alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
41644.

#### BURSON, Director v. HOWELL.

*676Argued November 4, 1965

Decided November 10, 1965

Rehearing denied November 23, 1965.

*Arthur K. Bolton, Attorney General, Paul L. Hanes,*As*sistant Attorney General, Marion 0. Gordon,*for appellant.

*Rowland & Rowland, Emory L. Rowland, E. Hodges Rowland,*for appellee.

Hall, Judge.

In 1963 the Workmen’s Compensation Act was amended by adding to the statutory definition of “injury” and “personal injury” the following exception: “. . . nor shall 'injury’ and 'personal injury’ include heart disease, heart attack, the failure or occlusion of any of the coronary blood vessels, or thrombosis, unless it is shown by preponderance of competent and creditable evidence that it was attributable to the performance of the usual work of employment.” Ga. L. 1963, pp. 141, 142 *(Code Ann.*§ 114-102). This case squarely presents the issue whether under the law as amended the evidence stated above is sufficient to support a finding that exertion in the employment contributed to the death.

In *Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Poole,*112 Ga. App. 557, this court held that the 1963 amendment to *Code Ann.*§ 114-102 “did not change the law respecting the evidence necessary to prove that an accident arising out of and in the course of employment caused *677the disability or death.” Before that amendment the law was that in workmen’s compensation cases, as in other cases, the weight and credit to be given to the testimony of witnesses and the question as to where the preponderance of the evidence lay were matters resting with the trior of the facts; and the board’s determinations upon these matters were final if supported by any evidence. *Ocean Accident &c. Corp. v. Bates,*104 Ga. App. 621, 622 (122 SE2d 305); *Hansard v. Georgia Power Co.,*105 Ga. App. 486 (124 SE2d 926). To say that the language of the 1963 amendment to the effect that disability from heart disease is not compensable unless the fact of its connection with the employment is shown “by preponderance of competent and creditable evidence” changed the law would be to say that before the amendment something other than a “preponderance of competent and creditable evidence” was required to prove this fact. This we cannot say. Even though, as argued by the employer, the General Assembly may have intended to change the law in some way by enacting the amendment, an intention neither expressed nor implied in the words of the enactment could effect no change. The amendment only made explicit in the workmen’s compensation statute the law contained in judicial decisions.

The law prior to the 1963 amendment was that evidence of exertion before “the deceased was found in a dying condition” and medical opinion that the exertion could have caused a coronary occlusion authorized a finding that the fatal attack was precipitated by the exertion. *Aetna Cas. &c. Co. v. Pulliam,*99 Ga. App. 406, 407 (108 SE2d 823); accord *Thomas v. U. S. Cas. Co.,*218 Ga. 493 (128 SE2d 749). There was such evidence in this case.

The trial court did not err in affirming the award of the board.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Bell, P. J., and Frankum, J., concur.*
No. 99-611.

#### National Federation of the Blind, Inc., et al. *v.*Cross, Director, Division of Family Services of Missouri, et al.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Home2021 Treaties and Agreements...Qatar (21-1112.1) – Agreement for the Sharing of Visa Information

# 									Qatar (21-1112.1) – Agreement for the Sharing of Visa Information							

TIAS

Office of Treaty Affairs

November 12, 2021

Consular Affairs: Visa, Immigration, and Nationality Information Exchange

Signed at Washington November 12, 2021; entered into force November 12, 2021.
Download Agreement						 [3 MB]

Tags

ImmigrationQatarTreatiesVisas

Back to Top
<PAGE>

POCC                                                             Exhibit 10.131
Penn Octane Corporation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


July 29, 1999


Mr. Joseph Castle
President
Castle Energy Corporation
One Radnor Corporate Center, Suite 250
100 Matsonford Road
Radnor, PA 10987

Via Facsimile
-------------

Dear Joe:

         This letter will confirm that the issues surrounding the Certificate of
Designation, Powers, Preferences and Rights of the Series B Convertible
Redeemable Preferred Stock (the "Preferred Stock"), including those regarding
anti-dilution, arising in connection with the $900,000 preferred stock
transaction between Castle Energy Corporation and Penn Octane Corporation in
March 1999, have been resolved between parties based on the following changes:

         1.   The conversion rate of the Preferred Stock will be increased from
              4 shares of common stock of Penn Octane Corporation for each share
              of Preferred Stock to 5 shares of common stock of Penn Octane
              Corporation for each share of Preferred Stock (subject to
              adjustment as more fully described in the Certificate of
              Designation), and

         2.   The annual dividend rate on the Preferred Stock will be reduced to
              $1.00 per share from $1.20 per share.

