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

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3397

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to require that

contributions to candidates in odd-numbered years be from individuals only.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 7, 1996

Mr. BARTON of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on House Oversight

A BILL

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to

require that contributions to candidates in odd-numbered

years be from individuals only.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. CONTRIBUTIONS TO CANDIDATES IN ODD-NUM4 BERED YEARS TO BE FROM INDIVIDUALS

5 ONLY.

6 Section 315 of the Federal Election Campaign Act

7 of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a) is amended by adding at the end

8 the following new subsection:

9 ‘‘(i) A candidate for Federal office may not, with re10 spect to a regularly scheduled general election and any pri-
2

•HR 3397 IH

1 mary election related to such general election, accept any

2 contribution in an odd-numbered year from any source

3 other than an individual.’’.

4 SEC. 2. TIME LIMITATION ON ACCEPTANCE OF MULTICAN5 DIDATE POLITICAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBU6 TIONS TO CANDIDATES.

7 Section 315 of the Federal Election Campaign Act

8 of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a), as amended by section 1, is fur9 ther amended by adding at the end the following new sub10 section:

11 ‘‘(j) A candidate for Federal office may not, with re12 spect to a regularly scheduled general election and any pri13 mary election related to such general election, accept any

14 contribution from a multicandidate political committee be15 fore the earlier of (1) the 90th day before the primary

16 election, or (2) May 1 of the election year.’’.

17 SEC. 3. PROPORTIONAL LIMITATION ON ACCEPTANCE OF

18 MULTICANDIDATE POLITICAL COMMITTEE

19 CONTRIBUTIONS TO CANDIDATES.

20 Section 315 of the Federal Election Campaign Act

21 of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a), as amended by sections 1 and

22 2, is further amended by adding at the end the following

23 new subsection:

24 ‘‘(k) A candidate for Federal office may not, with re25 spect to a reporting period for an election, accept contribu-
3

•HR 3397 IH

1 tions from multicandidate political committees totaling in

excess of 1 2 ⁄3 of the total of contributions accepted from

3 individuals, except that a candidate who is not an incum4 bent of the office involved may accept contributions from

5 multicandidate political committees totaling not more than

1 6 ⁄2 of the total of contributions accepted from individ7 uals.’’.

8 SEC. 4. REDUCTION IN MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE CONTRIBU9 TION BY A MULTICANDIDATE POLITICAL

10 COMMITTEE.

11 Section 315(a)(2)(A) of the Federal Election Cam12 paign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(2)(A)) is amended

13 by striking out ‘‘$5,000’’ and inserting in lieu thereof

14 ‘‘$4,000’’.

Æ
### A constant-feed direct-current arc

By: C. S. AnnellA.W. Helz

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/b1084J

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
#### STATE of Alabama, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS v. Lois W. CLARK.

Civ. 1638.

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

Jan. 31, 1979.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 28, 1979.

*562Frank D. Marsh, Asst. Gen. Counsel, State of Ala., Dept, of Indus. Relations, Montgomery, for appellant.

Earl Y. Johnson, Andalusia, for appellee.

WRIGHT, Presiding Judge.

This is an unemployment compensation case.

Claimant was awarded compensation after appeal to circuit court. The Department appeals. The only issue is whether testimony of claimant as to a physical condition suffered from her employment is sufficient, without medical evidence, to support the finding of the court that she left her job for good cause connected with her work. We find the issue in favor of claimant and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The testimony of claimant was that she had worked as a sewer for Good Luck Glove Co. for some three weeks when she was given a new and different material to sew into gloves. After sewing on the material for a short time, she began to itch badly and a rash came on h'er skin resembling measles. She notified her superiors of her difficulty and requested that she be given other materials to sew. She was informed there were no others. She quit her job. She had sewed gloves for several years before this occasion and was sewing gloves at the time of trial. She had never sewn the material she was given when her rash appeared. She did not go to a doctor and get a medical opinion as to the cause of her rash. She never had it again after leaving Good Luck Glove.

The Department contends medical testimony as to cause and effect between job and injury to health is necessary for a claimant to carry the burden of proof when claimant claims good cause for leaving employment. Department submits its contention is supported by our case law. We do not agree.

The cases cited and relied upon by the Department do not state that medical evidence is required to support a claim of compensation for leaving employment because of ill health connected with her work. Those cases merely comment upon the absence of testimony, medical or otherwise, to sustain claimant’s claim of good cause for leaving her employment. *Department of Industrial Relations v. Estes,*45 Ala.App. 360, 231 So.2d 137 (1970). Though often medical testimony may present more satisfactory and conclusive evidence of cause and effect, we know of no case holding that such testimony is necessary to carry claimant’s burden of proving that the job caused the injury or disease. We have held even in workmen’s compensation cases that extent of disability may be established without expert medical testimony. *Stewart v. Busby,*51 Ala.App. 242, 284 So.2d 269 (1973).

