alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000727538
<NAME> ART.5 FDS FOR 1997 FIRST QUARTER 10-Q
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S.DOLLAR
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                  1,000
<CASH>                                         451,546
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,516,447
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,967,993
<PP&E>                                     163,616,122
<DEPRECIATION>                           (156,251,361)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,332,754
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,095,344
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,237,410
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,332,754
<SALES>                                      3,698,691
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,708,083
<CGS>                                          932,635
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  932,635
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               135,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,818
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,627,630
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,627,630
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,627,630
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    1,683
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    1,683
        

</TABLE>
#### § 1.203 Information to be reported to VA Police.

Information about actual or possible violations of criminal laws related to VA programs, operations, facilities, or involving VA employees, where the violation of criminal law occurs on VA premises, will be reported by VA management officials to the VA police component with responsibility for the VA station or facility in question. If there is no VA police component with jurisdiction over the offense, the information will be reported to Federal, state or local law enforcement officials, as appropriate.

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 902)

[68 FR 17550, Apr. 10, 2003]
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 179 (Thursday, September 17, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 47781]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-22397]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

Time and Date: Thursday, September 24, 2009, 2 p.m.

Place: Hearing Room 420, Bethesda Towers, 4330 East-West Highway, 
Bethesda, Maryland.

Status: Closed to the public.

Matter to be Considered: Compliance Status Report (Monthly)--Commission 
Briefing.
    The staff will brief the Commission on various compliance matters.
    For a recorded message containing the latest agenda information, 
call (301) 504-7948.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Todd A. Stevenson, Office of the 
Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East-West 
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 504-7923.

    Dated: September 11, 2009.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-22397 Filed 9-16-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-M
#### Edward Smith, Plaintiff, *v.*Ada B. Smith, Defendant.

(Supreme Court, New York Trial Term,

April, 1899.)

Mistrial — Failure of jury'to agree except on. one issue decided by the court. '

Where issues are Settled, in an action for an absolute divorce, for a trial by jury and- the jury disagree except as to-'one of the charges made, in- regard to which they Were directed to Arid for the'defendant, there is a. mistrial and no judgment Whatever can be entered. ■

Application as to alleged adjudication as to one-of several issues . in an action for divorce.. ,

Alex. Thain, for motion.

David-Welch, opposed.

McAdam, J.

The action is for divorce, on the ground of adul- • ,'tery, and the answer contains recriminatory charges. The issues .were settled for - trial by jury.- Code, '§ 970, At the' trial the jury disagreed. : As to-one of the charges, made by the, plaintiff, the. court directed the jury -to find for-the defendant, the evidence being insufficient to warrant any other.finding.. The other, charges were submitted,, and the; jury having disagreed, nothing was ad'jiidicated. It was,, in short,, a mistrial. The rule is, that'the jury cannot find on one'issue'and disagree on another; the findings- must be altogether- or not-at all,, and-the; court will not. receive the finding of the jury on'one issue, and- discharge the-jury as to the other. -Berry v. Waller, 1 Overt. 186;. and see "Thompson’s Trials;-§'§ 265.0, -2,657-.' There- is no- such thing'in-practice as: verdicts on the in,*253stallment plan or alternate findings by successive juries on different issues in the same case. The verdict as rendered must be sufficient for all the purposes of the case, or it is no verdict. See Parker v. Laney, 58 N. Y., at p. 472. There can be but one final judgment in an action, and the verdict must be sufficient to authorize it. This is the rule in regard to special verdicts; and they are analogous to verdicts on framed issues, which now take the place of feigned issues. Vermilyea v. Palmer, 52 N. Y. 471; Kintz v. McNeal, 1 Den., at p. 438; Carr v. Carr, 52 N. Y. 251; Casey v. Dwyre, 15 Hun, 153. When, then, the verdict is so imperfect that no judgment can be rendered upon it, and it cannot be cured by the exercise by the court of its power of amendment, the practice at common law is to award a *venire de novo.*Thompson’s Trials, § 2657. When a jury disagree the directions given on the trial affect that trial only, and not a subsequent one, wherein there may be different evidence. The defendant now moves for an order declaring that the court directed a verdict for the defendant on one of the issues, and that the remaining issues only are to be considered on the new trial. This practice is unauthorized. There may be additional evidence on the new trial which may require a different finding thereat on the different issues. *“*Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.” No verdict having been received or recorded, the new trial must, of course, proceed *de novo-*as to all the issues in the action, and the plaintiff may take an order to that effect.

