alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Charles Benda, Respondent, *v.*Francis Keil et al., Appellants.

Appeal from judgment entered upon a verdict and from an order denying defendants’ motion for a new trial.

Adam E. Schatz (Edward E. McCall, of counsel), for appellants.

E. W. Gatlin, for respondent.

Hascall, J.

It seems to me that the verdict was clearly against the weight of evidence in this case, and that the jury arrived at its conclusion on the theory that there was *some*evidence to support the claim of plaintiff, and would, therefore, be justified in expressing a sympathetic feeling for him. This, of course, could not uphold such a determination. Baulec v. N. Y. & H. R. R. Co., 59 N. Y. 366.

If any danger existed in the occupation of the injured person, he knew of it, and assumed the risk that was apparent. The testimony shows that he, best of all, was acquainted with the exact condition of his surroundings, and, if the conditions were as plaintiff contends, was certainly careless in his operations. Crown v. Orr, 140 N. Y. 452.

Judgment and order reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event.

McCarthy, J., concurs.

Judgment and order reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to abide event.
# Official Journal C 173/2022

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 173 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6527 April 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 173

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6527 April 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 173/01 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10679 – TELEFONICA / PONTEGADEA / TELXIUS) (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2022/C 173/01

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10679 – TELEFONICA / PONTEGADEA / TELXIUS) (
  1
  )

1

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 173/02 | Euro exchange rates — 26 April 2022 | 2 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2022/C 173/02

Euro exchange rates — 26 April 2022

2

---

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

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

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

EN
# Official Journal C 213/2006

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 213 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 495 September 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 213

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 495 September 2006

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Information |
| | Commission |
| 2006/C 213/1 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |
| 2006/C 213/2 | Commission notice pursuant to Article 4(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 — Imposition of public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services within Italy (1) | 2 |
| 2006/C 213/3 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4271 — Daikin/OYL) (1) | 5 |
| 2006/C 213/4 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4316 — Atos Origin/Banksys/BCC) (1) | 6 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Information

Commission

2006/C 213/1

Euro exchange rates

1

2006/C 213/2

Commission notice pursuant to Article 4(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 — Imposition of public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services within Italy (1)

2

2006/C 213/3

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4271 — Daikin/OYL) (1)

5

2006/C 213/4

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4316 — Atos Origin/Banksys/BCC) (1)

6

---

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

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

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

EN
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2456 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain acrylic fiber tow. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 23, 2007 

Mr. LINCOLN DAVIS of Tennessee introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain acrylic fiber 

tow. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ACRYLIC FIBER TOW. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new headings: 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2456 IH

‘‘ 9902.06.41 Acrylic fiber tow 

(polyacrylonitrile tow), non 

crimped, more than 13 cm 

wide sheet tow, containing 

312,000 filaments and 25– 

35 percent water, such acrylic fiber containing 95 percent acrylonitrile (plus or 

minus 0.5), not more than 

0.5 percent of Zinc and average filament denier of 1.67 

decitex (plus or minus 0.11) Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2008 

9902.06.42 Acrylic fiber tow 

(polyacrylonitrile tow), non 

crimped, more than 13 cm 

wide sheet tow, containing 

320,000 filaments and 25– 

35 percent water, such acrylic fiber containing 95 percent acrylonitrile (plus or 

minus 0.5), not more than 

0.5 percent of Zinc and average filament denier of 1.33 

decitex (plus or minus 0.11) Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2008 

9902.06.43 Acrylic fiber tow 

(polyacrylonitrile tow), non 

crimped, no twisted and containing 24,000 filaments and 

not more than 1.0 percent 

water contents, such acrylic 

fiber containing 96 percent 

acrylonitrile (plus or minus 

0.5), and average denier of 

1.2 decitex (plus 0.03 or 

minus 0.03) .......................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2008 ’’. 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 

3 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day 

4 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 19

- 00388

- CR

Ramiro Garcia
v. The State of Texas

On Appeal from the 117th District Court of Nueces County , Texas Trial Cause No. CR15003989

- B

JUDGMENT
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED . The Court
orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED

. We further order this decision certified below for observance.
January 7, 2021
42191.

