alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Mary Jones, Respondent, *v.*Julius Bohm, Appellant.

(City Court of New York, General Term,

October, 1900.)

Demurrer — Will not lie to matter pleaded in mitigation of damages — Code C. P., § 494.

A demurrer will not lie to matter pleaded in an answer in mitigation of damages, as, under the Code of Civil Procedure, § 494, only matter pleaded by way of counterclaim or defense is demurrable.

Appeal from an interlocutory judgment sustaining a demurrer and from an order denying a motion to compel the plaintiff to accept a proposed amended answer.

James C. De La Mare, for appellant.

Arthur J. Stern (Myer J. Stein, of counsel), for respondent.

*639Conlan, J.

The record brings up for review two appeals: One, from an interlocutory judgment sustaining a demurrer to matter pleaded in the answer in mitigation of damages only, and the other, from an order denying the defendant’s motion to compel the plaintiff to accept a proposed amended answer.

As to the first appeal, we are of the opinion that the demurrer should have been overruled. The matter demurred to was pleaded in mitigation of damages and was, therefore, not the subject of a demurrer. Under section 494 of the Code of Civil Procedure only matter pleaded by way of counterclaim or defense, in an answer, can be demurred to. The order sustaining the demurrer will be overruled and the interlocutory judgment vacated. Costs of the appeal to appellant.

As to the second appeal, we agree with the order made. The defendant’s time to serve his proposed amended answer had clearly expired. The order should be affirmed, with costs to the respondent.

Hascall, J., concurs.

Order affirmed, with costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          16,462
<SECURITIES>                                    58,490
<RECEIVABLES>                                   58,496
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,100
<INVENTORY>                                     41,462
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               180,822
<PP&E>                                           7,506
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,870
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 198,830
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           57,208
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           215
<OTHER-SE>                                     141,407
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   198,830
<SALES>                                        927,895
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               927,895
<CGS>                                          805,413
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  805,413
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                68,879
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  14
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 56,884
<INCOME-TAX>                                    22,484
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             34,400
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    34,400
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
THEODIST TYRONE 

RICHARDSON,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-5335

_____________________________/

Opinion filed December 31, 2015.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

James H. Daniel, Judge.

Teresa J. Sopp, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Trisha Meggs Pate, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of first-degree murder, second-degree murder,

attempted first-degree murder, six counts of attempted second-degree murder, and 

shooting or throwing deadly missiles into occupied dwellings, all stemming from a 

shoot-out at an apartment complex. He raises two issues on appeal, we affirm as to 

the first issue without further comment. In the second issue, Appellant contends

that the trial court erred when instructing the jury as to self-defense for three 
2

separate reasons. We reach only his argument that the court erred in giving the 

“aggressor” instruction pursuant to section 776.041, Florida Statutes (2011), which 

included the requirement that Appellant was to have “exhausted every reasonable 

means to escape the danger,” in direct conflict with the statutory right to stand

one’s ground then in effect. On this point, we agree with Appellant that it is 

necessary to reverse his convictions and remand for a new trial based on our 

precedent in Floyd v. State, 151 So. 3d 452 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014), review granted, 

State v. Floyd, 168 So. 3d 229 (Fla. Dec. 16, 2014); Ross v. State, 157 So. 3d 406 

(Fla. 1st DCA 2015); and Swearingden v. State, 2015 WL 2189750 (Fla. 1st DCA 

May 12, 2015). 

REVERSED and REMANDED for a new trial.

