alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 261b.2 Definitions. For purposes of this part, the following definitions shall apply: ( a ) The term *agency* means the Board and subdivisions thereof.
( b ) The term *subdivision* means any group composed of two or more Board members that is authorized to act on behalf of the Board.
( c ) The term *meeting* means the deliberations of at least the number of individual agency members required to take action on behalf of the agency where such deliberations determine or result in the joint conduct or disposition of official Board business, but does not include ( 1 ) deliberations required or permitted by subsections (d) or (e) of the Act, or
( 2 ) the conduct or disposition of official agency business by circulating written material to individual members.
( d ) The term *number of individual agency members required to take action on behalf of the agency* means in the case of the Board, a majority of its members except that ( 1 ) Board determination of the ratio of reserves against deposits under section 19(b) of the Federal Reserve Act requires the vote of four members,
( 2 ) Board action with respect to advances, discounts and rediscounts under sections 10(a), 11(b), and 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act requires the vote of five members and
( 3 ) Board action with respect to the percentage of individual member bank capital and surplus which may be represented by loans secured by stock and bond collateral under section 11(m) of the Federal Reserve Act requires the vote of six members. In the case of subdivisions of the Board, the term means the number of members constituting a quorum of the designated subdivision.
( e ) The term *member* means a member of the Board appointed under section 10 of the Federal Reserve Act. In the case of certain Board proceedings pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 1818(e), the Comptroller of the Currency is entitled to sit as a member of the Board and for these proceedings he shall be deemed a *member* for the purposes of this part. In the case of any subdivision of the Board, the term *member* means a member of the Board designated to serve on that subdivision.
( f ) The term *public observation* means that the public shall have the right to listen and observe but not to record any of the meetings by means of cameras or electronic or other recording devices unless approval in advance is obtained from the Public Affairs Office of the Board and shall not have the right to participate in the meeting, unless participation is provided for in the Board's Rules of Procedure.
( g ) The term *Federal agency* means an *agency* as defined in 5 U.S.C. 551(1).
( h ) *Committee* means the Action Committee established pursuant to 12 CFR 265.1a(c).
[42 FR 13297, Mar. 10, 1977, as amended at 43 FR 34481, Aug. 4, 1978]
§ 215.1 Authority, purpose, and scope. ( a ) *Authority.* This part is issued pursuant to sections 11(a), 22(g), and 22(h) of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 248(a), 375a, and 375b), 12 U.S.C. 1817(k), section 306 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (Pub. L. 102-242, 105 Stat. 2236 (1991)), section 11 of the Home Owners' Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1468), and section 312(b)(2)(A) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (12 U.S.C. 5412).
( b ) *Purpose and scope.* ( 1 ) This part governs any extension of credit made by a member bank to an executive officer, director, or principal shareholder of the member bank, of any company of which the member bank is a subsidiary, and of any other subsidiary of that company.
( 2 ) This part also applies to any extension of credit made by a member bank to a company controlled by such a person, or to a political or campaign committee that benefits or is controlled by such a person.
( 3 ) This part also implements the reporting requirements of 12 U.S.C. 1817(k) concerning extensions of credit by a member bank to its executive officers or principal shareholders (or to the related interests of such persons).
( 4 ) Extensions of credit made to an executive officer, director, or principal shareholder of a bank (or to a related interest of such person) by a correspondent bank also are subject to restrictions set forth in 12 U.S.C. 1972(2).
[Reg. O, 71 FR 71474, Dec. 11, 2006, as amended at 76 FR 56530, Sept. 13, 2011]
Order entered April 17, 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 18
- 00458
- CR LONZELL HUNTER, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 203rd Judic ial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F
- 1676537
- P



### O RDER Before the Court are appellant’s April 15, 2019 “Motion to Amend Appellant’s December 12, 2018 Brief” and “Third Motion to Supplement Reporter’s Record.” In his motions,
appe llant requests that this Court accept his amended brief tendered on April 15, 2019, as timely filed and “order the court reporter to supplement the reporter’s record with the transcript of the
pre - trial hearing in which Judge Teresa Hawthorne, presiding ju dge of the 203rd Judicial District Court, ruled on most of Appellant’s pre

- trial motions,” which hearing “likely took place on January 29, 2018 or January 31, 2018.”
We GRANT appellant’s motions and order the following relief.
We ORDER the amended brief t endered by appellant on April 15, 2019, timely filed as of the date of this order.We ORDER the court reporter to file, WITHIN FIFTEEN ( 15 ) DAYS OF THE DATE

OF THIS ORDER , a supplemental reporter’s record of the pre

- trial hearing on approximately
Januar y 29, 2018, or January 31, 2018, in which Judge Teresa Hawthorne ruled on pre

- trial motions of appellant. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to send a copy of this order to Lisabeth Kellett, official court reporter, 203rd Judicial District Court; to Felic ia Pitre, Dallas County District Clerk; and to counsel for all parties. /s/ LANA MYERS PRESIDING JUSTICE
Editorial Note on Part 220
Editorial Note: A copy of each form referred to in this part is filed as a part of the original document. Copies are available upon request to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System or any Federal Reserve Bank.