Ordered accordingly.
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed August 9, 2023.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D22-0571

Lower Tribunal No. F14-15090

________________

Anzagen Black,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida, 

Appellee.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Ramiro C. 

Areces, Judge.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Shannon Hemmendinger, 

Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Christina L. Dominguez, 

Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before LOGUE, C.J., and SCALES, and MILLER, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.
2

Affirmed. See Soliz v. State, 18 So. 3d 1094, 1097 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) 

(concluding probationer willfully violated probation terms when evidence 

submitted established probationer “had twenty-one ‘bracelet gone 

notifications’ and ten insufficient battery alarms”); Palma v. State, 830 So. 2d 

201, 203 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (affirming trial court’s finding that defendant 

willfully violated probation where, despite her allegations of mental illness, 

defendant had history of violating her probation); see also Harris v. State, 

898 So. 2d 1126, 1127 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (determining competent, 

substantial evidence supported trial court’s finding of willful probation 

violation notwithstanding defendant’s limited intellectual capabilities).
110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2121 

AN ACT 

To modify a land grant patent issued by the Secretary of 

the Interior. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 2121 EH

1 SECTION 1. AMENDMENTS TO LAND GRANT PATENT 

2 ISSUED BY SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR. 

3 Patent Number 61–2000–0007, issued by the Sec4 retary of the Interior to the Great Lakes Shipwreck His5 torical Society, Chippewa County, Michigan, pursuant to 

6 section 5505 of division A of the Omnibus Consolidated 

7 Appropriations Act, 1997 (Public Law 104–208; 110 Stat. 

8 3009–516) is amended in paragraph 6, under the heading 

9 ‘‘SUBJECT ALSO TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS’’ by 

10 striking ‘‘Whitefish Point Comprehensive Plan of October 

11 1992, or a gift shop’’ and inserting ‘‘Human Use/Natural 

12 Resource Plan for Whitefish Point, dated December 2002, 

13 permitted as the intent of Congress’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 10, 2007. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2121 

AN ACT 

To modify a land grant patent issued by the 

Secretary of the Interior.
#### Eric JOLLY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 80-2170.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Dec. 15, 1981.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Charles D. Peters, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Laura R. Morrison, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

ON REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

The defendant appeals asserting his three-year mandatory minimum sentence to be improper.1 Defendant was sentenced for robbery with a firearm as a youthful offender pursuant to Chapter 958, Florida Statutes. This sentence is vacated in accordance with *Trent v. State,*403 So.2d 1131 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981), and Section 958.-05(3), Florida Statutes (1979).

*1299Reversed and remanded for resentencing in accordance with the above cited authorities.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

MOORE, BERANEK and HERSEY, JJ., concur.

1

. This Court’s previous opinion issued October 28, 1981, is withdrawn and the present opinion substituted.
#### § 352.1 How made.

Except for decisions authorized by law to be made by a single Copyright Royalty Judge, determinations in a proceeding will be made by a majority of the Copyright Royalty Judges. The opinion or opinions of the majority and any dissenting opinion will be included in the determination. Each determination will be transmitted to the Register of Copyrights to enable review for consistency with the Copyright Act on the day it is issued.

[70 FR 30905, May 31, 2005, as amended at 71 FR 53330, Sept. 11, 2006]
§ 81.20 Required use of NIOSH-IREP. ( a ) NIOSH-IREP is an interactive software program for estimating probability of causation for covered employees seeking compensation for cancer under EEOICPA, other than as members of the Special Exposure Cohort seeking compensation for a specified cancer.
( b ) DOL is required to use NIOSH-IREP to estimate probability of causation for all cancers, as identified under §§ 81.21 and 81.23.
#### Davis Schapiro, Respondent, *v.*Samuel Block et al., Appellants.

Appeal by defendants from a judgment of the Municipal Court, first district, borough of Manhattan, in favor of plaintiff, for the sum of $200.15.

George A. Steinmuller, for appellants.

John Callahan, for respondent.

Freedman, P. J.