WETHERELL, ROWE, and RAY, JJ., CONCUR.
# C_2022326EN.01000101.xml

| 29.8.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 326/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.8.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/1

---

Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union

(2022/C 326/01)

Last publication

OJ C 318, 22.8.2022

Past publications

OJ C 311, 16.8.2022

OJ C 303, 8.8.2022

OJ C 294, 1.8.2022

OJ C 284, 25.7.2022

OJ C 276, 18.7.2022

OJ C 266, 11.7.2022

These texts are available on:

EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---
Home2021 Certificates of Competency for Nominees to be Chiefs of Mission...Salazar, Ken – United Mexican States – June 2021

# 									Salazar, Ken – United Mexican States – June 2021							

Certificate of Competency

June 25, 2021

REPORT FOR THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

UNITED STATES SENATE

SUBJECT: 		Ambassadorial Nomination:  Certificate of			Demonstrated Competence — Foreign Service			Act, Section 304(a)(4)

POST:		United Mexican States

CANDIDATE:	Ken Salazar

Ken Salazar has served as U.S. Secretary of the Interior, Colorado U.S. Senator, and Colorado Attorney General. Secretary Salazar is a partner at WilmerHale, an American law firm and the founder of the firm’s Denver office.  Salazar represents clients on energy, environment, natural resources and Native American matters.  In 1998, Salazar was elected as Colorado Attorney General and became the first Latino ever elected to statewide office in Colorado.  He was reelected as Attorney General in 2002.  In 2004, Salazar was elected to the U.S. Senate for Colorado becoming the first Latino democrat to be elected to the United States Senate since 1972.  During the Obama Administration, he served as Secretary of the Interior, where he had a lead role on energy and climate, and the nation’s conservation agenda.  Mr. Salazar has devoted much of his career to public service.  His extensive and substantive experience both at the state and federal level, coupled with his management experience and demonstrated ability to lead a large U.S. government department, makes him a well-qualified candidate to be the U.S. Ambassador to the United Mexican States.

 A native of Colorado, Salazar is a fifth-generation rancher in Colorado’s San Luis Valley.  Salazar has a B.S. from Colorado College and a J.D. from the University of Michigan.  He also has honorary degrees from the Colorado School of Mines, The University of Massachusetts, The Colorado School of Law, the University of Denver School of Law, and Colorado College.   He speaks Spanish.

Back to Top
§ 204.9 Emergency reserve requirement. ( a ) *Finding by Board.* The Board may impose, after consulting with the appropriate committees of Congress, additional reserve requirements on depository institutions at any ratio on any liability upon a finding by at least five members of the Board that extraordinary circumstances require such action.
( b ) *Term.* Any action taken under this section shall be valid for a period not exceeding 180 days, and may be extended for further periods of up to 180 days each by affirmative action of at least five members of the Board for each extension.
( c ) *Reports to Congress.* The Board shall transmit promptly to Congress a report of any exercise of its authority under this paragraph and the reasons for the exercise of authority.
( d ) *Reserve requirements.* At present, there are no emergency reserve requirements imposed under this section.
[45 FR 56018, Aug. 22, 1980. Redesignated at 74 FR 25638, May 29, 2009]
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 192 (Tuesday, October 6, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 51322]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-24198]


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

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD


Sunshine Act Meeting

Time and Date:  9:30 a.m., Wednesday, October 14, 2009.

Place:  NTSB Conference Center, 429 L'Enfant Plaza SW., Washington, DC 
20594.

Status:  The Two items are open to the public.

Matters To Be Considered: 
8152--Aircraft Accident Report--Loss of Control and Impact with Water, 
Marlin Air Cessna Citation 550, N550BP, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, June 4, 
2007
7979A--Pipeline Accident Report--Rupture of Hazardous Liquid Pipeline 
with Release and Ignition of Propane near Carmichael, Mississippi, on 
November 1, 2007

News Media Contact:  Telephone: (202) 314-6100.
    The press and public may enter the NTSB Conference Center one hour 
prior to the meeting for setup and seating.
    Individuals requesting specific accommodations should contact 
Rochelle Hall at (202) 314-6305 by Friday, October 9, 2009.
    The public may view the meeting via a live or archived webcast by 
accessing a link under ``News & Events'' on the NTSB home page at 
http://www.ntsb.gov.

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT:  Candi Bing, (202) 314-6403.