We have reviewed the testimony of plaintiff heard orally by the trial court, and find the judgment sufficiently supported thereby so that it does not appear to us to be wrong or unjust. It is therefore affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

BRADLEY and HOLMES, JJ., concur.
Exhibit
32.1





Certification
of CEO Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350





Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned certifies that (1) this Quarterly
Report of Capital City Bank Group, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the
period ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (this "Report"), fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and (2) the information contained in this Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition of the Company and its results of
operations as of and for the periods covered therein.








/s/ William G. Smith, Jr.William
      G. Smith, Jr.Chairman,
      President, andChief
      Executive Officer





Date: May
7, 2009








A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
# C_2006132EN.01000101.xml

| 7.6.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 132/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 132/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

6 June 2006

(2006/C 132/01)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2847 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 144,74 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4592 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,68870 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,2095 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5608 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 93,82 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,7655 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,5750 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 28,283 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 263,45 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6960 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4293 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,9583 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,5180 |
| SIT | Slovenian tolar | 239,66 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 37,745 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,0075 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,7253 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4257 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,9689 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 2,0386 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,0273 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 211,41 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 8,6971 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,2966 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,2548 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 005,52 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,681 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 67,877 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 34,4430 |
| THB | Thai baht | 49,071 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2847

JPY

Japanese yen

144,74

DKK

Danish krone

7,4592

GBP

Pound sterling

0,68870

SEK

Swedish krona

9,2095

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5608

ISK

Iceland króna

93,82

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,7655

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,5750

CZK

Czech koruna

28,283

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

263,45

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6960

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4293

PLN

Polish zloty

3,9583

RON

Romanian leu

3,5180

SIT

Slovenian tolar

239,66

SKK

Slovak koruna

37,745

TRY

Turkish lira

2,0075

AUD

Australian dollar

1,7253

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4257

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,9689

NZD

New Zealand dollar

2,0386

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,0273

KRW

South Korean won

1 211,41

ZAR

South African rand

8,6971

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,2966

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,2548

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 005,52

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,681

PHP

Philippine peso

67,877

RUB

Russian rouble

34,4430

THB

Thai baht

49,071

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
-86 -84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74

 36

 38

 40

 42

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 2000

 1000

18 12 06 00

08/17

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 17 Aug 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.90 N 76.65 W Meters AGL
# C_2005156EN.01000402.xml

| 28.6.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 156/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.6.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 156/4

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3807 — Siemens/Hyundai/JV)

(2005/C 156/06)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 13 June 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 32005M3807. 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 32005M3807. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

---
The State 

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 18, 2015

No. 04-15-00788-CR

Raymond WARD, Jr.,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 15-0238-CR-C

The Honorable William Old, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The trial court’s certification in this appeal states, “this criminal case is a plea-bargain 

case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” The record contains a plea agreement, and 

notice that appellant was admonished of the possible sentence range. Appellant’s sentence does 

not exceed the noticed range of sentencing.

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 25.2(d) requires that the record in an appeal 

brought by a criminal defendant must contain a certification of right to appeal. TEX. R. APP. P. 

25.2(d). If the record does not contain a certification that shows the defendant has a right of 

appeal, the appeal must be dismissed. Id. 

It is therefore ORDERED this appeal will be dismissed pursuant to rule 25.2(d) of the 

Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure unless appellant causes an amended trial court certification 

to be filed by January 4, 2016, showing appellant has the right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 

25.2(d); 37.1; see also Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Daniels v. State,

110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.). 
All other appellate deadlines are SUSPENDED pending resolution of the certification 

issue.

_________________________________

Jason Pulliam, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 18th day of December, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
#### RESERVE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Juan ROJAS et al., Appellees.

No. 74-35.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 10, 1974.

Appeal dismissed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Jul-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 Aug-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   Oct-31-1997
<CASH>                                         33,579
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  10,681
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               44,618
<PP&E>                                         1,705,651
<DEPRECIATION>                                 346,074
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,418,862
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          44,989
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       14,879
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,418,862
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               216
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  115,681
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               78,309
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (193,774)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   688
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (194,462)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (194,462)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
        


</TABLE>
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

BENJAMIN LEE BLUNT, JR.

,

Appellant

,

v. Case No. 5D 16

- 1006

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

. ________________________________/

Opinion filed July 29, 2016

3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court

f or Lake County

, William G. Law, Jr , Judge.

