alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### SOUTHERN SHIPPING COMPANY, Constantine G. Nomikos, Mrs. C. G. Nomikos and Thomas K. Skordas, Appellants, v. FLAGSHIP FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MIAMI BEACH, a National Banking Association, Appellee.

No. 78-856.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 30, 1979.

*856Richard F. Ralph and Leonard Lubart, Miami, for appellants.

Therrel, Baisden, Stanton, Stillman, Brown & Wood and Allen R. Roman, Miami Beach, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, BARKDULL and HUBBART, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The defendants appeal a summary final judgment for the plaintiff Bank in an action on a promissory note and the guarantees thereon. The defendants urge that a genuine issue of material fact exists precluding summary judgment, or that the defendants were entitled to a judgment forfeiting interest charges as a matter of law upon the issue of usury. Defendants did not appear at the hearing on the motion for summary judgment and offered no affidavits in opposition thereto. On this appeal, it is urged that the answers of the plaintiff to certain interrogatories propounded by the defendants and the subsequent amendment of the complaint constituted an admission that the note was usurious on its face with regard to the individual guarantors.

Our review of the record in the light of the briefs and oral argument shows that for the note to be usurious with regard to the guarantors, it is necessary that it be read in an unnatural and unusual manner, and inasmuch as the defendants failed to come forward with any particularization of their defense of usury, we hold that the trial court correctly granted summary final judgment for the plaintiff on the usury issue. See *Garris v. Robeison,*146 So.2d 388, 389 (Fla.2d DCA 1962).

A second problem arises from the fact that at the summary judgment hearing, the trial judge entered a judgment for attorney’s fees and assessed costs according to affidavits submitted to him at that time, the affidavits having been served on the defendants only on the day of the hearing. The effect of this procedure was to deprive the defendants of an opportunity to object to the entitlement to attorney’s fees or to the amount thereof, or to present evidence and argument in contravention of the items claimed as costs. See Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.090(d).

Accordingly, the summary final judgment is affirmed, except that the portions thereof referring to attorney’s fees and costs is stricken therefrom and upon remand a separate order may be entered on costs and attorney’s fees.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded with directions.
----

Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 10 January 2006 — ArchiMEDES v Commission

(Case T-397/05 R)

(Interim proceedings - Application for interim measures - Arbitration clause - Urgency - Absence)

(2006/C 86/59)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Architecture, microclimat, energies douces — Europe et Sud (ArchiMEDES) SARL (Ganges, France) (represented by: P.-P. Van Gehuchten, J. Sambon and P. Reyniers, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: K. Kańska and E. Manhaeve, Agents)

Application for

Suspension of the operation, firstly, of the Commission's decision contained in its letter of 5 October 2005 to offset debts to the detriment of the applicant; secondly, of the Commission's decision contained in its letter of 30 August 2005 and, thirdly, of the debit note of 23 August 2005, No 3240705638

Operative part of the order

----
#### OFFICE OF the PUBLIC DEFENDER of the NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT In and For ORANGE COUNTY, Florida, Petitioner, v. Honorable J. C. STONE, Jr., Judge of the County Court of the Ninth Judicial Circuit, Criminal Justice Division, in and for Orange County, Florida, Respondent.

No. 80-1109.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Oct. 29, 1980.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 16, 1980.

*1196Harry W. Carls, III, Public Defender, and Anne E. Richards, Asst. Public Defender, Orlando, for petitioner.

No appearance for respondent.

COWART, Judge.

This is a petition for a writ of common law certiorari to review a circuit court order denying a writ of certiorari to review a non-final order of a county court relating to discovery in a criminal case.

We deny the petition because it demonstrates neither the jurisdiction of this court1 nor any basis for a decision that the circuit court exceeded its jurisdiction or departed from the essential requirements of law.2

PETITION DENIED.

ORFINGER and COBB, JJ., concur.

