
#### Milton Ray GOSS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 81-577.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Sept. 16, 1981.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 22, 1981.

Jerry Hill, Public Defender, and Paul C. Helm, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Barbara Ann Butler and Deborah A. Os-mond, Asst. Attys. Gen., Tampa, for appel-lee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s judgment of guilt of attempted burglary and sentence of five years in prison. In addition, appellant was ordered to pay court costs. Appellant was adjudged insolvent and *Cox v. State,*334 So.2d 568 (Fla. 1976) provides that imposition of court costs on a criminal defendant is improper where the defendant has been adjudicated insolvent. Accordingly, we remand so that the trial court can strike court costs.

BOARDMAN, Acting C. J., and RYDER and DANAHY, JJ., concur.
#### SHERBA BROS., INC., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. GROLIER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, Appellee.

No. 73-960.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Aug. 23, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed..
HomeGreece

# Greece

169 items

        -    TIAS  		Greece (18-607) – Extension to the Agreement of July 8, 1990 for Mutual Defense Cooperation	   
        -    Report  		Greece	  May 29, 2018 
        -    Report  		Greece	  April 20, 2018 
        -    TIAS  		Greece (17-1213) – Agreement to Improve International Tax Compliance and to Implement the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act	  December 13, 2017 
        -    TIAS  		Greece (17-1016) – Agreement Regarding Defense Services	  October 16, 2017 
        -    Report  		Greece	  August 15, 2017 
        -    TIAS  		Greece (17-707.1) – Agreement Extending the Agreement of July 8, 1990 Concerning Defense Cooperation	  July 7, 2017 
        -    Report  		Greece	  June 29, 2017 
        -    Report  		Greece	  June 27, 2017 
        -    Report  		Greece	  March 3, 2017 

previous page1…1314151617next page

Back to Top
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Jessie McGEE.

No. 65083.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 4, 1979.

In re Jessie McGee, applying for writ of certiorari. Orleans Parish. No. 253 — 296.

Writ denied. Sequestration of the jury is not required in the trial of a second degree murder charge, the offense being non-capital. See La.C.Cr.P. art. 791.
§ 569.301 Blocked account; blocked property. The terms *blocked account* and *blocked property* shall mean any account or property subject to the prohibitions in § 569.201 held in the name of a person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to § 569.201, or in which such person has an interest, and with respect to which payments, transfers, exportations, withdrawals, or other dealings may not be made or effected except pursuant to a license or other authorization from OFAC expressly authorizing such action. Note 1 to § 569.301 :
*See* § 569.406 concerning the blocked status of property and interests in property of an entity that is directly or indirectly owned, whether individually or in the aggregate, 50 percent or more by one or more persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to § 569.201.
§ 1003.1200 Basis for civil money penalties. The OIG may impose a penalty against— ( a ) Any wholesaler, manufacturer, or direct seller of a covered outpatient drug that— ( 1 ) Refuses a request for information by, or
( 2 ) Knowingly provides false information to, the Secretary about charges or prices in connection with a survey being conducted pursuant to section 1927(b)(3)(B) of the Act; and
( b ) Any manufacturer with an agreement under section 1927 of the Act that— ( 1 ) Fails to provide any information required by section 1927(b)(3)(A) of the Act by the deadlines specified therein, or
( 2 ) Knowingly provides any item information required by section 1927(b)(3)(A) or (B) of the Act that is false.
HomeJamaica

# Jamaica

88 items

        -    Special Briefing via Telephone  		Telephonic Press Briefing with Brian A. Nichols, Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, on the IX Summit of the Americas	  Brian A. NicholsJanuary 20, 2022 
        -    DSS Releases  		Two Individuals Charged with Identity Theft After Using Stolen Identities of Deceased and Elderly Victims to Purchase Vehicles, a House, and to Obtain a False Passport	  September 29, 2021 
        -    Press Statement  		Jamaica’s Independence Day	  Antony J. BlinkenAugust 6, 2021 
        -    Report  		2021 Investment Climate Statements: Jamaica	  July 21, 2021 
        -    Report  		2021 Trafficking in Persons Report: Jamaica	  July 1, 2021 
        -    Report  		2020 Report on International Religious Freedom: Jamaica	  May 12, 2021 
        -    Media Note  		Secretary Blinken’s Roundtable with CARICOM Foreign Ministers	  April 21, 2021 
        -    Report  		2020 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Jamaica	  March 30, 2021 
        -    Special Briefing via Telephone  		Telephonic Press Briefing with Vice Admiral Steven Poulin, U.S. Coast Guard, and David Hogan, U.S. Department of State	  February 12, 2021 
        -    		Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs: Jamaica Summary	   

previous page1…34567…9next page

Back to Top
#### Ruth M. MITCHELL, Appellant, v. Ralph E. MITCHELL, Appellee.

No. 77-2669.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 14, 1979.

L. Guerry Dobbins, Jr., and Walter W. Manley, II, Lakeland, for appellant.

Kendall T. Moran, Titusville, for appellee.

DOWNEY, Chief Judge.

The parties to this dissolution of marriage proceeding were wed but for three years and no children were born. Prior to the marriage the husband owned a home which the parties eventually occupied as the marital home. Title remained in the husband’s name alone. Prior to the marriage the husband had accumulated some money which he used during the marriage to purchase a $20,000 certificate of deposit, title to which was taken in the joint names of husband and wife.

The wife claimed she was entitled to one-half of the certificate of deposit and a special equity in the marital home because they both worked during the marriage and deposited their respective salaries into a joint account from which their living expenses were paid including the monthly mortgage payment on the home.

The trial court found from the evidence that the home was purchased by the husband with his funds prior to the marriage and the wife’s contributions to the general living expenses of the parties via the joint account were simply non-recoverable contributions to the marriage. We believe the finding is adequately supported *629factually by the record and legally by the rule set forth in *Steinhauer v. Steinhauer,*252 So.2d 825 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971).

With regard to the certificate of deposit the trial court found that the source of the money used to purchase the certificate of deposit came from the husband’s funds which were unconnected with the marriage and that there was no intention by the husband to make a gift to the wife. Therefore, the trial judge concluded the rule set forth in *Ball v. Ball,*335 So.2d 5 (Fla.1976), controls and the husband was entitled to a special equity therein to the extent of the wife’s one-half interest in the certificate of deposit. We agree with the trial court’s legal conclusion that, although the Supreme Court made it clear through a footnote that *Ball*involved only real property, there is no apparent reason why it should not apply equally to personalty. However, since the application of the *Ball*rule to personalty involves a question of great public interest and should be settled for the benefit of bench and bar, we certify the following question to the Supreme Court of Florida:

> IS A SPECIAL EQUITY CREATED IN *PERSONAL PROPERTY*BY AN UN-REBUTTED SHOWING THAT ALL OF THE CONSIDERATION FOR PROPERTY HELD AS TENANTS BY THE EN-TIRETIES WAS SUPPLIED BY ONE SPOUSE FROM A SOURCE CLEARLY UNCONNECTED WITH THE MARITAL RELATIONSHIP?

The judgment appealed from is affirmed.

MOORE, J., and FARRINGTON, OTIS (Retired), Associate Judge, concur.
# C_2005253EN.01000402.xml

| 13.10.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 253/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.10.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 253/4

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3945 — LBO/Terreal)

(2005/C 253/05)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 28 September 2005, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3945. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3945. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

---