alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Edith S. Youngs *v.*Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Norwalk.

Maltbie, C. J., Aveby, Buowisr, Jenstings and Ells, Js.

Argued December 6, 1940

decided January 10, 1941.

*John Keogh, Jr.,*with whom, on the brief, was *G. F. McKendry,*for the appellant (plaintiff).

*Bernard A. Nevas,*with whom, on the brief, was *Leo Nevas,*for the appellee (defendant).

Per Curiam.

On November 3, 1938, the Gulf Oil Corporation obtained a certificate of approval for the erection of a gasoline service station on a vacant lot on Van Zandt Street in Norwalk. Efforts by other applicants to secure a permit for this location have been continuous since 1935. The first application was denied. The second was granted by the board but this action was reversed on appeal to the Superior Court. The plaintiff has filed numerous assignments of error in her appeal from the granting of the present application but since one of them is decisive of the case, the discussion is confined to the question which it raises. *716This question concerns the effect of § VII of the Nor-walk zoning ordinance. It reads in part as follows:

> “Except with the permission of the Board of Appeals under appropriate conditions and safeguards, no permit shall be issued for the erection of a . . . gas filling station ... in any business . . . zone, if any part of the lot or plot in question is situated within a distance of two hundred feet [of]:

> *((*

> “3. A church with a meeting capacity of 300 persons.”

The application was for the erection of a gas filling station in a business zone within two hundred feet of a church with a meeting capacity of three hundred persons. The pertinent inquiry therefore is whether it was granted “under appropriate conditions and safeguards.” None appear in the vote granting the application. The records of the board show only that, after a hearing, a motion that the petition be granted was made, seconded and passed. As far as the exhibits disclose, the application simply asked for a license to sell gasoline at the location in question and specified that four pumps would be used. While plans of the proposed station were submitted, they were not referred to in either the application or vote. The applicant was in no way bound to construct the station in accordance with them. It follows that neither the vote of the board alone nor the vote considered in connection with the application contained any conditions or safeguards whatever, to say nothing of appropriate ones. The failure of the board to follow the express mandate of the ordinance rendered its action voidable on appeal.

There is error and the case is remanded with direction to sustain the appeal.
§ 264b.4 Gifts of minimal value. ( a ) Board employees may accept and retain a gift of minimal value tendered and received as a souvenir or mark of courtesy. If more than one tangible gift is presented at or marks an event, the value of all such gifts must not exceed “minimal value.” If tangible gifts are presented at or mark separate events, their value must not exceed “minimal value” for each event, but may exceed “minimal value” for all events, even if the events occur on the same day.
( b ) Board employees may determine at the time a gift is offered whether it is of minimal value, or they may submit an accepted gift as soon as practicable to the Office of the Secretary for valuation.
( c ) Disagreements over whether a gift is of minimal value will be resolved by an independent appraisal under procedures established by the Office of the Secretary.
§ 303.204 Applications for acquisitions, branching, and new lines of business. ( a ) *Scope.* ( 1 ) Any insured State nonmember bank, any insured State savings association, and any insured branch of a foreign bank which is undercapitalized or significantly undercapitalized, and any insured depository institution which is critically undercapitalized, shall submit an application to engage in acquisitions, branching or new lines of business.
( 2 ) A new line of business will include any new activity exercised which, although it may be permissible, has not been exercised by the institution.
( b ) *Content of filing.* Applications shall describe the proposal, state the date the institution's capital restoration plan was accepted by its primary Federal regulator, describe the institution's status in implementing the plan, and explain how the proposed action is consistent with and will further the achievement of the plan or otherwise further the purposes of section 38 of the FDI Act. If the FDIC is not the applicant's primary Federal regulator, the application also should state whether approval has been requested from the applicant's primary Federal regulator, the date of such request and the disposition of the request, if any. If the proposed action also requires applications pursuant to section 18 (c) or (d) of the FDI Act (mergers and branches) (12 U.S.C. 1828 (c) or (d)), such applications should be filed concurrently with, or made a part of, the application filed pursuant to section 38 of the FDI Act (12 U.S.C. 1831 *o*).
[86 FR 8097, Feb. 3, 2021]
EXHIBIT
31.2




CERTIFICATION




I, Peter
Frugone, certify that:




1. I have
reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Arrow Resources Development,
Inc.;




2. Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
with respect to the period covered by this report;




3. Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report;




4. The
registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:




a)
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;




b)
Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and




c)
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal
quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and




5. The
registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):




a) All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and




(b) Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls over financial
reporting.




Date: November
19, 2009.