         Based on the above, we will modify the latest draft Certificate of
Designation for these changes and immediately file the Certificate with the
State of Delaware.

         Please acknowledge your agreement with the above by signing below and
returning a faxed copy to 562 929-1921.


         Regards,


         /s/ IAN T. BOTHWELL
         -------------------
         Ian T. Bothwell

Accepted and Agreed to this 30th day of July, 1999

By: /s/ Joseph Castle
    -----------------
Name: Jos. L. Castle
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
PRINCETON NATIONAL BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND
STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          21,268
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         343,607
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                11,900
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    107,042
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          12,498
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            12,661
<LOANS>                                        276,181
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,830
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 449,660
<DEPOSITS>                                     385,940
<SHORT-TERM>                                    13,237
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              4,065
<LONG-TERM>                                      3,750
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        13,800
<OTHER-SE>                                      28,868
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 449,660
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 24,150
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                6,598
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   564
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                31,312
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              14,716
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              15,541
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           15,771
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      590
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  97
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 12,662
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,884
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       5,884
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,359
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.61
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.61
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.25
<LOANS-NON>                                        810
<LOANS-PAST>                                        27
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    396
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,630
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,006
<RECOVERIES>                                       616
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,830
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,574
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            256
        

</TABLE>
41253.

#### KERN v. THE STATE.

Eberhardt, Judge.

Where there is no brief of the evidence in the record and all grounds of the motion for new trial require a consideration of the evidence, the judgment denying a new trial must be affirmed. *Anderson v. State,*211 Ga. 768 (2) (88 SE2d 149).

*552Submitted April 6, 1965

Decided April 12, 1965.

*McLeod & Galis, Denny C. Galis,*for plaintiff in error.

*Preston M. Almand, Solicitor,*contra.

Where the court read to the jury all of *Code Am.*§ 38-415 and there is exception to the inclusion of the portion of that section reading “except that no evidence of general bad character or prior convictions shall be admissible unless and until the defendant shall have first put his character in issue,” an examination of the evidence is required to determine whether it may have been appropriate. For aught that appears the defendant may have put his character in issue.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Nichols, P. J., and Panned, J., concur.*
41402.

#### WOOD et al. v. UNIVERSAL CREDITORS ASSOCIATION, INC., Transferee.

Argued July 6, 1965

Decided September 8, 1965.

*David H. Fink,*for plaintiffs in error.

*B. V. Karlberg,*contra.

Bell, Presiding Judge.

1. The petition does not show that Leonard R. Wood and Joan C. Wood were husband and wife. Defendants’ first contention is thus based upon matter dehors the record. Except for matters of which the court may take judicial notice *(Genesco, Inc. v. Greeson,*105 Ga. App. 798, 800 (125 SE2d 786), a court in passing on a general demurrer to a pleading, cannot consider aliunde matter not appearing in the pleading. *Seibels v. Hodges,*65 Ga. 245, 247 (3); *Pollard v. Blalock,*147 Ga. 406 (3) (94 SE 226); *Crowley v. Calhoun,*161 Ga. 354 (2) (130 SE 563); *Sims v. Etheridge,*169 Ga. 400 (2) (150 SE 647); *Kinney v. Crow,*186 Ga. 851, 857 (199 SE 198); *Rawleigh Co. v. Etheridge,*37 Ga. App. 554, 557 (140 SE 913); *Bowman v. Davis,*51 Ga. App. 478, 480 (6) (180 SE 917).

2. In their second contention defendants argue that the assignment of the claim to plaintiff fails to show that the assignor is a legal entity; and that the plaintiff corporation “can stand in no better position than its transferor.” The assignment of the claim, a copy of which is annexed to the petition as an exhibit, shows that it was executed by one member of a named “firm” composed of several medical doctors, on behalf of the firm. In *204common acceptation the word “firm” is synonymous with “partnership.” Thomas-Bonner Co. v. Hooven, Owens & Rentschler Co., 284 F. 377, 380 (S.D. Ohio); Gustafson v. Taber, 125 Mont. 225 (234 P2d 471); Bufton v. Hoseley, 236 Ore. 12 (386 P2d 471). Any member of a partnership may in its behalf transfer in writing choses in action belonging to the firm. *Whitehurst & Hilliard v. Brice & Co.,*14 Ga. App. 209, 213 (80 SE 670). The assignment to the corporation, the plaintiff in this case, being valid, there is no merit in the defendants’ contention that the plaintiff is not a real party at interest.

