alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The Seven Sutherland Sisters, Respondent, *v.*Thomas H. McInnerney et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term,

October, 1898.)

Contract — Interpretation — Royalty on *“*gross sales”.

Under a contract providing that the defendants shall pay the plaintiff, a corporation, “as a royalty, a sum equal to 20 per cent, of the amount of the gross sales made by them ”, the plaintiff is not entitled *721to this percentage on the apparent, or nominal, gross sales, but only-on the money which the defendants actually received — allowance being made for the discount which the defendants gave their customers.

Appeal from a judgment of the Fourth Municipal Court, borough of Manhattan, in favor of the plaintiff-corporation.

E. P. Johnson, for appellants.

M. Esberg, for respondent.

Gildersleeve, J.

The plaintiff-corporation and defendants entered into a contract, under the terms of which plaintiff was to receive from defendants 20 per cent, of the gross sales of certain articles. The precise words of the contract are as follows, viz.: “ The parties of the second part (defendants) promise and agree to pay to the said party of the first part (plaintiff) monthly, and as a royalty, a sum equal to 20 per cent, of the amount of the gross sales made by them,” etc. The nominal gross sales, without deducting the discount allowed to customers, amounted to the sum of $5,907.85; while the actual gross sales, after allowing the discount, or, in other words, the money actually received on sales, amounted to $5,411.14. The defendants have already paid to the plaintiff 20 per cent, on this sum of $5,411.14, but plaintiff wants $99.34 more, or 20 per cent, on $5,907.85, the nominal gross sales.

The only question presented on this appeal is the following, viz.: Do the words “ gross sales,” mentioned in the contract mean the nominal gross sales without deducting the discount allowed to customers, or do they mean the gross sales after deducting the discount, *i. e.,*the actual money received? The justice found for plaintiff. This decision was erroneous.

The term “ gross sales ”• means actual sales, without deducting expenses. The discount certainly cannot be regarded as expenses. The plaintiff, under this contract, was entitled to 20 per cent, of the actual receipts, without deducting the expenses. In other words, it was entitled to 20 per cent, of the gross receipts, as distinguished from the net profits. If a seller says to a buyer that, he will sell him a horse for $100, and allow him 10 per cent, discount if he pays within a certain time, and the buyer does pay within that time, the *722“ gross sale ” of that horse is $90; and the same principle applies to the case at bar.

. The judgment should be reversed, and as there 'are no questions of fact in dispute, the complaint should be dismissed, with costs in the court below and of this appeal.

Beekman, P. J., and Giegerich, J., concur.

Judgment reversed, complaint dismissed, with costs in court below and of this appeal.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Designation of Attorney General Maria Consuelo Porras Argueta de Porres for Involvement in Significant Corruption and Consideration of Additional Designations

# 									Designation of Attorney General Maria Consuelo Porras Argueta de Porres for Involvement in Significant Corruption and Consideration of Additional Designations							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

May 16, 2022

The United States is designating Attorney General of Guatemala Maria Consuelo Porras Argueta de Porres (“Porras”) due to her involvement in significant corruption.  During her tenure, Porras repeatedly obstructed and undermined anticorruption investigations in Guatemala to protect her political allies and gain undue political favor.  Porras’s pattern of obstruction includes reportedly ordering prosecutors in Guatemala’s Public Ministry to ignore cases based on political considerations and firing prosecutors who investigate cases involving acts of corruption.

This public designation is made under Section 7031(c) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2022. Under this authority, designated officials of foreign governments involved in significant corruption and their immediate family members are ineligible for entry into the United States.  The Department is also designating Porras’s husband Gilberto de Jesus Porres de Paz.  The designation follows Porras’s September 2021 inclusion on the list of corrupt and undemocratic actors submitted to the U.S. Congress under Section 353 of the United States – Northern Triangle Enhanced Engagement Act. The Department is actively considering additional designations under Section 353, including making new designations public at the appropriate time.

These designations reaffirm the commitment of the United States to combat corruption, which undermines the Guatemalan people’s faith in their democratic institutions.  The United States continues to stand with all Guatemalans in support of democracy and the rule of law and against those who would undermine these principles for personal gain.

Tags

7031(c)Bureau of Western Hemisphere AffairsCorruptionGuatemalaOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

## Related Articles

-  											 									
Read more
 

Back to Top
# C_2005296EN.01002401.xml

| 26.11.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 296/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.11.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 296/24

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 19 September 2005 — Aseprofar and Edifa v Commission

(Case T-247/04) (1)

1

(Action for annulment - Admissibility - Challengeable act - Failure to bring an action for failure to fulfil obligations - Notification 2002/C 244/03)

(2005/C 296/51)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant(s): Asociación de exportadores españoles de productos farmacéuticos (Aseprofar) and Española de desarrollo e impulso farmacéutico, SA (Edifa) (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: L. Ortiz Blanco, lawyer).