#### FLETCHER v. WILLIAMS.

Dben, Judge.

1. The defendant filed a general demurrer and various special demurrers, each of which latter moved to strike some vital paragraph of the petition as amended. The trial court overruled the general demurrer, sustained the special demurrers (which had the effect of deleting most of the paragraphs of the petition; see *White v. Little,*139 Ga. 522 (3) (77 SE 646)) and granted 20 days leave to amend. No amendment was filed. Thereafter the trial court granted a motion to dismiss. The appeal fails to enumerate as error the sustaining of the special demurrers, from which it becomes the law of the case that the paragraphs to which the demurrers were sustained were automatically eliminated when no amendment perfecting them was filed within the time limited. Thereafter if, with such paragraphs stricken, the petition failed to set out a cause of action, a motion to dismiss would be proper. *Baker v. City of Atlanta,*22 Ga. App. 483 (96 SE 332); *Strickland v. Hall,*109 Ga. App. 822 (137 SE2d 520). A distinction must be made between these cases and cases such as *Gassett v. Hugh Steele, Inc.,*113 Ga. App. 47 (147 SE2d 10) and others cited therein, where it was held that the judgment overruling the general demurrer set the law of the case that the petition set out a cause of action although certain special demurrers were also sustained. In all of those cases the cause of action attempted to be set forth was not affected by whatever deletions resulted from the sustaining of special demurrers, while in the line of cases exemplified by *Baker,*supra, the deletion of the matter stricken on special demurrer carried with it vital portions of the statement of facts on which the pleader was depending for his right of action (assuming because of the overruling of the general demurrer that these facts, if properly pleaded, would have been sufficient to state a cause of action).

2. After the plaintiff’s failure to amend, only the following allegations remained in the petition: jurisdictional allegations; a contract between the plaintiff and defendant stating in part that any sums loaned or advanced to the defendant by the plaintiff constitute a debt repayable on demand; an allegation that plaintiff’s account is just, due, and unpaid and that defendant refuses to pay the same, and a prayer for judgment in the sum of $2,081.02. There is no bill of particulars and *389no allegation that any amount of money was in fact loaned or advanced to the defendant. The petition thus stripped of most of its vital allegations failed to set out a cause of' action, and it was not error to dismiss it on a motion by the defendant in the nature of a general demurrer.

Argued September 12, 1966

Decided September 29, 1966.

*J. Sidney Lanier, Murray C. Underwood,*for appellant.

*Swift, Currie, McGhee & Hiers, Robert S. Harkey, James B. Hiers, Jr., J. L. Sapp,*for appellee.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Nichols, P. J., and Hall, J., concur.*
[BEE - AXE-PO01 

NATZOBJ, t3ZSTORZC 

LEGEND 

-- NEZ PERCE TRAIL 

- HIGH POTENTIAL ROUTE SEGMENT: 

C Lolo Tnll, 112 mlles 

- RELATED TRAIL: 

1. Lewls and CIarlc National Historlc Trall 

a. Lolo Trail 

0 NATIONAL FOREST 

NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE 

0 PRIVATE LAND 

PRINCIPAL ROADS 

HISTORIC SITE: 