/s/ Peter
Frugone





Principal
Accounting Officer
§ 228.17 Retail lending assessment areas. ( a ) *In general.* ( 1 ) Based upon the criteria described in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, a large bank must delineate retail lending assessment areas within which the Board evaluates the bank's record of helping to meet the credit needs of its entire community pursuant to § 228.22.
( 2 ) A large bank is not required to delineate retail lending assessment areas for a particular calendar year if, in the prior two calendar years, the large bank originated or purchased within its facility-based assessment areas more than 80 percent of its home mortgage loans, multifamily loans, small business loans, small farm loans, and automobile loans if automobile loans are a product line for the large bank as described in paragraph II.a.1 of appendix A to this part.
( 3 ) If, in a retail lending assessment area delineated pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section, the large bank did not originate or purchase any reported loans in any of the product lines that formed the basis of the retail lending assessment area delineation pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) or (2) of this section, the Board will not consider the retail lending assessment area to have been delineated for that calendar year.
( b ) *Geographic requirements for retail lending assessment areas.* ( 1 ) A large bank's retail lending assessment area must consist of either: ( i ) The entirety of a single MSA (using the MSA boundaries that were in effect as of January 1 of the calendar year in which the delineation applies), excluding any counties inside the large bank's facility-based assessment areas; or
( ii ) All of the counties in the nonmetropolitan area of a State (using the MSA boundaries that were in effect as of January 1 of the calendar year in which the delineation applies), excluding: ( A ) Any counties included in the large bank's facility-based assessment areas; and
( B ) Any counties in which the large bank did not originate any closed-end home mortgage loans or small business loans that are reported loans during that calendar year.
( 2 ) A retail lending assessment area may not extend beyond a State boundary unless the retail lending assessment area consists of counties in a multistate MSA.
( c ) *Delineation of retail lending assessment areas.* Subject to the geographic requirements in paragraph (b) of this section, a large bank must delineate, for a particular calendar year, a retail lending assessment area in any MSA or in the nonmetropolitan area of any State in which it originated: ( 1 ) At least 150 closed-end home mortgage loans that are reported loans in each year of the prior two calendar years; or
( 2 ) At least 400 small business loans that are reported loans in each year of the prior two calendar years.
( d ) *Use of retail lending assessment areas.* The Board uses the retail lending assessment areas delineated by a large bank in its evaluation of the bank's closed-end home mortgage lending and small business lending performance unless the Board determines that the retail lending assessment areas do not comply with the requirements of this section.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF EDISON CONTROL CORPORATION AS OF AND
FOR THE PERIOD ENDING OCTOBER 31, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JAN-31-2001
<PERIOD-END>                                   OCT-31-2000
<CASH>                                         812,589
<SECURITIES>                                   845,067
<RECEIVABLES>                                  3,747,156
<ALLOWANCES>                                   343,862
<INVENTORY>                                    6,335,148
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               12,151,743
<PP&E>                                         10,575,074
<DEPRECIATION>                                 3,091,987
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 29,019,724
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          3,347,880
<BONDS>                                        5,747,063
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       23,513
<OTHER-SE>                                     19,818,551
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   29,019,724
<SALES>                                        18,895,533
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               18,895,533
<CGS>                                          11,507,861
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  3,805,871
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               520,840
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               116,472
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             438,055
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                3,061,321
<INCOME-TAX>                                   1,213,731
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            1,847,590
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (105,077)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   1,742,513
<EPS-BASIC>                                    .74
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .60



</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONDENSENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS
OF OPERATIONS FOUND ON PAGES 3, 4 AND 5 OF THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-QSB FOR THE
QUARTER ENDED AUGUST 31, 1997, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1997
<CASH>                                         319,240
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  280,250
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (4,585)
<INVENTORY>                                        222
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               612,105
<PP&E>                                         156,930
<DEPRECIATION>                               (109,398)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 949,801
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,894,999
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,155
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,140,529
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   949,801
<SALES>                                        132,583
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               132,583
<CGS>                                           61,827
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   61,827
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                86,280
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 374
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (19,019)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (537,600)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            518,581
<DISCONTINUED>                                 854,477
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,373,058
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.22
        

