alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Virginia CROCKETT *v.*Ralph JOHNSON et al

75-199

530 S.W. 2d 671

Opinion delivered December 22, 1975

*Blankenship & Jarhoe,*for appellant.

*II. David*Blair, for appellees.

George Rose Smith, Justice.

The issue here is the validity of a default judgment entered by the circuit court of Lawrence county against a resident of Sharp county, over whom the court acquired no personal jurisdiction. The trial court was right in setting aside the default judgment, on the ground that it was void.

*7The appellant brought suit in Lawrence county upon a $10,000 promissory note executed by the appellee Ralph Johnson, a long-time resident of Sharp county. The summons was served by the sheriff of Sharp county, in that county. No answer having been filed within the time allowed, the court entered a default judgment against Johnson. Later on, after a writ of execution had been sent to Sharp cssunty without results, the plaintiff sought judgment against the Sharp county sheriff and his bondsman. Johnson and the sheriff then attacked the original judgment, which the trial court set aside.

For reversal the appellant relies upon a line of cases, beginning with *State*v. *Hill,*50 Ark. 458, 8 S.W. 401 (1887), holding that one who attacks a judgment rendered in his absence must show not only that he was not properly summoned but also that he did not know about the proceeding in time to make his defense. Upon that theory it is argued that Johnson is bound by the judgment, because the service of summons in Sharp county gave him notice that he was being sued.

That line of authority is distinguishable; for in those cases the court *could*acquire personal jurisdiction over the defendant, there merely being some defect in the service of process. Here personal jurisdiction was lacking. Under our statutes an action upon a transitory cause of action cannot be maintained in one county upon service had in another county. *Chambers*v. *Gray,*203 Ark. 858, 158 S.W. 2d 926 (1942). A default judgment in such a situation is necessarily void, for otherwise every court in the state would have statewide jurisdiction to compel residents of other counties either to defend a suit such as this one in the first place or to show a meritorious defense in order to attack the default judgment. That showing is unnecessary when the judgment is void. *Davis*v. *Schimmel,*252 Ark. 1201, 482 S.W. 2d 785 (1972). The trial court was right in setting aside the void default judgment.

Affirmed.
§ 64.12 Scoring and selection. ( a ) *Scoring.* VA will score only complete applications received from eligible entities by the established deadline. Applications will be scored using the following criteria: ( 1 ) *Background, organizational history, qualifications, and past performance (maximum 10 points).* Applicant documents a relevant history of successfully providing the type of services proposed in the RVCP grant application, particularly in the location it plans to serve and/or to veterans and their families.
( 2 ) *Need for pilot project (maximum 10 points).* Applicant demonstrates the need for the pilot project among veterans and their families in the proposed project location, and provides evidence of the applicant's understanding of the unique needs of veterans and their families in the location to be served.
( 3 ) *Pilot project concept, innovation, and ability to meet VA's objectives (maximum 40 points).* Application shows appropriate concept, size, and scope of the project; provides realistic estimates of time, staffing, and material needs to implement the project; and details the project's ability to enhance the overall services provided, while presenting realistic plans to reduce duplication of benefits and services already in place. Application must describe a comprehensive and well-developed plan to meet one or more of the permissible uses set out in § 64.6.
( 4 ) *Pilot project evaluation and monitoring (maximum 10 points).* Self-evaluation and monitoring strategy provided in application is reasonable and expected to meet requirements of § 64.10(b)(5).
( 5 ) *Organizational finances (maximum 10 points).* Applicant provides documentation that it is financially stable, has not defaulted on financial obligations, has adequate financial and operational controls in place to assure the proper use of RVCP grants, and presents a plan for using RVCP grants that is cost effective and efficient.
( 6 ) *Pilot project location (maximum 20 points).* Applicant documents how the proposed project location meets the definition of rural or underserved communities in this part.
( b ) *Selection of grantees.* All complete applications will be scored using the criteria in paragraph (a) and ranked in order from highest to lowest total score. VA will rank all applications that receive at least the minimum number of points indicated in the NOFA. VA will award one RVCP grant to the highest scoring application. VA will award RVCP grants to each successive application, ranked by total score, provided the applicant has not been awarded an RVCP grant for a higher scoring application and the proposed project is not in the same project location as any previously awarded RVCP grant.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 523 note)
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-10-00694-CR

Lasaro Cortez, Jr., Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 264TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 63990, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant Lasaro Cortez was placed on deferred adjudication communitysupervision

after he pleaded guilty to possessing more than one gram of cocaine with intent to deliver and true

to a previous felony conviction alleged for enhancement. See Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann.