25, Lolo Pass (Packer's Meadow) 28. Fon Owen 

26. Lolo Hot Springs
§ 1091.301 Petition for termination of order. ( a ) Any person subject to an order under 1091.206(a)(1) may, no sooner than two years after issuance of such an order and no more frequently than annually thereafter, petition for termination of the order. The same applies to an order under § 1091.201, subject to the limitations in § 1091.201(c).
( b ) A petition for termination submitted pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section shall set forth the reasons supporting termination of the order, including any actions taken by a respondent since issuance of the order to address the conduct that led to issuance of the order, and may include any supporting information or evidence that the petitioner believes is relevant to the Director's determination of the matter. A petition for termination must be filed with the Director and served on the initiating official and is subject to the word limit in § 1091.403.
( c ) The initiating official shall, within 30 days of receipt of a petition for termination, file a recommendation with the Director and serve it on the respondent. The initiating official's recommendation shall state whether the initiating official recommends that the order be terminated, or modified, or that the petition for termination be denied and the basis for such recommendation. The recommendation is subject to the word limit in § 1091.403.
( d ) Not later than 90 days after submission of a petition under paragraph (a) of this section, the Director shall issue a written decision either terminating or modifying the order, or denying the petition. If the Director modifies the order or denies the petition, the Director shall explain the basis for his or her decision with respect to the petition. At any time before issuing a decision, the Director may, on the Director's own motion, request that the respondent and initiating official provide any supplemental briefing that Director considers appropriate.
( e ) The decision of the Director made pursuant to paragraph (d) of this section shall constitute final agency action under 5 U.S.C. 704.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           223,176
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                      11,021
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 249,462
<CASH>                                           3,187
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                             227,200
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                           4,880
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 629,002
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                370,923
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                             58,212
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                 25,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           846
<OTHER-SE>                                     133,935
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   629,002
<PREMIUMS>                                      52,022
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                             11,909
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                 777
<OTHER-INCOME>                                     543
<BENEFITS>                                      37,479
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                     10,863
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                            18,091
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,269)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,506)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (763)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (763)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.09)
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                 150,517
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                141,939
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0


</TABLE>
#### § 4.22 Rating of disabilities aggravated by active service.

In cases involving aggravation by active service, the rating will reflect only the degree of disability over and above the degree existing at the time of entrance into the active service, whether the particular condition was noted at the time of entrance into the active service, or it is determined upon the evidence of record to have existed at that time. It is necessary therefore, in all cases of this character to deduct from the present degree of disability the degree, if ascertainable, of the disability existing at the time of entrance into active service, in terms of the rating schedule, except that if the disability is total (100 percent) no deduction will be made. The resulting difference will be recorded on the rating sheet. If the degree of disability at the time of entrance into the service is not ascertainable in terms of the schedule, no deduction will be made.
ex10-24.htm


Exhibit 10.24

 

	


 

December 4, 2013

 

Michael-Bryant Hicks

 

 

Re: Offer of Employment

 

Dear Hicks:

 

I am writing to summarize the terms of our offer, as follows:

 

	
Position
	
Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of Providence Service Corporation (the ''Company")

	  	  
	
Start Date
	
January 6, 2014

	  	  
	
Reporting
	
You will report to me directly in my role as the Chief Executive Officer

	  	  
	
Base Salary
	
$350,000 annually

	  	  
	
Bonus Opportunity
	
75% of Base Compensation, measured on a basis similar to that of other seniorexecutives

	  	  
	
Benefits
	
Same basis as others in the senior executive group, including enhanced life insurance and increased disability coverage

	  	  
	
Equity Plan
	
Same basis as others in the senior executive group in regard to any future equity grants

	  	  
	
Move From Colorado
	
The Company will pay for the actual costs of moving you and your family from Denver, the cost of housing in the Tucson area for up to 90 days during your transition, and up to 3 trips between Denver and Tucson between now and your start date



 


 

 




 


 

Michael-Bryant Hicks

December 4, 2013

Page 2 

 

 

 

	
Change in Control
	
In the event of a change in control of the Company while you are employed, and you are terminated without "cause" following such change in control, you will be entitled to receive compensation equal to two times your then applicable base salary, in a lump sum, on the same basis and terms as would be the case for senior executives of the Company. We will enter into a separate agreement with you in regard to this term of your employment prior to your Start Date.



 

As an employee of the Company, you will be subject to all policies applicable to employees of the Company which are included in the Corporate Handbook, as well as the Company's Compliance and Ethics Program and Code of Conduct, a copy of which can be found on our website. You will be considered an employee "at will," as your employment will have no specific term.

 

All of us at the Company are excited and are very much looking forward to your arrival here in Tucson and you becoming a part of our energetic and innovative team working on important matters for a growing and prosperous company. Our future is bright - and we are confident that your help in guiding our company going forward will contribute to our success! We also know that you and your family will enjoy living in Tucson.

 

Please let me know if you have questions.