</TABLE>
§ 19.171 Deposition subpoenas. ( a ) *Issuance.* At the request of a party, the ALJ may issue a subpoena requiring the attendance of a witness at a discovery deposition under § 19.170. The attendance of a witness may be required from any place in any State, territory, or possession of the United States or the District of Columbia or as otherwise permitted by law.
( b ) *Service* — ( 1 ) *Methods of service.* The party requesting the subpoena must serve it on the person named therein, or on that person's counsel, by any of the methods identified in § 19.11(d).
( 2 ) *Proof of service.* The party serving the subpoena must file proof of service with the ALJ, unless the ALJ issues an order indicating the filing of proof of service is not required.
( c ) *Motion to quash.* A person named in a subpoena, or any party, may file a motion to quash or modify the subpoena. A statement of the reasons for the motion must accompany it and a copy of the motion must be served on the party that requested the subpoena. The motion must be made prior to the time for compliance specified in the subpoena and not more than ten days after the date of service of the subpoena, or if the subpoena is served within 15 days of the hearing, within five days after the date of service.
( d ) *Enforcement of deposition subpoena.* Enforcement of a deposition subpoena must be in accordance with the procedures of § 19.27(d).
# C_2016386EN.01001301.xml

| 20.10.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 386/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.10.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 386/13

---

State aid — Decision to raise no objections

(2016/C 386/08)

The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following state aid measure:

| Date of adoption of the decision | : | 27 April 2016 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Case number | : | 78783 |
| Decision No | : | 085/16/COL |
| EFTA State | : | Norway |
| Title | : | Tax refund scheme for employing seafarers |
| Legal basis | : | Regulation 2016-02-26-204 on refunds for employing seafarers |
| Type of measure | : | Scheme |
| Objective | : | Maritime transport |
| Form of aid | : | Tax and social security refunds |
| Budget | : | For March-December 2016, NOK 1 892 million. In the following years the scheme will be applicable for the full 12 months of the year. |
| Duration | : | 10 years from 1 March 2016 to 28 February 2026 |
| Economic sectors | : | Maritime transport |
| Name and address of the granting authority | : | Norwegian Maritime Authority |
| PO Box 2222 |
| N-5509 Haugesund |
| NORWAY |

Date of adoption of the decision

Date of adoption of the decision

:

27 April 2016

Case number

Case number

:

78783

Decision No

Decision No

:

085/16/COL

EFTA State

EFTA State

:

Norway

Title

Title

:

Tax refund scheme for employing seafarers

Legal basis

Legal basis

:

Regulation 2016-02-26-204 on refunds for employing seafarers

Type of measure

Type of measure

:

Scheme

Objective

Objective

:

Maritime transport

Form of aid

Form of aid

:

Tax and social security refunds

Budget

Budget

:

For March-December 2016, NOK 1 892 million. In the following years the scheme will be applicable for the full 12 months of the year.

Duration

Duration

:

10 years from 1 March 2016 to 28 February 2026

Economic sectors

Economic sectors

:

Maritime transport

Name and address of the granting authority

Name and address of the granting authority

:

Norwegian Maritime Authority

PO Box 2222

N-5509 Haugesund

NORWAY

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website:

http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/

---
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-126369, 333-55732, 333-28701, and 333-03631 on Form S-8 of our reports dated
March 13, 2006, relating to the consolidated financial statements of Riviera
Holdings Corporation and management's report on the effectiveness of internal
control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A
of Riviera Holding Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2005.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP


Las Vegas, Nevada
April 25, 2006
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Willis J. Johnson, hereby certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Copart, Inc. on Form 10-Kfor the fiscal year ended July 31, 2007 fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 and that, based on my knowledge, the information containedin this Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and result of operations of Copart, Inc.
| /s/ WILLIS  J. JOHNSON  |   |   |
|-------------------------|--------|--------|
| Willis J. Johnson       |   |   |
| Chief Executive Officer |   |   |

 

Date: September 28,2007

A signedoriginal of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to Copart, Inc. and will be retained by Copart, Inc. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The foregoingcertification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionpursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being filed forpurposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company,whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any generalincorporation language in such filing.

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6362

In Re: EL SHADDAI MASADA,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

(CA-01-2536-9-17BG)

Submitted: April 25, 2002 Decided: May 8, 2002

Before WILLIAMS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

El Shaddai Masada, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

El Shaddai Masada filed this mandamus petition seeking to

compel the district court to reinstate two dismissed defendants in

his civil action. Mandamus is a drastic remedy only to be used in

extraordinary circumstances. In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826-27

(4th Cir. 1987). Mandamus relief is available only when the

petitioner has a clear and indisputable right to the relief sought

and there are no other adequate means for obtaining the requested

relief. Allied Chem. Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc., 449 U.S. 33, 35

(1980); Beard, 811 F.2d at 826. Mandamus is not a substitute for

appeal. In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir.

1979). Because Masada has not demonstrated both a clear right to

relief and the absence of other means to obtain the relief, we deny

the petition.

We grant Masada’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis. We

deny Masada’s motion for recusal of the magistrate judge, for

sanctions, and to consolidate this case with another mandamus

petition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED