alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### CARTER *v.*HAWLEY, ET AL.

Penal laws — repeal by new enactment — to be construed strictly — error.

The passage of a law upon the same subject of a former one, increasing its penalties without an express repealing clause, is a virtual repeal of the first law'..

The repeal, of a penal law pending a suit under it, cuts off the right to recover.

Penal laws are to be construed strictly; doubts are to be resolved against exacting penalties. Costs are not to be recovered against a supervisor of roads.

Error to the Common Pleas. The suit below was brought *by*a *supervisor*of highways against the plaintiff in error, claiming a penalty for obstructing a road. When the suit was brought, the 20th section of the road law, 22 *O. L. 315,*was in force. While the suit was pending, the general assembly re-enacted the substance of this section in a new law, and increased the maximum penalty from 10 to 20 dollars, 30 O. *L.*18, without any express repealing clause. When the evidence for the plaintiff was closed on the trial below, the defendant moved for a non suit, which was ordered. The plaintiff refused to submit to it, and the jury under the instruction of the court, found a verdict for the defendant, on which the court rendered judgment for costs in his favor. Exception was taken to the instruction of the court, and sealed, on which this writ is brought.

*Boalt,*for the plaintiff in error.

*Andrews*and *Sturges,*contra.

By the Court.

When this judgment was rendered, the 66th section of the practice act of 1824, 22 *O. L.*63, was in force. That exonerates officers from payment of costs of suit prosecuted against them for acts done in pursuance of their official duties. Supervisors were bound by the road law, 22 vol. *315 to*sue. It was erroneous to give judgment against him for costs. This point has been expressly decided by the Court in Bank; *Bittle*v. *Hay,*5 O. *R.*270.

The passage of the new road law in 1832, 30 *O. L.*18, re-enacting this clause in substance, and increasing the penalty, we think virtually repeals the act under which the suit was brought. The judgment being rendered after the new law went into force, there was no foundation for it. The law being a penal one, must be construed strictly. Upon the question whether the law is repealed, we feel difficulty, and now experience some diversity of opinion. Indeed the question is not clear of all doubt; but if we err, it is better to err against the exaction of penalties, than in favor of their exaction.

The judgment is reversed with costs.
uNITED sTATEs oF AMERICA n EC E f\ l 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIOrr"'l _::,, ~ ,l 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. FEB 0 6 2017 

HEARING 

In the Matter of: 

Federal Express 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3306 

FAA Case No. 2015NM720020 

Judge J.E. Sullivan 

NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY 

To: Judge Sullivan and Respondent through his attorney of record herein: 

Notice is hereby given that counsel will be unavailable the following dates in 2017: Aprilll, 

12, 17, 18; May 22 through June 8, inclusive; July 11 through July 21, inclusive; September 21, 22; 

October 5,6,12,13, inclusive; for the complainant in the above-captioned case. It is respectfully 

requested that no hearings be scheduled during this period. 

David F. Shayne 

Attorney 

Enforcement Division, Western Team 

1601 Lind Avenue S.W. 

Renton, WA 98057 

Email: david.f.shayne@faa.gov 

Telephone: (425) 227-2007 (main) 

(425) 227-2165 (direct) 

(425) 227-1007 (fax) 

Please address all further correspondence regarding this matter to the above address. 

DAVID F. SHAYNE 

FAA Attorney 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that the foregoing Notice of Unavailability has been served this date, to the 

following: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbnr Wright Building, Suite 2W1 000 

800 Independence Ave., S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Fax 202-267-1293 

(facsimile and Certified Mail- Return Receipt Requested) 

Greg. G. Stofko 

Senior Attorney 

Regulatory Affairs 

1700 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 950 

Washington, DC 20006 

Email: Greg.stofko@fedex.com 

(email and Certified Mail- Retnrn Receipt Requested) 

Honorable J.E. Sullivan 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Bldg., Ground Floor, Room E11-310 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Fax: 202-366-7536 

(facsimile and Certified Mail- Retnrn Receipt Requested) 

Dated: FEB 0 2 2017 

,· -~rl 7'\":::·:-------·7 c"'-;:>7 

/£ff,#~ J <,~.--(>/) JeffKa e g 

Legal Technician 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

Enforcement Division- Western Team 

Renton, WA 

DAVID F. SHAYNE, FAA ATTORNEY 

TEL: (425) 227-2165; FAX: (425) 227-1007
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than October 27, 2009.