The trial court properly overruled defendants’ general demurrer to plaintiff’s petition.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Frankum and Hall, JJ., concur.*
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...On Russia’s Presidential Elections

# 									On Russia’s Presidential Elections							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

March 19, 2024

Russia’s recent presidential election occurred in an environment of intense repression of independent voices and the imprisonment, death, or exile of virtually all genuine political opposition.  The Kremlin has systematically marginalized groups advocating for democratic processes and rule of law, including election monitors.  Russian authorities also denied anti-war candidates’ registration for the presidential election on spurious technical pretenses and did not invite the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, or any credible international organizations, to observe polling.  These steps illustrate the extent to which the Kremlin has denied its citizens a transparent, meaningful democratic process.  Against this backdrop, this election can only be described as undemocratic.

Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the Kremlin has attempted to project the illusion that the Russian public is unequivocally behind its brutal war by eliminating space for civic discourse and deepening its campaign of intimidation, violence, and censorship against independent media and civil society.  The Kremlin conducted sham presidential elections in temporarily occupied parts of Ukraine as a blatant propaganda exercise, in the hopes it would strengthen Russia’s illegitimate claim to the parts of Ukraine it illegally invaded and now occupies.  Weeks before the election, Aleksey Navalny died in prison after years of harassment and cruel treatment at the hands of Russian authorities for his continued efforts to foster genuine democracy in Russia.

Vladimir Putin is depriving Russian citizens of access to information, including to inform political participation.  Regardless of the pre-determined outcome of this election, the United States will continue to stand with those who are pursuing a brighter future for Russia.

Tags

Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and LaborBureau of European and Eurasian AffairsElectionsOffice of the SpokespersonRule of LawRussiaSecretary TripThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
BMVIT -IV/L 1 (Strategle und lnternationales) 

Postanschrift: Postfach 201, 1000 Wien 

BUroanschrift: RadetzkystraBe 2, 1030 Wien 

E-Mail: 11 @bmvit.gv.at 

Internet: www.bmvit.gv.at 

\ 

GZ. BMVIT-40.005/0003-IV/L 1/2012 DVR:0000175 

Paul Gretch 

Director, Office of International Aviation 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for 

Aviation and International Affairs 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

400 7th Street, S.W. Room 6402 

Washington, DC 20590 

Paui.Gretch@dot.gov 

Dear Mr. Gretch, 

06. August 2012 

With reference to the intentions of Tyrolean Jet Services in continuing non-scheduled (charter) air 

services to/from the United States based on fifth, sixth or seventh freedom traffic rights and 

referring to the designation of the said airline (Note Verbal of the Embassy of Austria dated 201

h of 

July 2005) according to the provisions of the bilateral air services agreement (Air Services 

Agreement between the Austrian Federal Government and the Government of the United States of 

America, done at Vienna on 16th of March 1989, as amended), the Austria Civil Aviation Authority 

hereby confirms that similar requests submitted by the U.S. carriers will be treated on the basis of 

reciprocity. 

Director, Transport Affairs 

Federal Ministry of Transport, 

Innovation and Technology 

Civil Aviation Authority
HomeBureau of Arms Control, Deterrence, and StabilityRemarks & Releases...New START Treaty Aggregate Numbers of Strategic Offensive Arms of the United States and the Russian Federation, February 2011 – March 2022

# 									New START Treaty Aggregate Numbers of Strategic Offensive Arms of the United States and the Russian Federation, February 2011 – March 2022							

Fact Sheet

March 1, 2022

						Download Fact Sheet												[252 KB]

Under the New START Treaty, the United States and the Russian Federation were required to come within the following central limits on their strategic offensive arms by February 5, 2018, and must remain within the limits thereafter, for the life of the treaty:
        - 700 deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), and heavy bombers (HBs);
        - 1,550 warheads on deployed ICBMs and SLBMs and warheads counted for deployed heavy bombers; and
        - 800 deployed and non-deployed ICBM launchers, SLBM launchers, and heavy bombers.

The charts below document U.S. and Russian force levels for delivery vehicles (DVs), launchers, and warheads subject to the treaty, including before the treaty’s central limits came into effect. U.S. and Russian force numbers routinely fluctuate, such as when systems change deployment status due to routine maintenance. The United States assesses Russian forces subject to the treaty have remained below the central limits since they took effect on February 5, 2018.