Benjamin Lee Blunt, Jr., Orlando, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Benjamin Lee Blunt, Jr., appeals the summary denial of his motion for

postconviction relief. Although unclear , it appears to us, as it did to the trial court, that the

motion was filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm the trial

court's summary denial of the motion, but conclude that Blunt should have been given an

opportunity to amend his facially defective motion if he can do so in good fa ith. See Fla.

R. Crim. P. 3.850(b)(1) ; Spera v. State , 971 So. 2d 754, 761

- 62 (Fla. 2007)

.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART.

LAWSON, C.J.

, ORFINGER and EVANDER , JJ., concur.
exhibit4m






T-GRA-RPL-E1 Page E1  TEACHERS INSURANCE AND ANNUITY ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA  (TIAA)  730 Third Avenue, New York, NY  10017-3206  Telephone:  [800-842-2733]  Endorsement to Your TIAA Group Retirement Annuity Certificate  [Effective Date: Attached at issue / Upon receipt / Specific date / Date of Issue, and as part of  endorsement END-G1000.6-ACC or END-G1000.7-ACC, if such endorsements apply / Upon  receipt, and as part of END-G1000.6-ACC or END-G1000.7-ACC, if such endorsements apply /  Specific date, and as part of END-G1000.6-ACC or END-G1000.7-ACC, if such endorsements  apply]  This endorsement modifies the provisions of your TIAA Group Retirement Annuity Certificate and  becomes part of it. Please read this endorsement and attach it to your certificate.  The following provisions are added to your certificate:  The term Investment Account refers to the Real Estate Account or to any subaccount of any other  Separate Account available under the certificate.  Retirement Plan Loans  A Retirement Plan Loan is a disbursement of some or all of your Investment Account accumulation  to provide loans. To the extent your employer’s plan so provides and in accordance with section  72(p) of the IRC, as amended, and ERISA, to the extent applicable, you may request a Retirement  Plan Loan from your available Investment Account accumulations, at any time prior to the annuity  starting date. Retirement Plan Loans are not available from your TIAA Traditional accumulations.  The amount of a Retirement Plan Loan may generally not exceed the least of:  i) the total of your available Investment Account accumulations; ii) [50%] of the present value of your vested accrued benefit under any of your employer's plans; and iii) [$50,000] In determining the amount available for a Retirement Plan Loan, all plans of your employer,  including 403(b), 401(a), 403(a) and 457(b) plans, to the extent loans are available, and all such  plans of any related employers under IRC Section 414(b), (c) or (m) shall be considered employer  plans for this purpose.   A request for a Retirement Plan Loan must be made on or before the annuity starting date in  accordance with the terms of your certificate. A Retirement Plan Loan will be effective as of the  business day on which we receive your request, in a form acceptable to TIAA as well as any spousal  waiver that may be required under ERISA or the terms of your employer’s plan. TIAA will  determine all values as of the end of the effective date. You can't revoke a request for a Retirement  Plan Loan after its effective date.   Exhibit 4(M) 





 






  T-GRA-RPL-E1   Page E2      A Retirement Plan Loan reduces the accumulations from which it is paid by the amount of the loan  chosen. The loan will be issued in accordance with the terms of a loan agreement. The loan  agreement will describe the terms, conditions and any fees or charges for the loan. Any loan  repayments applied to the certificate will be applied as new premiums.              President and       Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Cass Information Systems, Inc. ("the
Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, P.
Stephen Appelbaum, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

     (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 results of operations
          of the Company.

                                    /s/ P. Stephen Appelbaum
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    P. Stephen Appelbaum
                                    Chief Financial Officer
                                    (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
                                    March 11, 2009

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Cass Information Systems, Inc. and will be retained by Cass
Information Systems, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
January 22, 2015

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

MARK DOUGLAS ROBISON, Appellant

NO. 14-13-00682-CR

NO. 14-13-00683-CR V.

NO. 14-13-00684-CR

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. 

Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the 

judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED.

We further order appellant to pay all costs expended in the appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
§ 405.2449 Preventive services. For services furnished on or after January 1, 2011, preventive services covered under the Medicare FQHC benefit are those preventive services defined in section 1861(ddd)(3) of the Act, and § 410.2 of this chapter. Specifically, these include the following: ( a ) The specific services currently listed in section 1861(ww)(2) of the Act, with the explicit exclusion of electrocardiograms.
( b ) The Initial Preventive Physical Examination (IPPE) (as specified by section 1861(ww)(1) of the Act as added by section 611 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (Pub. L. 108-173) and § 410.16 of this chapter).
( c ) The Personalized Prevention Plan Services (PPPS), also known as the “Annual Wellness Visit” (as specified by section 1861(hhh) of the Act as added by section 4103 of the Affordable Care Act (Pub. L. 111-148) and § 410.15 of this chapter).
[75 FR 73613, Nov. 29, 2010, as amended at 79 FR 25477, May 2, 2014]