**A. Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia**                     (Michael E. Collins, Senior Vice President) 100 North 6th Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19105-1521:                

*1. Patriot Financial Partners, GP, L.P.; Patriot Financial Partners, L.P.; Patriot Financial Partners Parallel, L.P.; Patriot Financial Partners, GP, LLC; Patriot Financial Managers, L.P.; and Messrs. Ira M. Lubert; W. Kirk Wycoff; and James J. Lynch*, all of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; to acquire voting shares of Heritage Oakes Bancorp, and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of Heritage Bank, both in Paso Robles, California.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, October 7, 2009.

Robert deV. Frierson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. E9-24614 Filed 10-13-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
§ 608.838 Waiver requests and claims to the General Accounting Office. ( a ) The regulations contained in this subpart do not preclude an employee from requesting a waiver of an overpayment under 5 U.S.C. 5584 or 8346(b), 10 U.S.C. 2774, 32 U.S.C. 716, or in any way questioning the amount or validity of a debt by submitting a subsequent claim to the General Accounting Office in accordance with the procedures prescribed by the General Accounting Office.
( b ) These regulations also do not preclude an employee from requesting a waiver pursuant to other statutory provisions pertaining to the particular debts being collected.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondent

v. JAMSHID ASSADINIA, Petitioner : : : : : : : : : : : No. 795 MAL 2014 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 11th day of February, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED
.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET OF BACK YARD BURGERS AT JANUARY 1, 2000 AND THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR ENDED JANUARY 1, 2000 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U S DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-03-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-01-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           1,697
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      284<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        177
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,302
<PP&E>                                          13,211<F1>
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  18,340<F1>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,493
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            46
<OTHER-SE>                                       9,012
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    18,340
<SALES>                                         26,480
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                29,295
<CGS>                                            8,943
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   14,410
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,152
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   154
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 566
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (930)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (372)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (558)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (558)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.12)
<FN>
<F1> Asset value represents net amount.
</FN>


</TABLE>
#### Bridgman *v.*Doss, *et al.*

*Trover.*

(Decided December 18, 1913.

64 South. 173.)

*Appeal and, Error; Review; Finding of Court;*Presentation.— "Under section 5361, Code 1907, the conclusion and judgment of the court on the evidence, in a trial without a jury, are not reviewable unless the bill of exceptions shows what was the conclusion and judgment of the court on the evidence.

Appeal from Walker Law and Equity Court.

Heard before Hon. T. L. Sowell.

Trover by W. H. Bridgman against J. A. Doss and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

Bay & Cooner, for appellant.

Counsel discuss the assignments of error with citation of authority in support of their contention, but it is not deemed necessary to here set them out. They insist that the evidence shows that judgment should have been rendered in favor of plaintiff, and that defendants failed to make out a legal defense, and that the case should be reversed since there is no presumption in favor of the finding of the trial court. — Sec. 5361, Code 1907.

*616Gunn & Powell, and Bankhead & Bankhead, for appellee.

The case was tried by the court without a jury, and the bill of exceptions fails to show what the finding and conclusion of the trial court was, and hence, the assignment of error is not sustained, as they relate only to the conclusions and findings of the trial court on the evidence. — Sec. 5361, Code 1907.

WALKER, P; J. —

The only assignments of error made relate to the conclusion and judgment on the evidence of the trial court, sitting without a jury. These matters are not subject to review by this court, unless, presented for review by a bill of exceptions; and a bill of exceptions does not accomplish this result, unless it shows what the finding or conclusion and judgment of the trial court were. — Code, § 5361; *Williams, Adm’r, v. Woodward Iron Co.,*106 Ala. 254, 17 South. 517. The provision of the statute which dispenses with the necessity of reserving an exception to the finding of the trial court in order to present it for review does not affect the other requirement of the statute in reference to presenting by bill of exceptions the conclusion and judgment and judgment on the evidence which are sought to be *reviewed.*— Alosi *v. Birmingham Waterworks Co.,*1 Ala. App. 630, 55 South. 1029.

The bill of exceptions found in the record now before us sets out the evidence adduced on the trial, but fails to show that there was any conclusion reached or judgment given on that evidence. The result is that nothing which is subject to be reviewed here on appeal is assigned as error. It follows that the judgment must be affirmed.