 

 

 

 

Tags

Arms ControlArms Control and NonproliferationBureau of Arms Control, Deterrence, and StabilityNew START TreatyNuclear WeaponsRussia

Back to Top
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases…On Senegal’s Constitutional Court Decision

# 											On Senegal’s Constitutional Court Decision									

Press Statement

Matthew Miller, Department Spokesperson

February 16, 2024

The United States welcomes the February 15 decision by Senegal’s Constitutional Council to restore the presidential electoral calendar in accordance with Senegal’s constitution.  We note President Sall’s announcement that he will fully implement the Constitutional Council’s decision and take the necessary steps to organize the election as quickly as possible.  We urge all stakeholders to come together in the spirit of Senegal’s strong democratic tradition to support a free and fair election conducted in a peaceful and timely manner.  The United States stands with the Senegalese people in their unwavering support for democracy.

Tags

AfricaBureau of African AffairsElectionsHuman Rights and DemocracyOffice of the SpokespersonSenegal

Back to Top
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPublic Schedule...Public Schedule – February 17, 2021

# 									Public Schedule – February 17, 2021							

Public Schedule

Office of the Spokesperson

February 16, 2021

*****THE DAILY PUBLIC SCHEDULE IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE*****

**SECRETARY ANTONY J. BLINKEN**

**8:30 a.m.** Secretary Blinken delivers virtual remarks at the UN Security Council VTC on Maintenance of international peace and security: Implementation of Resolution 2532 (2020), on the cessation of hostilities in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, from the Department of State.**(VIRTUAL OPEN PRESS COVERAGE)**

*The Secretary’s remarks will be live streamed on**www.state.gov**and**http://webtv.un.org/**.***

**UNDER SECRETARY FOR POLITICAL AFFAIRS DAVID HALE**

Under Secretary Hale attends meetings and briefings, from the Department of State.

**Acting Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs Philip T. Reeker**

**12:30 p.m.** Ambassador Reeker meets with Serbian Ambassador to the United States Marko Djuric, in Washington, D.C.**(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)**

**BRIEFING SCHEDULE**

**2:30 p.m.** Department Press Briefing by Spokesperson Ned Price.**(POOLED PRESS COVERAGE)**

*The Department Press Briefing will be live streamed on**www.state.gov**.*

 

 

 

Tags

Office of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1977 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1977

     To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow solar and 
       geothermal investment credit for public utility property.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 20, 2007

 Ms. Berkley introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow solar and 
       geothermal investment credit for public utility property.

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

SECTION 1. SOLAR AND GEOTHERMAL INVESTMENT CREDIT ALLOWED FOR PUBLIC 
              UTILITY PROPERTY.

    (a) In General.--The second sentence of section 48(a)(3) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting ``(other than 
property described in clause (i) or (iii) of subparagraph (A))'' before 
``shall not''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to periods after the date of the enactment of this Act, in 
taxable years ending after such date, under rules similar to the rules 
of section 48(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as in effect on 
the day before the date of the enactment of the Revenue Reconciliation 
Act of 1990).
                                 <all>
```
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-14-00026-CV

Keitha Thayer

v.

Mark Thayer

§

§

§

§

From the 90th District Court

of Young County (31091)

March 13, 2014

Per Curiam

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed for 

want of jurisdiction.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

PER CURIAM
Exhibit 21.1
                   Subsidiaries of Omega Financial Corporation

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Name of Subsidiary                            State or Jurisdiction            Trade Name
                                                of Incorporation                (if any)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                              <C>                   <C>
Omega Bank, N.A.                                 United States                 Omega Bank
P.O. Box 298                                                           Hollidaysburg Trust Company
State College, PA    16804                                             Penn Central National Bank

Omega Financial Company, LLC                     Delaware                           --
1105 N. Market Street
Wilmington, DE  19899

Central Pennsylvania Investment Company          Delaware                           --
1105 N. Market Street
Wilmington, DE 19899

Omega Insurance Agency                           Pennsylvania           Omega Investment Services
366 Walker Drive
State College, PA  16801

Central Pennsylvania Life Insurance Company      Arizona                            --
1421 E. Thomas Road
Phoenix, AZ  85014

Central Pennsylvania Leasing, Inc.               Pennsylvania                       --

Central Pennsylvania Real Estate, Inc.           Pennsylvania                       --
</TABLE>