    Dated: Friday, October 2, 2009
Candi Bing,
Federal Register Alternate Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. E9-24198 Filed 10-2-09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 7533-01-P
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 15.1

     Deloitte & Touche LLP
     333 Clay Street
     Suite 2300
     Houston, Texas 77002

     May 11, 1999

     Sterling Chemicals Holdings, Inc.
     1200 Smith Street, Suite 1900
     Houston, Texas 77094

     We have made a review, in accordance with standards established by the
     American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, of the unaudited
     interim financial information of Sterling Chemicals Holdings, Inc. and
     subsidiaries for the three and six month periods ended March 31, 1999 and
     1998, as indicated in our report dated May 11, 1999; because we did not
     perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on that information.

     We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your
     Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1999, is
     incorporated by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-30917 for
     Sterling Chemicals Holdings, Inc. on Form S-3 and in Registration Statement
     No. 333-52795 for Sterling Chemicals Holdings, Inc. on Form S-8.

     We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c)
     under the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the
     Registration Statements prepared or certified by an accountant or a report
     prepared or certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and
     11 of that Act.



     DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION FROM THE REGISTRANT'S
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE SIX MONTH PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996,
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         182,226
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,495,342
<ALLOWANCES>                                   374,000
<INVENTORY>                                 27,572,910
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            35,497,930
<PP&E>                                      30,921,435
<DEPRECIATION>                              16,436,931
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              50,450,248
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       27,023,470
<BONDS>                                      1,473,477
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        37,289
<OTHER-SE>                                  17,660,944
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                50,450,248
<SALES>                                     88,074,972
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            88,074,972
<CGS>                                       60,772,656
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               60,772,656
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            25,540,818
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             777,962
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,004,394
<INCOME-TAX>                                   475,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            529,394
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   529,394
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .14
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.5


 


AMERICAN EDUCATION CENTER INC.


 


17 Battery Place, Suite 300


New York, NY, 10004


(212) 825-0437


  


New Oriental Education &Technology Group, Guangzhou Branch


65 Wenming Rd, Yuexiu, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China


Erdi Zhao


Branch Representative


Date: April 28, 2015


 


Dear Mr. Zhao:


 


I regret to inform
you that the American Education Center Inc. (the "Company") has determined to terminate the Implementation Agreement
on the State University of New York (SUNY) 1+3 Program (the "Consulting Agreement") entered into between American Education
Center Inc. and Guangzhou Branch of New Oriental Education &Technology Group (the "New Oriental Guangzhou Branch")
dated August 13, 2014, pursuant to Section 7 "termination clause" of the Consulting Agreement.


 


The Board of the Company
has determined that it is best for the Company to terminate the consulting agreement due to the failure of New Oriental Guangzhou
Branch to recruit a sufficient number of students to enroll in the SUNY 1+3 program and its failure to generate revenue within
certain period of time and its failure to obey profit sharing agreement between the Company and Guangzhou New Oriental.


 


In addition, the Company
would like to clarify that, pursuant to the Consulting Agreement, the Company agreed to serve as consultant to New Oriental Guangzhou
Branch to advise the Guangzhou Branch to implement SUNY 1+3 program in China and study credit transfer to SUNY in the States. The
Company was not serving as consultant to SUNY.


 


This letter serves
as a termination notice to the Consulting Agreement effective immediately.


 