Affirmed.
§ 269b.442 Duties and powers of the hearing officer. The hearing officer shall inquire fully into the facts as to whether the respondent has engaged or is engaging in an unfair labor practice as set forth in the charge or the amended charge. The hearing officer shall have authority, with respect to cases assigned to him, between the time he is designated and transfer of the case to the panel, subject to the rules and regulations in this subchapter, to: ( a ) Grant requests for attendance of witnesses and production of documents;
( b ) Rule upon petitions to quash requests made pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section;
( c ) Call, examine, and cross-examine parties and witnesses as may be required for a full and true disclosure of the facts and to introduce into the record documentary or other evidence;
( d ) Rule upon offers of proof and receive relevant evidence;
( e ) Take or cause depositions to be taken whenever the ends of justice would be served thereby;
( f ) Limit lines of questioning or testimony which are repetitive, cumulative, or irrelevant;
( g ) Regulate the course of the hearing and, if appropriate or necessary, exclude persons or counsel from the hearing for contemptuous conduct and strike all related testimony of witnesses refusing to answer any proper question;
( h ) Hold such prehearing conferences as may be necessary to expedite proceedings and hold such other conferences for the settlement or simplification of the issues by consent of the parties or upon his own motion;
( i ) Dispose of procedural requests, motions, or similar matters which shall be made part of the record of the proceeding, including motions referred to the hearing officer by the panel, and motions to amend pleadings, also to recommend dismissal of cases or portions thereof, and to order hearings reopened or, upon motion, consolidated prior to issuance of the hearing officer's report and recommendations;
( j ) Request the parties at any time during the hearing to state their respective positions concerning any issue in the case or theory in support thereof;
( k ) Require the parties, if necessary, to file written briefs in support of their positions;
( l ) Take any other action necessary under the foregoing and authorized by the rules and regulations in this subchapter.
In the event the hearing officer designated to conduct the hearing becomes unavailable, the panel may designate another hearing officer for the purpose of further hearing or issuance of a report and recommendation on the record as made, or both.
```

EXHIBIT 32.2

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Eldorado Artesian Springs,  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form  10-QSB/A for the period  ending  September 30, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report") I,
Cathleen Shoenfeld, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 USC SS. 1350,  as adopted  pursuant to SS. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

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

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

/s/ Cathleen Shoenfeld
----------------------
Chief Financial Officer

Dated: March 18, 2005
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000796529
<NAME> HANOVER LSE INCOME FUND FDS 9/30/96
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         295,777
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   13,274
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               309,051
<PP&E>                                       5,834,359
<DEPRECIATION>                               5,834,359
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 309,051
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          275,088
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                    25,570,053
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                (25,536,090)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   309,051
<SALES>                                        495,176
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               600,575
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   24,760
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               115,179
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                460,636
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            460,636
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   460,636
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     7.72
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3210 Received in Senate (RDS)]

  2d Session
                                H. R. 3210

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 29, 2004

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To authorize the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau 
 of Reclamation, to conduct a water resource feasibility study for the 
              Little Butte/Bear Creek Subbasins in Oregon.

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

SECTION 1. LITTLE BUTTE/BEAR CREEK SUBBASINS, OREGON, WATER RESOURCE 
              STUDY.

    (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Little Butte/
Bear Creek Subbasins Water Feasibility Act''.
    (b) Authorization.--The Secretary of the Interior, acting through 
the Bureau of Reclamation, may conduct the Water for Irrigation, 
Streams and the Economy Project water management feasibility study and 
environmental impact statement in accordance with the ``Memorandum of 
Agreement Between City of Medford and Bureau of Reclamation for the 
Water for Irrigation, Streams, and the Economy Project'', dated July 2, 
2004.
    (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be 
appropriated $500,000 to carry out this section.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 28, 2004.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
EXHIBIT 32.2

          CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
               PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
         (SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)


       In   connection  with  the  Quarterly  Report  of   Werner
Enterprises,  Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q  for  the  period
ending  June  30, 2009 (the "Report"), filed with the  Securities
and  Exchange  Commission,  I, John  J.  Steele,  Executive  Vice
President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of the  Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to  Section  906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that  to  the
best of my knowledge:

     1.   The  Report  fully  complies  with  the requirements of
          Section 13(a)  or 15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act
          of 1934; and

     2.   The  information  contained   in  the   Report   fairly
          presents,  in  all  material  respects,  the  financial
          condition and results of operations of the Company.



August 3, 2009                     /s/ John J. Steele
------------------------           ---------------------------------------
                                   John J. Steele
                                   Executive Vice President, Treasurer and
                                   Chief Financial Officer