Applicant(s):

Defendant(s): Commission of the European Communities (represented by: G. Valero Jordana, Agent).

Defendant(s):

Application for

Annulment of the Commission's decision of 30 March 2004 to take no further action in respect of complaint P/2002/4609 and of the Commission's decision of 30 March 2004 to take no further action in respect of complaint P/2003/5119, as regards Article 29 EC.

Operative part of the Order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | Asociación de exportadores españoles de productos farmacéuticos and Española de desarrollo e impulso farmacéutico, SA are ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Asociación de exportadores españoles de productos farmacéuticos and Española de desarrollo e impulso farmacéutico, SA are ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 217 of 28.08.2004.

1

---
STATE NOT A PARTY IN INTEREST UNDER A BOND FOR APPEARANCE RUNNING TO CITY.

Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County.

#### Lilliston et al v. State of Ohio.

Decided, June 1, 1917.

*Forfeited Recognizance*— Action *on, Where Running to a■ Municipality —Improperly Brought in "Name of the State.*

The state of Ohio is not “the real party in interest” in an action on a forfeited recognizance running to the- city of Cleveland, taken in a prosecution in the municipal court of such city under a city ordinance.

*G. W. Gurney,*for plaintiff in error.

*Samuel Voerfler,*Prosecuting Attorney, contra.

*96Metcalfe, J.

The plaintiff in error, Eva Lilliston, was arrested by an officer of the Cleveland police department, and under a city ordinance an affidavit was filed against her in the municipal court charging her with street soliciting.

Thereupon she appeared before the clerk of said court, with plaintiff in error G. W. Gurney, and entered into a recognizance for her appearance, the bond running to the city of Cleveland. The plaintiff in error, Eva Lilliston, failed to appear at the time set for trial and the recognizance was forfeited.

This action is brought in the name of the state of Ohio to- recover the penalty. The question' here is, can an action be maintained in the name of the state of Ohio on a recognizance running to the city of Cleveland taken in a prosecution in the municipal court of said city under a munieipál ordinance?

We are clear that such action can not be maintained in the name of the state. The case cited in the brief of counsel for defendant in error as *Chandler*v. Commissioners, 2 Dec. Re., 112, does not apply. In that case the prosecution was under a state law and the bond was taken in the name of the state of Ohio. Of course, in a prosecution under the law of the state, in a state court, the recognizance would run to the state of Ohio, and the state of Ohio would be the real party in interest in an action to recover the penalty of the bond. Here, however, the case is different. The prosecution was under a municipal ordinance in municipal court and the bond ran to the city of Cleveland.

Before the state can maintain an action on such a bond it would have to show either a statutory right or that it had in some way acquired the interest of the city.

The petition in this case does not show a cause of action in favor of the plaintiff, the defect would not be waived by a failure to demur, and a judgment on such a petition would be void. *Weidner et al*v. *Rankin et al,*26 Ohio St., 522, and *Spoors*v. *Coen, 44*Ohio St., 197.

The judgment is reversed.

Pollock, J., and Farr, j.,’ concur.
§ 403.231 Emblem. ( a ) The emblem is a graphic symbol, approved by HHS, that indicates that CMS has certified a policy as meeting the requirements of the voluntary certification program, specified in § 403.232.
( b ) Unless prohibited by the State in which the policy is marketed, the insuring organization may display the emblem on policies certified under the voluntary certification program.
( c ) The manner in which the emblem may be displayed and the conditions and restrictions relating to its use will be stated in the letter with which CMS notifies the insuring organization that a policy has been certified. The insuring organization must comply with these conditions and restrictions.
( d ) If a certified policy is issued in a State that later has an approved regulatory program, as provided for in § 403.222, the insuring organization may display the emblem on the policy until the earliest of the following— ( 1 ) When prohibited by State law or regulation.
( 2 ) When the policy no longer meets the requirements for Medicare supplemental policies specified in § 403.206.
( 3 ) The date the insuring organization would be required to submit material to CMS for annual review in order to retain certification, if the State did not have an approved program (see § 403.239).
FEWS NET Afghanistan FEWS NET Washington 

1717 H St NW 

Washington DC 20006 

info@fews.net 

FEWS NET is a USAID-funded activity. The authors’ views expressed in 

this publication do not necessarily reflect the view of the United States 

Agency for International Development or the United States Government.

www.fews.net/afghanistan 

AFGHANISTAN Weekly Climate Forecast #18, May 13 - 19, 2009 

Since late March, heavy rainfall and snowmelt has triggered 

flooding, landslides, and avalanches in 10 of the country’s 34 

provinces. The heaviest rainfall has occurred in western and 

northern Afghanistan where flash flooding was responsible for 

casualties. Across Afghanistan, more than 10,000 hectares of 

farmland was affected and many livestock were killed. 

During the past week, precipitation amounts ranged from 5 to 

50 mm, liquid equivalent, in the northern parts of the country 

(Figure 2). Much of the precipitation likely fell in the form of 

snow across the northeast mountains where snow depths 

remain high. In the highest elevations of the central highlands, 

snow cover remains but rapid melting has likely occurred in the 

lower elevations of the central highlands. 

During the next week, dry weather can be expected across 

Afghanistan (Figure 3). Despite the drier weather, flooding 

associated with snowmelt will remain a concern. Above normal 

temperatures should affect the lowlands with maximum 

temperatures reaching the upper 30s (°C) in southwest 

Afghanistan. 

Figure 1. Weather hazards in Afghanistan 

Figure 2. May 5 – 11 Accumulated Precipitation (mm) Based 

on Satellite and Gauge Data. 

 Source: NOAA/CPC

Figure 3. GFS Precipitation Forecast (mm) from May 12 -

18. 

Source: NOAA/CPC
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Deputy Secretary McKeon’s Travel to Paris and Frankfurt

# 									Deputy Secretary McKeon’s Travel to Paris and Frankfurt							

Media Note

Office of the Spokesperson

June 7, 2022

Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Brian P. McKeon will travel to Paris, France, from June 8 to 10 to lead the U.S. delegation to the 61st annual Ministerial Council Meeting of the Organization for Economic Development and Cooperation (OECD).  While in Paris, Deputy Secretary McKeon will meet with OECD Secretary General Matthias Corman and officials from OECD member countries.  The Deputy Secretary and the Secretary General will discuss the OECD’s key role in driving progress to meet shared challenges, including the climate crisis, inclusive economic recovery, and support for Ukraine’s recovery and reconstruction.  He will participate in Ministerial Council Meeting working sessions, including on Africa and on the economic and other consequences of Russia’s aggression in Ukraine.  Deputy Secretary McKeon will also visit Frankfurt, Germany, for internal meetings at the U.S. Consulate General.

The Deputy Secretary’s participation in the OECD Ministerial Council Meeting will underscore our support for the OECD as the premiere venue for market-oriented democracies to come together to develop solutions for economic challenges.

Tags

Bureau of European and Eurasian AffairsDeputy Secretary of State for Management and ResourcesFranceGermanyOffice of the SpokespersonOfficial International TravelOrganization for Economic Co-operation and Development

Back to Top
§ 37.202 Payment for autopsy. ( a ) NIOSH may, at its discretion, pay any pathologist who has received prior authorization for payment from NIOSH pursuant to § 37.204(a). Payment will only be provided with proof that legal consent for an autopsy as required by applicable law from the next of kin or other authorized person has been obtained, or that consent is not required, such as for a forensic autopsy. Payment may be provided to a pathologist who: ( 1 ) Performs an autopsy on a miner in accordance with this subpart; and
( 2 ) Submits the findings and other materials to NIOSH in accordance with this subpart within 180 calendar days after having performed the autopsy. ( i ) Types of chest radiographic images accepted for submission include a digital chest image (posteroanterior view) provided in an electronic format consistent with the DICOM standards described in § 37.42(c)(5), a chest computed tomography provided in an electronic format consistent with DICOM standards, or a good-quality copy or original of a film chest radiograph (posteroanterior view).
( ii ) More than one type of chest radiographic image may be submitted.
( b ) If payments are available, pathologists will be compensated in accordance with their ordinary, usual, or customary fees or at amounts determined through negotiation with NIOSH. To inform payment amounts, NIOSH may collect information about the fees charged by other pathologists with the same board certifications for the same services, in the same geographic area. NIOSH will additionally compensate a pathologist for the submission of chest radiographic images made of the subject of the autopsy within 5 years prior to their death together with copies of any interpretations made.
( c ) A pathologist (or the pathologist's employer, the organization in which the pathologist practices, or another entity receiving payment on behalf of or for services provided by the pathologist) who receives any other specific payment, fee, or reimbursement in connection with the autopsy from the miner's surviving spouse, family, estate, or any other Federal agency will not receive payment from NIOSH.
[86 FR 24339, May 6, 2021]
HomeTrinidad and Tobago