	 	Sincerely,
	 	 
	 	/s/ Hinman Au	 
	 	Hinman Au
	 	Chief Executive Officer
	 	American Education Center, Inc.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001014669
<NAME> STERLING CHEMICALS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           8,160
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  106,849
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,147)
<INVENTORY>                                     79,189
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               212,062
<PP&E>                                         753,137
<DEPRECIATION>                               (310,425)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 751,255
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          130,366
<BONDS>                                        744,199
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (230,322)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   751,255
<SALES>                                        171,929
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               171,929
<CGS>                                          155,212
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  155,212
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,832
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              20,640
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (15,755)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (5,781)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (9,974)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (9,974)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
§ 19.206 Definitions. For purposes of this subpart: ( a ) *Adversary adjudication* means an adjudication under 5 U.S.C. 554 in which the position of the OCC is represented by Enforcement Counsel.
( b ) *Final disposition* means the date on which a decision or order disposing of the merits of a proceeding or any other complete resolution of the proceeding, such as a settlement or voluntary dismissal, becomes final and unappealable both within the OCC and to the courts.
( c ) *Party* means a party, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 551(3), that is: ( 1 ) An individual whose net worth did not exceed $2,000,000 at the time the adversary adjudication was initiated; or
( 2 ) Any owner of an unincorporated business, or any partnership, corporation, association, unit of local government, or organization, the net worth of which did not exceed $7,000,000 at the time the adversary adjudication was initiated, and which had not more than 500 employees at the time the adversary adjudication was initiated; except that an organization described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the Code) exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of the Code, or a cooperative association as defined in section 15(a) of the Agricultural Marketing Act, may be a party regardless of the net worth of the organization or cooperative association. The net worth and number of employees of the applicant and any of its affiliates must be aggregated when determining the applicability of this paragraph (c).
( d ) *Position of the OCC* means, in addition to the position taken by the OCC in the adversary adjudication, the action or failure to act by the OCC upon which the adversary adjudication is based, except that fees and other expenses may not be awarded to a party for any portion of the adversary adjudication in which the party has unreasonably protracted the proceedings.
( e ) *Presiding officer* means the official, whether the official is designated as an ALJ or otherwise, that presided over the adversary adjudication or the official that presides over an EAJA proceeding.
<PAGE>   1
                                  EXHIBIT 4(c)
                                  ------------

          Amended Articles of Incorporation, as amended, of the Registrant
(incorporated by reference to Registration Statement No. 333-51613, filed with
the Commission on May 1, 1998; see Exhibit 4(c) therein)
RE: Meeting tomorrow on NO2 monitoring

King, Heidi R. to: Lydia Wegman 01/19/2010 10:16 AM

Cc: Karen Martin, Nealson Watkins, Richard Wayland, Scott Jenkins, 

Tricia Crabtree

For 20 minutes -- 11 would be fine

-----Original Message-----

From: Wegman.Lydia@epamail.epa.gov [mailto:Wegman.Lydia@epamail.epa.gov]

Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 10:13 AM

To: King, Heidi R.

Cc: Martin.Karen@epamail.epa.gov; Watkins.Nealson@epamail.epa.gov;

Wayland.Richard@epamail.epa.gov; Jenkins.Scott@epamail.epa.gov;

Crabtree.Tricia@epamail.epa.gov

Subject: RE: Meeting tomorrow on NO2 monitoring

Is there any chance that we could meet at 11?

 From: "King, Heidi R." <Heidi_R._King@omb.eop.gov>

 To: Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

 Cc: Richard Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Nealson

Watkins/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Scott 

 Jenkins/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Karen Martin/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA,

Tricia 

 Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

 Date: 01/19/2010 10:09 AM

 Subject: RE: Meeting tomorrow on NO2 monitoring

I'm on another call, but available at 10:30. Would that work?

-----Original Message-----

From: Wegman.Lydia@epamail.epa.gov [mailto:Wegman.Lydia@epamail.epa.gov]

Sent: Monday, January 18, 2010 12:17 PM
To: King, Heidi R.

Cc: Wayland.Richard@epamail.epa.gov; Nealson Watkins; Scott Jenkins;

Karen Martin; Tricia Crabtree

Subject: Meeting tomorrow on NO2 monitoring

Heidi,

I hope you're feeling better and are having a good weekend.

Following the management discussion today, we'd like to meet with you

tomorrow, rather than wait until Wednesday, to discuss the issue of how

many near-road monitors we will require in the NO2 rule. Do you have

time to talk tomorrow after 10 AM? Please let me know.

Lydia