§ 481.112(a), (c) (West 2010). The State later moved to adjudicate, alleging two violations of the

conditions of supervision. Following a hearing, the trial court found the allegations to be true,

adjudged appellant guilty, and imposed a fourteen-year prison sentence.

In his only issue on appeal, appellant contends that the evidence does not support the

court’s order that he pay $565 in attorney’s fees. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 26.05(g)

(West Supp. 2010); Mayer v. State, 309 S.W.3d 552, 556-57 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010). The State

concedes that there is no evidence of a material change in appellant’s financial status subsequent to

his being found indigent.
The issue is sustained. The judgment of conviction is modified to delete the order

that appellant pay $565 in attorney’s fees. As modified, the judgment is affirmed.

___________________________________________

J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Henson and Goodwin

Modified and, as Modified, Affirmed

Filed: August 18, 2011

Do Not Publish

2
# Official Journal C 38A/15 F

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 38A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 4815 February 2005 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 38A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 4815 February 2005

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Corrigenda |
| | |
| 2005/C 038A/2 | Corrigendum to the Directorate-General Trade — publication of a vacancy notice for Deputy Director-General (grade A*15) COM/2005/268 (OJ C 28 A of 4.2.2005) | 3 |

Notice No

Contents

page

Corrigenda

2005/C 038A/2

Corrigendum to the Directorate-General Trade — publication of a vacancy notice for Deputy Director-General (grade A*15) COM/2005/268 (OJ C 28 A of 4.2.2005)

OJ C 28 A of 4.2.2005

3

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN

---

Corrigenda

15.2.2005

| 15.2.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CA 38/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CA 38/3

---

Corrigendum to the Directorate-General Trade — publication of a vacancy notice for Deputy Director-General (grade A*15) COM/2005/268

(

  Official Journal of the European Union C 28 A of 4 February 2005

  )

(2005/C 38 A/01)

On page 5, ‘Applicants must:’

for:

| ‘4. | have a thorough knowledge of one of the official languages of the European Union or of one of the 10 new Member States (Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia) and an adequate knowledge of another of these languages. Candidates should note that the selection procedures will be carried out in English, French and German only.’ |
| --- | --- |

‘4.

have a thorough knowledge of one of the official languages of the European Union or of one of the 10 new Member States (Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia) and an adequate knowledge of another of these languages. Candidates should note that the selection procedures will be carried out in English, French and German only.’

read:

| ‘4. | have a thorough knowledge of one of the official languages of the European Union and an adequate knowledge of another of these official languages. Candidates should note that the selection procedures will be carried out in English, French and German only.’ |
| --- | --- |

‘4.

have a thorough knowledge of one of the official languages of the European Union and an adequate knowledge of another of these official languages. Candidates should note that the selection procedures will be carried out in English, French and German only.’

---
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 62 (Tuesday, April 1, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 18382]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07251]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8678]

Determination by the Secretary of State Relating to Iran 
Sanctions

AGENCY: Department of State.
    This notice is to inform the public that the Secretary of State 
determined on March 4, 2014, pursuant to Section 1245(d)(4)(D) of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (NDAA) (Pub. L. 
112-81), as amended by the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights 
Act (Pub. L. 112-158), that as of March 4, 2014, each of the following 
purchasers of oil from Iran has qualified for the 180-day exception 
outlined in section 1245(d)(4)(D): Belgium, the Czech Republic, France, 
Germany, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Spain, and the United 
Kingdom. The Secretary of State last made exception determinations 
under Section 1245(d)(4)(D) of the NDAA regarding these purchasers on 
September 6, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carlos Pascual, Special Envoy and 
Coordinator, Bureau of Energy Resources, (202) 647-8543.