This is an action brought to recover the sum of $180, claimed to be .due' for commissions earned by oneOppenheim in obtaining a loan of $18,000 upon the real estate of the defendant Levy, the claim having been assigned to the plaintiff. The testimony is conflicting upon the questions involved, and a cursory examination of the record might lead to the impression that the judgment was against the weight of evidence. A careful ex- > animation shows, however, that the witness Oppenheim, on whose testimony the plaintiff’s case depends, is supported by the probabilities, that, had he been informed on the 3d day of October, that Mrs. Levy had obtained the loan elsewhere, as testified to by her and Miss Hene, he would not have continued his negotiations with a reputable firm and completed all the necessary arrangements to obtain the loan.

The silence of the defendant Block as to his having already obtained the loan, when called upon by the witness Wainwright, on the 8th of October and asked by him if he had authorized Oppenheim to obtain the loan, is also significant. Uo motion was made at the close of the testimony for a dismissal of the complaint upon any ground, and a careful consideration of all the facts and circum*792stances of the case does not convince me that there is such a disregard of the weight of evidence'by the court below, as to warrant a disturbance of. the judgment. Weight of evidence- does -not consist in mere number of witnesses, and the decisions are very uniform to the effect that judgments will not be disturbed where there is a conflict of evidence, except in cases of palpable mistake, prejudice, passion or partiality, or unless the judgment is clearly and strongly -against the preponderance of evidence.

MacLeaw and Levektritt, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs to respondent*
| | Joint Travel Regulation (JTR), Volume 2 | 
| | --------------------------------------- |
HomeAssisted Schools...Helsinki, Finland: International School of Helsinki: 2024 Special Needs Profile

# 									Helsinki, Finland: International School of Helsinki: 2024 Special Needs Profile							

Special Needs Profile

Office of Overseas Schools

February 21, 2024

## 								School Contact Information							

        -  Tel: +358-9-686-6160 | Overseas Schools Fact Sheet | Regional Education Officer: Tim Stuart 
        -  E-mail: mainoffice@ishelsinki.fi | Website: www.ishelsinki.fi| Special needs information can be found ishelsinki.fi/student-support-services. 
        -  Additional details on special needs support at post found on the **School Summary Information Portal**(must have OKTA login to access).  For more information, contact A/OPR/OS (**overseasschools@state.gov** / +1-202-261-8200), MED/CFP Child and Family Program Team (**MEDCFP@state.gov**/ +1-202-663-1815), or the school directly.    

**Download the Special Needs Profile** (Helsinki 2024 Special Needs Profile Finland) for this school to learn more about their capability to support students with exceptionalities.

 

The**International School of Helsinki**(ISH) is an independent, coeducational day school that offers an educational program from kindergarten through grade 12 for students of all nationalities. The school was founded in 1963. The lower school (K-5) and upper school (6-12) operate on semesters that run from 8 August 2022 to 3 June 2023.

*This is intended to provide general information. Prospective users of the schools may wish to inquire further of A/OPR/OS or contact the school directly for more specific and up-to-the-minute information. Information and statistics are current as of December 2023 and provided by the school.*

NOTE: School situations can change quickly, particularly as schools face cutbacks to learning support programs due to the pandemic, unrest, and economic uncertainty. For the most current information, work with the REO and school. Information in this document was collected by the Department of State’s Office of Overseas Schools directly from the school in December 2023 and shows the availability of services rather than an assessment of the quality of the services. The profile is intended as a jumping off point for a conversation with the REO and school to understand the best fit for your child. Definitions may vary school to school.

Tags

FinlandOffice of Overseas Schools

Back to Top
II 

Calendar No. 1018 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2246 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 5, 2007 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources 

SEPTEMBER 16, 2008 

Reported by Mr. BINGAMAN, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To provide for the release of any reversionary interest of 

the United States in and to certain lands in Reno, Nevada. 

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

3 SECTION 1. RAILROAD LANDS DEFINED. 

4 For the purposes of this Act, the term ‘‘railroad 

5 lands’’ means those lands within the City of Reno, Ne6 vada, located within portions of sections 10, 11, and 12 

7 of T.19 N., R. 19 E., and portions of section 7 of T.19 

8 N., R. 20 E., Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada, that were 

9 originally granted to the Union Pacific Railroad under the 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2246 RS

1 provisions of the Act of July 1, 1862, commonly known 

2 as the Union Pacific Railroad Act. 

3 SEC. 2. RELEASE OF REVERSIONARY INTEREST. 

4 Any reversionary interests of the United States (in5 cluding interests under the Act of July 1, 1862, commonly 

6 known as the Union Pacific Railroad Act) in and to the 

7 railroad lands as defined in section one of this Act are 

8 hereby released. 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS

rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
Calendar No. 1018 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2246 

AN ACT 

To provide for the release of any reversionary interin Reno, Nevada. est of the United States in and to certain lands 

SEPTEMBER 16, 2008 

Reported without amendment 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 654/2005

of 28 April 2005         

determining to what extent import right applications submitted during the month of April 2005 for live bovine animals weighing between 80 and 300 kg as part of a tariff quota provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1204/2004 may be accepted

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1204/2004 of 29 June 2004 opening and providing for the administration of a tariff quota for live bovine animals weighing between 80 and 300 kg and originating in Bulgaria or Romania (1 July to 30 June 2005) (2), and in particular Article 4 thereof,

Whereas:

Article 1(3)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 1204/2004 lays down the number of head of live bovine animals weighing between 80 and 300 kg falling within CN code 0102 90 05 and originating in Bulgaria or Romania which may be imported under special conditions in the period from 1 April to 30 June 2005. The quantities covered by import licence applications submitted are such that applications may by accepted in full.

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

All applications for import certificates made in the month of April 2005 pursuant to Article 3(3), second subparagraph, third indent, of Regulation (EC) No 1204/2004 are hereby met in full.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 29 April 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 28 April 2005.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

----

(1)OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 21. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 (OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 1).

(2)OJ L 230, 30.6.2004, p. 32.

----
Form Approved. OMB Nos. 2070-0060; 2070-0057; 2070-0107

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

Paperwork Reduction Act Notice: The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.25 hours per response

for registration activities and 0.25 hours per response for reregistration and special review activities, including time for reading the instructions and

completing the necessary forms. Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including

suggestions for reducing the burden to: Director, Collection Strategies Division (2822T), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200

Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20460. Do not send the form to this address.

SELF-CERTIFICATION STATEMENT FOR THE 

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL PROPERTIES (PR NOTICE 98-1)

Product Name:

Reg. No./File Symbol No.

(if known) or Company No.

SELF-CERTIFICATION STATEMENT:

I certify that the reported information on the “Summary Form” represents a true and accurate record of

the test results of studies generated or owned by (Company Name): 

 and that the values of the properties reported are reliable. 

I further certify that such data were generated in substantial conformity with OPPTS Test Guideline Series 830 

Product Properties, applicable to my product, and in effect at the time of submission.

As a condition of registration, EPA may, by order, (1) withdraw a pending registration, (2) suspend the

registration of this product without opportunity for hearing, or (3) assess civil penalties provided for in section

14 of FIFRA for violations of section 12(a)(2)(N) of FIFRA without opportunity for hearing, if I have not

submitted to EPA within thirty (30) days of receipt of a request by the Agency, or within a specified time

agreed to by the Agency, test results of studies summarized in the “Summary Form.”

As a condition of registration, EPA may, by order, (1) withdraw a pending registration, (2) suspend the

registration of this product without opportunity for hearing, or (3) assess civil penalties provided for in section

14 of FIFRA for violations of sections 12(a)(2)(N), 12(a)(2)(Q), or 12(a)(2)(R) of FIFRA without opportunity

for hearing, if I fail to provide to EPA within thirty (30) days of receipt of a notification of error, or within 

a specified time agreed to by the Agency, information that EPA determines is required to correct the error.

Type Applicant’s Name:

Title: Telephone No.

Applicant’s Signature: Date:

EPA Form 8570-37 (12-2003)

Attach-2
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 Quarterly Report of Tofutti Brands Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 26, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Steven
Kass, 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 result of operations of the
Company.


/s/Steven Kass*
---------------
Steven Kass
Chief Financial Officer

Date:  NOvember 10, 2009



* The originally executed copy of this Certification will be maintained at the
Company's offices and will be made available for inspection upon request.