§ 220.105 Ninety-day rule in special cash account. ( a ) Section 220.4(c)(8) places a limitation on a special cash account if a security other than an exempted security has been purchased in the account and “without having been previously paid for in full by the customer * * * has been * * * delivered out to any broker or dealer.” The limitation is that during the succeeding 90 days the customer may not purchase a security in the account other than an exempted security unless funds sufficient for the purpose are held in the account. In other words, the privilege of delayed payment in such an account is withdrawn during the 90-day period.
( b ) The Board recently considered a question as to whether the following situation makes an account subject to the 90-day disqualification: A customer purchases registered security ABC in a special cash account. The broker executes the order in good faith as a bona fide cash transaction, expecting to obtain full cash payment promptly. The next day, the customer sells registered security XYZ in the account, promising to deposit it promptly in the account. The proceeds of the sale are equal to or greater than the cost of security ABC. After both sale and purchase have been made, the customer requests the broker to deliver security ABC to a different broker, to receive security XYZ from that broker at about the same time, and to settle with the other broker—such settlement to be made either by paying the cost of security XYZ to the other broker and receiving from him the cost of security ABC, or by merely settling any difference between these amounts.
( c ) The Board expressed the view that the account becomes subject to the 90-day disqualification in § 220.4(c)(8). In the instant case, unlike that described at 1940 Federal Reserve Bulletin 772, the security sold is not held in the account and is not to be deposited in it unconditionally. It is to be obtained only against the delivery to the other broker of the security which had been purchased. Hence payment can not be said to have been made prior to such delivery; the purchased security has been delivered out to a broker without previously having been paid for in full, and the account becomes subject to the 90-day disqualification.
[13 FR 2368, May 1, 1948]
#### § 27.6 Substitute monitoring program.

The recordkeeping provisions of § 27.3 constitute a substitute monitoring program as authorized under § 202.13(d) of Regulation B of the Federal Reserve Board (12 CFR 202.13(d)). A bank collecting the data in compliance with § 27.3 of this part will be in compliance with the requirements of § 202.13 of Regulation B.
#### § 1209.35 Partial summary disposition.

If the presiding officer determines that a party is entitled to summary disposition as to certain claims only, he shall defer submitting a recommended decision to the Director as to those claims. A hearing on the remaining issues must be ordered. Those claims for which the presiding officer has determined that summary disposition is warranted will be addressed in the recommended decision filed at the conclusion of the hearing.
AFS-16-9305-E 

Attachment 1 

The relief provided by Exemption No. 5487 is limited to the air carriers listed below:1 

Airlines for America 

Alaska Airlines, Inc. 

American Airlines, Inc. and/or US Airways, Inc. 

Atlas Air, Inc. 

Federal Express Corporation 

Hawaiian Airlines, Inc. 

JetBlue Airways Corp. 

Southwest Airlines Co. 

United Airlines, Inc 

United Parcel Service Co. 

Air Canada (Associate Member) 

Additional Air Carriers2

ABX AIR, Inc. 

Allegiant Air, LLC 

Ameristar Air Cargo, Inc. 

Delta Air Lines, Inc. 

Gulf and Caribbean Cargo, Inc.

Miami Air International, Inc. 

MN Sun Country 

Omni Air International, Inc. 

Spirit Airlines, Inc. 

Tantonduk Outfitters, LTD

 

1 Attachment amended February 13, 2017. 2

 Additional air carriers petitioned for exemption through the following FAA Docket Numbers: ABX AIR, Inc. 

(FAA-2017-0065); Allegiant Air, LLC (FAA-2016-7051); Ameristar Air Cargo, Inc. (FAA-2016-9162); Delta 

Air Lines, Inc. (FAA-2016-3659); Gulf and Caribbean Cargo, Inc. (FAA-2016-9368); Miami Air International, 

Inc. (FAA-2016-7050); MN Sun Country (FAA-2016-8935); Omni Air International, Inc. (FAA-2016-4705); 

Spirit Airlines, Inc. (FAA-2016-7056); Tantonduk Outfitters, LTD (FAA-2016-9106).
#### MARY ALEXANDER AND CATHERINE ALEXANDER, BY THEIR NEXT FRIEND, JOSEPH ALEXANDER, AND JOSEPH ALEXANDER AND NINA ALEXANDER, INDIVIDUALLY, AND PERTELLA CAMPBELL, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. STANDARD ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, A CORPORATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Argued October 7, 1939

Decided February 5, 1940.

For the plaintiffs-appellants, *Elias G. Willman.*

For the defendant-respondent, *Collins & Corbin.*

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Hague, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment of nonsuit granted in the Essex Circuit of the Supreme Court.

The action was to recover from the defendant insurance carrier the amount of several judgments already entered for the plaintiffs against Lawrence Clarkson on the theory that Clarkson’s operation of the Klein automobile was covered by the policy of insurance issued to Klein by the defendant insurance company.

The automobile was kept at a public garage owned by one Katowitz; when the injuries of the plaintiffs were sustained it was operated by the said Clarkson, an employe of Katowitz; the plaintiffs, pedestrians at the time, met with their injuries when a collision occurred between this and another car. See *337
      *Alexander et al.*v. *Marech,*13 *N. J. Mis. B.*425; 178 *Atl. Bep.*279; *affirmed,*116 *N. J. L.*246; 183 *Atl. Bep.*459.

The policy of insurance issued by the defendant below (respondent here) provided that “the term ‘Assured’ shall include the Named Assured [Klein] and also any other person while riding in or legally operating any such automobile and any other person, firm or corporation legally responsible for the operation of such automobile, provided (a) the operator of such automobile is using it with the permission of the Named Assured, or if the Named Assured is an individual, with the permission of an adult member of his household * * Clarkson was not operating the car with the permission of Klein, the Named Assured, or with the permission of an adult member of Klein’s household. Mrs. Marech, who had asked for the car at this particular time and to whom Clarkson was bringing it, was not a member of the household of Mr. Klein, her brother. Our conclusion of this phase of the policy disposes of the appeal. It will not, therefore, be necessary to consider whether Clarkson was an employe under subdivision “C” of the policy which provides:

> “The term assured shall not be held to include any public garage, automobile repair shop, automobile sales agency, automobile service station, or any agent or *employe*thereof.”

The action of the court in granting a nonsuit was, we find, entirely correct and the judgment will be affirmed.

*For affirmance*— The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Trenchard, Case, Donges, Heher, Perskie, Porter, Heteield, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, Rafferty, Hague, JJ. 14.

*For reversal*— None.
**Exhibit 32**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Trans WorldEntertainment Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the periodending October 29, 2005 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Robert J. Higgins, Chairmanand Chief Executive Officer of the Company and John J. Sullivan, Executive VicePresident and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of our knowledge:

 

(1)          The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)          The information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/Robert J. Higgins                 |                         | /s/John J. Sullivan |   |
|--------------------------------------|------------------------------|---------------------|--------|
| Chairman and Chief Executive Officer | Executive Vice President and |
|                                 | Chief Financial Officer      |
|                                 |                         |
| December 8, 2005                | December 8, 2005        |

 

1

----
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT (11)

                HEALTHDYNE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                   COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE
               (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE AMOUNTS)
                                 (UNAUDITED)



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                            Years Ended December 31,
                                            ------------------------
                                              1996     1995    1994
Primary                                       ----     ----    ----
-------
<S>                                         <C>       <C>     <C>
Net earnings                                $ 5,725    6,287   5,105
                                            =======   ======  ======
 Shares:
  Weighted average number of common shares
  outstanding                                12,577   12,369  12,340
 Shares issuable from assumed exercise of
  options and warrants                          342      325      61
                                            -------   ------  ------
  Weighted average number of common shares
  and common share equivalents               12,919   12,694  12,401
                                            =======   ======  ======
 Net earnings per common share
  and common share equivalent               $   .44      .50     .41
                                            =======   ======  ======
Fully Diluted
-------------

Net earnings                                $ 5,725    6,287   5,105
                                            =======   ======  ======
 Shares:
  Weighted average number of common
   shares outstanding as adjusted per
   primary computation above                 12,919   12,694  12,401
                                            -------   ------  ------