    Dated: March 25, 2014.
Amos Hochstein,
Acting, Bureau of Energy Resources, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2014-07251 Filed 3-31-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-07-P
```
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 19-1376

___________________________

Raphael Mendez

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

Bryan Meek, Correctional Officer; Lt. Holbus, Correctional Officer; Lt. Sladek,

Correctional Officer; Ms. Whiplinger, Correctional Officer; Ms. G. Balas, Unit

Disciplinary Officer; T. Muller, Unit Disciplinary Officer; Warden David Paul, et al.

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the District of Minnesota

 ____________

 Submitted: August 9, 2019

Filed: August 21, 2019

[Unpublished]

____________

Before BENTON, SHEPHERD, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.
Federal civil detainee Raphael Mendez appeals after the district court

1

dismissed his pro se civil rights complaint, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). 

He challenges the dismissal of his claim asserting that confiscation of his property

violated his due process rights.

Upon careful review of the record and Mendez’s arguments on appeal, we

conclude that the dismissal was proper. See Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 533

(1984) (unauthorized deprivation of property by government official does not violate

procedural due process unless suitable post-deprivation remedy is unavailable); see

also 28 C.F.R. § 542.10-.19 (setting forth Bureau of Prison’s administrative remedy

procedures); Moore v. Sims, 200 F.3d 1170, 1171 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam)

(de novo review of § 1915(e)(2)(B) dismissal); cf. Gardner v. Howard, 109 F.3d 427,

430 (8th Cir. 1997) (there is no liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 based only on prison

official’s violation of prison policy). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

The Honorable Eric C. Tostrud, United States District Judge for the District 1

of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Hildy

Bowbeer, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.

-2-
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 185 (Friday, September 25, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 49000]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-23224]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Docket No. FR-5300-N-20]


Notice of Availability: Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for 
Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 Green and Healthy Homes Technical Studies Program

AGENCY: Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control, HUD.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Through this notice, HUD announces the availability on its 
website of the application information, submission deadlines, funding 
criteria, and other requirements for the FY2009 Green and Healthy Homes 
Technical Studies Program NOFA. The Green and Healthy Homes Technical 
Studies Program NOFA makes $2.4 million available under the Department 
of Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Act, 2009 (Pub. L. 111-
8, approved March 11, 2009). The notice providing information regarding 
the application process, funding criteria and eligibility requirements 
is available on the HUD Web site at http://www.hud.gov/offices/adm/grants/fundsavail.cfm or http://www.hud.gov/offices/lead. The Catalogue 
for Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number for the Green and Healthy 
Homes Technical Studies program is 14.911. Applications must be 
submitted electronically through <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#eaa5a2a2a6a2a9a4a5acab988f9c838f9daaa2bfaec48d859c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="bbf4f3f3f7f3f8f5f4fdfac9decdd2deccfbf3eeff95dcd4cd">[email protected]</span></a>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning the Green 
and Healthy Homes Technical Studies Program, contact Warren Friedman, 
Senior Advisor to the Director, Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard 
Control, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh 
Street, SW., Room 8236, Washington DC 20410-3000; telephone 202-402-
7574 (this is not a toll-free number). Persons with speech or hearing 
impairments may access this telephone number via TTY by calling the 
toll-free Federal Information Relay Service during working hours at 
800-877-8339.

    Dated: September 15, 2009.
Matthew Ammon,
Acting Director, Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control.
[FR Doc. E9-23224 Filed 9-24-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
§ 1.485 Medical emergencies. ( a ) *General rule.* Under the procedures required by paragraph (c) of this section, patient identifying information from records covered by §§ 1.460 through 1.499 of this part may be disclosed to medical personnel who have a need for information about a patient for the purpose of treating a condition which poses an immediate threat to the health of any individual and which requires immediate medical intervention.
( b ) *Special rule.* Patient identifying information may be disclosed to medical personnel of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) who assert a reason to believe that the health of any individual may be threatened by an error in the manufacture, labeling, or sale of a product under FDA jurisdiction, and that the information will be used for the exclusive purpose of notifying patients or their physicians of potential dangers.
( c ) *Procedures.* Immediately following disclosure, any VA employee making an oral disclosure under authority of this section shall make an accounting of the disclosure in accordance with the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a(c) and 38 CFR 1.576(c)) and document the disclosure in the patient's records setting forth in writing: ( 1 ) The name and address of the medical personnel to whom disclosure was made and their affiliation with any health care facility;