 

Very truly yours

 

/s/ Warren S. Rustand

Warren S. Rustand

 

 

Agreed and Accepted:

 

/s/ Michael-Bryant Hicks

Michael-Bryant Hicks
EXHIBIT 99.2


                  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                    SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT ENTERPRISES, INC.
                     PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


     I certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form
10-QSB of Sports Entertainment Enterprises, Inc. for the period ending March
31, 2003:

     (1) 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 aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of Sports
Entertainment Enterprises, Inc.






/s/ Kirk Hartle
Kirk Hartle
Chief Financial Officer
May 15, 2003


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Sports Entertainment
Enterprises, Inc. and will be retained by Sports Entertainment Enterprises,
Inc.and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.
§ 59.1 Purpose. This part sets forth the mechanism for a State to obtain a grant: ( a ) To construct State home facilities (or to acquire facilities to be used as State home facilities) for furnishing domiciliary or nursing home care to veterans, and
( b ) To expand, remodel, or alter existing buildings for furnishing domiciliary, nursing home, adult day health, or hospital care to veterans in State homes.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 101, 501, 1710, 1742, 8105, 8131-8137)
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2487 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2487

  To provide for an additional place of holding court in the western 
                        district of Washington.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 24, 2007

  Mr. Baird introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To provide for an additional place of holding court in the western 
                        district of Washington.

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

SECTION 1. ADDITIONAL PLACE OF HOLDING COURT.

    Section 128(b) of title 28, United States Code, is amended by 
striking ``and Tacoma'' and inserting ``Tacoma, and Vancouver''.
                                 <all>
```
**IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Supreme Court Cause No.**  **DA 23 -**  **0529**

__________________________________________________________________ CAITHNESS BEAVER CREEK , LLC ,

Petitioner/Appellant v. THE MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICE REGULATION, MONTANA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ,

Respondent/

Cross
- Appellant and NORTHWESTERN CORPORATION d/b/a NORTHWESTERN ENERGY ,

Respondent/Appellee and THE MONTANA CONSUMER COUNSEL ,

Respondent
-

Interven o r/Appellee **ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO VOLUNTARILY DISMISS**  **APPEAL** This matter comes before the Court on Appellant Caithness Beaver Creek, LLC’s and Cross
- Appellant Montana Department of Public Service Regulation, Montana Public Service Commission’s Joint Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss Appeal filed on December 14 th , 2023. Respondents/Appelle e s NorthWestern Energy and the Montana Consumer Counsel d o not object to the Motion. Upon consideration of the Joint Motion and good cause appearing, 12/15/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0529**IT IS HEREBY ORDERED** that the appeal and cross
- appeal in the above

matter are he reby **DISMISSED** , and the docket closed. Dated this ____ day of December, 2023.

________________________ Honorable Justice

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 15 2023
```

[House Document 104-182]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                     

        104th Congress, 2d Session - - - - - - - - - - - - House 
Document 104-182

              ONE REVISED DEFERRAL, TOTALING $91 MILLION,
 
 AND TWO PROPOSED RESCISSIONS OF BUDGETARY RESOURCES, TOTALING $15 MILLION

                               __________

                                MESSAGE

                                  FROM

                   THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

                              TRANSMITTING

     ONE REVISED DEFERRAL, TOTALING $91 MILLION, AND TWO PROPOSED 
RESCISSIONS OF BUDGETARY RESOURCES, TOTALING $15 MILLION, PURSUANT TO 2 
                            U.S.C. 683(A)(1)

    March 5, 1996.--Message and accompanying papers referred to the 
         Committee on Appropriations and ordered to be printed
To the Congress of the United States:
    In accordance with the Congressional Budget and Impoundment 
Control Act of 1974, I herewith report one revised deferral, 
totaling $91 million, and two proposed rescissions of budgetary 
resources, totaling $15 million.
    The deferral affects the Department of State U.S. emergency 
refugee and migration assistance fund. The rescission proposals 
affect the Department of Agriculture and the General Services 
Administration.
                                                William J. Clinton.
    The White House, March 5, 1996.

    
    

```