 Additional shares issuable from assumed
  exercise of options and warrants
  computed on a fully diluted basis              26       --      13
                                            -------   ------  ------
                                             12,945   12,694  12,414
                                            =======   ======  ======
 Net earnings per common share
  and common share equivalent               $   .44      .50     .41
                                            =======   ======  ======
</TABLE>
§ 143.12 Grandfathered authority. ( a ) A Federal savings bank formerly chartered or designated as a mutual savings bank under state law may exercise any authority it was authorized to exercise as a mutual savings bank under state law at the time of its conversion from a state mutual savings bank to a Federal or other state charter. Except to the extent such authority may be exercised by Federal savings associations not enjoying grandfathered rights hereunder, such authority may be exercised only to the degree authorized under state law at the time of such conversion. Unless otherwise determined by the OTS prior to July 21, 2011 or by the OCC an association, in the exercise of grandfathered authority, may continue to follow applicable state laws and regulations in effect at the time of such conversion.
( b ) A Federal savings association that acquires, or has acquired, a Federal savings bank by merger or consolidation may itself exercise any grandfathered rights enjoyed by the disappearing institution, whether such rights were obtained directly through conversion or through merger or consolidation. The extent of the grandfathered rights of a Federal savings association that disappeared prior to the effective date of this section shall be determined exclusively pursuant to this section.
( c ) This section shall not be construed to prevent the exercise by a Federal savings association enjoying grandfathered rights hereunder of authority that is available under the applicable state law only upon the occurrence of specific preconditions, such as the attainment of a particular future date or specified level of regulatory capital, which have not occurred at the time of conversion from a state mutual savings bank, provided they occur thereafter.
( d ) This section shall not be construed to permit the exercise of any particular authority on a more liberal basis than is allowable under the most liberal construction of either state or Federal law or regulation.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

THOMAS ANTHONY SCOTT,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 135 WAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 13th day of August, 2018

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
# C_2019378EN.01000801.xml

| 7.11.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 378/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.11.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 378/8

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 1 August 2019

in Case E-7/18

Fosen-Linjen AS, supported by the Confederation of Norwegian Enterprise (Næringslivets Hovedorganisasjon)

v

AtB AS

(Public procurement — Directive 89/665/EEC — Claim for compensation for the loss of profit — Gravity of the breach — Principles of equivalence and effectiveness)

(2019/C 378/07)

In Case E-7/18, Fosen-Linjen AS, supported by the Confederation of Norwegian Enterprise (Næringslivets Hovedorganisasjon) v AtB AS — REQUEST to the Court under Article 34 of the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice by the Supreme Court of Norway (Norges Høyesterett) concerning the interpretation of Council Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts, and in particular Article 2(1)(c) thereof, the Court, composed of Páll Hreinsson, President and Judge-Rapporteur, Bernd Hammermann and Ola Mestad (ad hoc), Judges, gave judgment on 1 August 2019, the operative part of which is as follows:

Article 2(1)(c) of Council Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts does not require that any breach of the rules governing public procurement in itself is sufficient to award damages for the loss of profit to persons harmed by an infringement.

---
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.2

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

     Ivex Packaging Corporation, a Delaware corporation, owns all of the
outstanding capital stock of IPC, Inc., a Delaware corporation, which owns all
of the outstanding capital stock of the following:

      1.   Packaging Products, Inc., a Delaware corporation

      2.   Ivex Corporation, an Ontario corporation, which owns all of
           the outstanding capital stock of:

                  (i)  M & R Plastics Inc., a Quebec corporation which owns all
                       of the outstanding capital stock of:

                              (a)  M&R Plastics Canada, Inc., an Ontario 
                                   corporation
                              (b)  2528-5347 Quebec Inc., a Quebec corporation

      3.   Kama of Illinois Corporation, a Delaware corporation

      4.   Valley Express Lines, Inc., a Delaware corporation

      5.   Ivex Paper Mill Corporation, a Delaware corporation

      6.   IPMC Holding Corporation, a Delaware corporation, which owns
           all of the outstanding capital stock of:

                  (i)  IPMC, Inc., a Delaware corporation

      7.   Trio Products, Inc., a Delaware corporation

      8.   Ivex Holdings, Ltd., a corporation organized under the laws
           of England and Wales, which owns all of the outstanding capital
           stock of:

                  (i)  Kama Europe Limited, a corporation
                       organized under the laws of England and Wales

      9.   CFI Industries, Inc., a Delaware corporation, which owns all
           of the outstanding capital stock of:

                  (i)  Plastofilm Industries, Inc., a Delaware corporation
                  (ii) CFI Recycling, Inc., a Delaware corporation
                  (iii)Plastofilm Limited, a Northern Ireland corporation