1

. The petition is not accompanied by an appendix, as required by Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.100(e), containing the order of the circuit court from which it can be determined that the petitioner is the real party in interest, that the circuit court order is final [Fla.R. App.P. 9.030(b)(2)(B)], and that the petition is timely [Fla.R.App.P. 9.100(c)],

2

. The petition purports to seek review of a circuit court order, yet the relief sought is the quashing of the county court order, the county court judge is named as respondent and served and all argument is directed toward the action of the county court.
# C_2006154EN.01001203.xml

| 1.7.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 154/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.7.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 154/12

---

Order of the President of the Court of 22 March 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-204/04) (1)

1

(2006/C 154/26)

Language of the case: German

Language of the case: German

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 201, 07.08.2004.

1

---
#### § 412.352 Budget neutrality adjustment.

For FY 1992 through FY 1995, CMS will determine an adjustment to the hospital-specific rate and the Federal rate proportionately so that the estimated aggregate payments under this subpart for inpatient hospital capital costs each fiscal year will equal 90 percent of what CMS estimates would have been paid for capital-related costs on a reasonable cost basis under § 413.130 of this chapter.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 95-20939 

Conference Calendar

 

THOMAS C. SAWYER ET AL.,

Plaintiffs,

THOMAS C. SAWYER JR.; HARRY L. JACKSON,

 Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

MICHAEL COUNTZ ET AL.,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. CA-H-93-3913

- - - - - - - - - -

October 23, 1996

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appellant Thomas C. Sawyer, #579557, appeals the district

court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action as frivolous

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). He contends that the district court

abused its discretion in dismissing his retaliation and denialof-access-to-the courts claims. We have reviewed the record, the
No. 95-20939

- 2 -

district court’s opinion, and the brief on appeal, and find no

abuse of discretion. See Whittington v. Lynaugh, 842 F.2d 818,

819-21 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 840 (1988); Lewis v.

Casey, 116 S. Ct. 2174, 2179-80 (1996). The brief is not signed

by Harry Jackson and raises no issues relative to him.

Sawyer’s motion requesting the appointment of counsel on

behalf of himself and Jackson is DENIED. Jackson’s “Motion To

Amend Signature” is also DENIED. 

AFFIRMED.
Editorial Note on Part 422
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 422 appear at 70 FR 4741, Jan. 28, 2005.

§ 422.670 Time and place of hearing. ( a ) The hearing officer— ( 1 ) Fixes a time and place for the hearing, which is not to exceed 30 calendar days after the receipt of the request for the hearing; and
( 2 ) Sends written notice to the parties that informs the parties of the general and specific issues to be resolved, the burden of proof, and information about the hearing procedure.
( b ) ( 1 ) The hearing officer may, on his or her own motion, change the time and place of the hearing.
( 2 ) The hearing officer may adjourn or postpone the hearing.
( c ) ( 1 ) The MA organization or CMS may request an extension by filing a written request no later than 10 calendar days prior to the scheduled hearing.
( 2 ) When either the MA organization or CMS requests an extension, the hearing officer will provide a one-time 15 calendar day extension.
( 3 ) Additional extensions may be granted at the discretion of the hearing officer.
[75 FR 19813, Apr. 15, 2010]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                            2380
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       12
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  2392
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    2392
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              167
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                        2225
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      2392
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    73
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       13
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   104
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (44)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (44)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (44)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.31)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.31)


</TABLE>
HomeUnited Arab Emirates

# United Arab Emirates

254 items

        -    Media Note  		Joint Statement from the United Arab Emirates Regional Climate Dialogue	  April 5, 2021 
        -    Media Note  		Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry Travels to United Arab Emirates, India, and Bangladesh to Discuss the Climate Crisis   	  March 31, 2021 
        -    Report  		2020 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: United Arab Emirates	  March 30, 2021 
        -    TIAS  		United Arab Emirates (21-303) – Agreement Regarding Consular Privileges and Immunities	  March 3, 2021 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – February 25, 2021	  February 25, 2021 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – February 17, 2021	  Ned PriceFebruary 17, 2021 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – February 5, 2021	  Ned PriceFebruary 5, 2021 
        -    Readout  		Secretary Blinken’s Call with the United Arab Emirates Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan	  February 3, 2021 
        -    Bilateral Relations Fact Sheet  		U.S. Relations With United Arab Emirates	  December 9, 2020 
        -    TIAS  		United Arab Emirates (20-1122) – Arrangement for the Exchange of Technical Information and Cooperation in Nuclear Safety Matters	  November 22, 2020 

previous page1…2021222324…26next page

Back to Top
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Charles RANKER v. Frank BLACKBURN, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 63714.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 9, 1979.

In re Charles Ranker applying for writ of habeas corpus. Parish of Orleans.

Writ denied. The realtor’s contentions have previously been rejected, after eviden-tiary hearing. See 275 So.2d 786 (La.1973).
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3034 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.3034

                       One Hundred Fourth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
   the third day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-six

                                 An Act

 
 To amend the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act to 
 extend for two months the authority for promulgating regulations under 
                                the Act.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY TO PROMULGATE REGULATIONS.

    Section 107(a)(2)(B) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education 
Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450k(a)(2)(B)) is amended by striking ``18 
months'' and inserting ``20 months''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
#### Inell THOMPSON and Glen Thompson, her husband, Appellants, v. Earl Michael GRIMM, United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company, Allstate Insurance Company and Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company, all foreign corporations, Appellees.

Nos. 79-2080, 79-2189.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 17, 1981.

Martin R. Dishowitz of Riskin & Dishow-itz, P.A., Hollywood, for appellants.

Burdick & Donahoe, Fort Lauderdale, and Jeanne Heyward, Miami, for appellee, Allstate Insurance Company.

K. Jack Breiden of Pomeroy, Betts, Pom-eroy & Moses, Fort Lauderdale, for appel-lee, Fireman’s Fund.

PER CURIAM.

Reversed on authority of *South Carolina Insurance Company v. Kokay,*298 So.2d 1355, (Florida Case No. 58,830, opinion filed May 21, 1981).

MOORE, BERANEK and HERSEY, JJ., concur.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Reginald ROBICHEAUX.

No. 67033.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 14, 1980.

In re Reginald Robicheaux, applying for writs of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition to the Criminal District Court for the Parish of Orleans. No. 272-944.

Writ denied.
# C_2005193EN.01000901.xml

| 6.8.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 193/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.8.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 193/9

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundessozialgericht by order of that court of 10 February 2005 in Gertraud Hartmann v Freistaat Bayern

(Case C-212/05)

(2005/C 193/15)

Language of the case: German

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Bundessozialgericht of 10 February 2005, received at the Court Registry on 17 May 2005, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings between Gertraud Hartmann and Freistaat Bayern on the following questions:

| (a) | Is a German national who, while continuing his employment relationship as a post office official in Germany, moved his permanent residence from Germany to Austria in 1990 and has since then carried on his occupation as a frontier worker to be regarded as a migrant worker within the meaning of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 (1) of the Council on freedom of movement for workers within the Community (‘Regulation No 1612/68’) for periods between January 1994 and September 1998? |
| --- | --- |

(a)

Is a German national who, while continuing his employment relationship as a post office official in Germany, moved his permanent residence from Germany to Austria in 1990 and has since then carried on his occupation as a frontier worker to be regarded as a migrant worker within the meaning of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 (1) of the Council on freedom of movement for workers within the Community (‘Regulation No 1612/68’) for periods between January 1994 and September 1998?

1

| (b) | If so:
  Does it constitute indirect discrimination within the meaning of Article 7(2) of Regulation No 1612/68 if the non-working spouse of the person mentioned in (a), who lives in Austria and is an Austrian national, was excluded from receiving German child-raising allowance in the period in question because she did not have either her permanent residence or her habitual place of stay in Germany? |
| --- | --- |

(b)

If so:

Does it constitute indirect discrimination within the meaning of Article 7(2) of Regulation No 1612/68 if the non-working spouse of the person mentioned in (a), who lives in Austria and is an Austrian national, was excluded from receiving German child-raising allowance in the period in question because she did not have either her permanent residence or her habitual place of stay in Germany?

---

(1)  OJ, English Special Edition, 1968 /II), p. 475.

1

---
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.

§ 405.1831 Contractor hearing decision. ( a ) If the contractor hearing officer(s) finds jurisdiction (as described in § 405.1814(a) of this subpart) and conducts a hearing, the contractor hearing officer(s) must promptly issue a written hearing decision.
( b ) The contractor hearing decision must be based on the evidence from the contractor hearing (as described in § 405.1823 of this subpart) and other evidence as may be included in the record (as described in § 405.1827 of this subpart).
( c ) The decision must include findings of fact and conclusions of law on jurisdictional issues (as described in § 405.1814(c)(1) of this subpart) and on the merits of the provider's reimbursement claims, and include appropriate citations to the record evidence and to the applicable law, regulations, CMS Rulings, and other interpretive rules, general statements of policy, and rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice established by CMS.
( d ) A copy of the decision must be sent promptly to the contractor, to each party and to the appropriate component of CMS (which currently is the Center for Medicare Management).
( e ) When the contractor's denial of the relief that the provider seeks before the contractor hearing officer(s) was based on procedural grounds (for example, the alleged failure of the provider to satisfy a time limit), or was based on the alleged failure to supply adequate documentation to support the provider's claim, and the contractor hearing officer(s) rule(s) that the basis of the contractor's denial is invalid, the contractor hearing officer(s) remands to the contractor for the contractor to make a determination on the merits of the provider's claim.
[73 FR 30248, May 23, 2008; 73 FR 49356, Aug. 21, 2008; 85 FR 59019, Sept. 18, 2020]
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Federated States of Micronesia Independence Day

# 									Federated States of Micronesia Independence Day							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

November 2, 2022

On behalf of the Government of the United States of America, I congratulate the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM) on the 36th anniversary of your independence on November 3.

Since the beginning of our bilateral ties, the FSM and the United States have enjoyed a deep friendship marked by democratic values and a shared commitment to promoting a free, open, resilient, and prosperous Indo-Pacific. The Compact of Free Association has been a cornerstone of this strong relationship for many decades. With the leadership of Ambassador Joseph Yun as Special Presidential Envoy for Compact Negotiations, the United States looks forward to strengthening our enduring partnership with the FSM through the negotiations.

As a close friend and partner, the United States sends its best wishes to the people of the Federated States of Micronesia as you celebrate this special day.

Tags

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsDemocracyIndo-PacificMicronesiaOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
HomeNorth Korea

# North Korea

439 items

        -    Readout  		Secretary Blinken’s Meeting with Japanese Foreign Minister Motegi and Republic of Korea Foreign Minister Chung	  May 5, 2021 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – April 30, 2021	  Jalina PorterApril 30, 2021 
        -    Press Statement  		On the Occasion of North Korea Freedom Week	  Ned PriceApril 28, 2021 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – April 23, 2021	  Jalina PorterApril 23, 2021 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – April 9, 2021	  Jalina PorterApril 9, 2021 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – April 8, 2021	  Ned PriceApril 8, 2021 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – April 6, 2021	  Ned PriceApril 6, 2021 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – April 2, 2021	  Jalina PorterApril 2, 2021Washington, DC 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – April 1, 2021	  Ned PriceApril 1, 2021Washington, DC 
        -    Report  		2020 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Democratic People's Republic of Korea	  March 30, 2021 

previous page1…3839404142…44next page

Back to Top