( 2 ) The name of the individual making the disclosure;
( 3 ) The date and time of the disclosure;
( 4 ) The nature of the emergency (or error, if the report was to FDA);
( 5 ) The information disclosed; and
( 6 ) The authority for making the disclosure (§ 1.485 of this part).
[60 FR 63929, Dec. 13, 1995, as amended at 85 FR 64043, Oct. 9, 2020]
# Materials Not Included in

Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

Docket Number: FAA

- 2016

- 4223

Directorate Identifier: 2015

- NM

- 108

- AD

GV AMM, R43

--- 2/15/2015

G550 AMM, R24

--- 2/15/2015

G500 AMM, R24

--- 2/15/2015

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the

Supplemental AD Docket



### MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate

Rules Docket

1601 Lind Ave. SW.,

Renton, WA 98057

425.227.1221

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Form Date: 03/05/2008
# Official Journal C 82/2014

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2014.082.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 82 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5721 March 2014 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2014.082.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 82

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5721 March 2014

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2014/C 082/01 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.7183 — Kendrick/Topaz/RPIF) (1) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2014/C 082/01

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.7183 — Kendrick/Topaz/RPIF) (1)

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | Council |
| 2014/C 082/02 | Council Decision of 18 March 2014 appointing and replacing members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training | 2 |
| 2014/C 082/03 | Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/172/CFSP and in Council Regulation (EU) No 270/2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Egypt | 3 |
| | European Commission |
| 2014/C 082/04 | Euro exchange rates | 4 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

Council

2014/C 082/02

Council Decision of 18 March 2014 appointing and replacing members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training

2

2014/C 082/03

Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/172/CFSP and in Council Regulation (EU) No 270/2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Egypt

3

European Commission

2014/C 082/04

Euro exchange rates

4

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Commission |
| 2014/C 082/05 | Call for proposals 2013 — EAC/S11/13 — Erasmus+ programme — Prolongation of deadline for submission of applications (Key Action 1 — Mobility of individuals in the field of education, training and youth) (OJ C 362, 12.12.2013) | 5 |

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Commission

2014/C 082/05

Call for proposals 2013 — EAC/S11/13 — Erasmus+ programme — Prolongation of deadline for submission of applications (Key Action 1 — Mobility of individuals in the field of education, training and youth) (OJ C 362, 12.12.2013)

5

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE, ACCOUNTING AND

FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Western Gaming Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I Robert Muniz, Secretary/Treasurer of the Company, hereby 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/Robert Muniz

Robert Muniz

Secretary/Treasurer

October 4, 2004
§ 21.192 “Independent living program” status. ( a ) *Purpose.* The *independent living program* status serves to: ( 1 ) Identify veterans who are being furnished a program of independent living services by VA; and
( 2 ) Assure that such veterans receive necessary services from VA in a timely manner.
( b ) *Assignment to independent living program* status. A veteran may be assigned or reassigned to *independent living program* status under the provisions of § 21.88, § 21.94, or § 21.96. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3107)
( c ) *Continuation in independent living program* status. A veteran will be in *independent living program* status during periods in which: ( 1 ) The provisions of § 21.282 for induction into a program are met, but the veteran is pending induction into the facility at which rehabilitation services will be provided;
( 2 ) The veteran receives rehabilitation services prescribed in an IILP; or
( 3 ) The veteran is on authorized leave of absence status. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3109, 3120)
( d ) *Termination of independent living program* status. When a veteran's case has been assigned to *independent living program* status, the case will be terminated from that status, if one of the following occurs: ( 1 ) A veteran, who has been notified of necessary arrangements to begin a program, the date the program begins and instructions as to the next steps to be taken: ( i ) Fails to report and does not respond to followup contact by the case manager;
( ii ) Declines or refuses to enter the program; or
( iii ) Defers entry for more than 30 days beyond the scheduled beginning date, unless the deferment is due to illness or other sufficient reason.
( 2 ) The veteran completes the IILP;
( 3 ) Either the veteran or VA interrupts the program;
( 4 ) Either the veteran or VA discontinues the program; or
( 5 ) Service-connection for the veteran's service-connected disability is severed by VA or he or she otherwise ceases to be eligible. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3109, 3110)


Cross References:
See §§ 21.160 Independent living services, 21.282 Effective date of induction into a rehabilitation program, 21.322 Commencing date, and 21.324 Reduction or termination date. [49 FR 40814, Oct. 18, 1984, as amended at 84 FR 193, Jan. 18, 2019]