# Trinidad and Tobago

83 items

        -    Press Statement  		Secretary Blinken’s Travel to Trinidad and Tobago and Guyana July 5-6, 2023	  Matthew MillerJune 30, 2023 
        -    Report  		2023 Trafficking in Persons Report: Trinidad and Tobago	  June 15, 2023 
        -    Remarks  		Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues Dr. Geeta Gupta's Remarks at the Opening Plenary Session of the Fifth Annual Capital Level Meeting of the Women, Peace and Security Focal Points Network	  Geeta Rao GuptaJune 6, 2023 
        -    Report  		2022 Report on International Religious Freedom: Trinidad and Tobago	  May 15, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Assistant Secretary Pyatt’s Travel to Trinidad and Tobago and Guyana	  May 5, 2023 
        -    Report  		2022 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Trinidad and Tobago	  March 20, 2023 
        -    Readout  		Secretary Blinken’s Meeting with Trinidad and Tobago’s Foreign Minister Browne	  March 7, 2023 
        -    Remarks  		Secretary Antony J. Blinken and Trinidadian and Tobagonian Foreign Minister Amery Browne Before Their Meeting	  Antony J. BlinkenMarch 7, 2023Thomas Jefferson RoomWashington, DC 
        -    Report  		Country Reports on Terrorism 2021: Trinidad and Tobago	  February 27, 2023 
        -    TIAS  		Trinidad and Tobago (22-1219) – Extension of Agreement of May 22, 2013 on Defense Status of Forces	  December 19, 2022 

previous page12345…9next page

Back to Top
# C_2005271EN.01002702.xml

| 29.10.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 271/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.10.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 271/27

---

Election of the President of the Civil Service Tribunal

(2005/C 271/51)

At a meeting on 6 October 2005, in accordance with Article 3 of the Council Decision of 22 July 2005 appointing Judges of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (1) and Article 4(1) of Annex I to the Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice, (2) the Judges of the Civil Service Tribunal elected Mr Mahoney President of the Tribunal for the period from 6 October 2005 to 5 October 2008.

1

2

---

(1)  OJ L 197, 28.7.2005, p. 28.

1

(2)  OJ L 333, 9.11.2004, p. 9.

2

---
##### 



Exhibit 10.74
 US Airways Group, Inc.  2005 Equity Incentive Plan  Stock Unit Award Agreement
 Grant Notice Award Agreement Company Plan Stock
Units Award
  1. Number of Stock Units and Shares of Common Stock.
 2. Vesting provided, however
 (a)
 (b)
 3. Dividends .
 4. Payment




---



##### 



5. Delivery of Shares.
 (a) e.g.
 (b) Original Distribution Date
 6. Securities Law Compliance
 7. Transfer Restrictions.
 8. Award not a Service Contract
 9. Unsecured Obligation.




---



##### 



10. Withholding Obligations.
 (a)
 (b)
 (c)
 11. Notices
 12. Miscellaneous.
 (a)
 (b)
 (c)




---



##### 



(d)
 (e)
 13. Headings .
 14. Severability.
 15. Governing Plan Document
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="Microsoft Word 97">
<TITLE>CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>

<FONT SIZE=3><P ALIGN="RIGHT">EXHIBIT 23.0</P>

<P> </P>
<P> </P>
<P> </P>
<P> </P>
<P ALIGN="CENTER">CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS</P>
<P ALIGN="CENTER"></P>
<P ALIGN="CENTER"> </P>
<P ALIGN="JUSTIFY">We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement Numbers 33-10784 on Form S-3 dated December 24, 1986, 33-14356 on Form S-8 dated May 15, 1987, 33-53188 on Form S-8 dated October 13, 1992, 33-59673 on Form S-8
dated May 30, 1995, and 333-39347 on Form S-8 dated November 3, 1997, of our report dated February 12, 1999, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Moto Photo, Inc. and Subsidiaries included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K/A
<P ALIGN="JUSTIFY"></P>
<P ALIGN="JUSTIFY"> </P>
<P ALIGN="JUSTIFY"> </P>
<P ALIGN="JUSTIFY">/s/ Ernst & Young LLP</P>
<P ALIGN="JUSTIFY">Ernst & Young LLP</P>
<P ALIGN="JUSTIFY">Dayton, Ohio</P>
<P ALIGN="JUSTIFY">September 15, 1999</P></FONT></BODY>
</HTML>
EXHIBIT 31.1
CERTIFICATION
I, Ken L. Joines, Vice President, Secretary and Chief Accounting Officer ofFirst Equity Properties, Inc. (“FEPI”), certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of FEPI; 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary tomake the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered bythis quarterly report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cashflows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisquarterly report; 4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)) and internalcontrol over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13(a)-15(f) and 15d-15(f) for FEPI and have:
 (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to insure that material information relating to FEPI andits consolidated subsidiaries is made known to me by others withinthose entities, particularly for the periods presented in thisquarterly report;  (b) Designed such internal controls over financial reporting, orcaused such internal control over financial reporting to be designedunder our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding thereliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financialstatements for external purposes in accordance with generallyaccepted accounting principles;  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of FEPI’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;and  (d) Disclosed in the report any change in FEPI’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during FEPI’s most recentfiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case ofan annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect FEPI’s internal control over financialreporting; and
5. I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to FEPI’s auditors and the audit committee ofFEPI’s Board of Directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect FEPI’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in FEPI’s internalcontrols.
Date: August 19, 2004
/s/ Ken L. Joines