alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### C. D. Moore and James Baker, *Plaintiffs in Error,*v. Seaboard Air Line Railway Company, a Corporation, *Defendant in Error.*

Decison Filed February 23, 1923.

A Writ of Error to the Circuit Court for Manatee County; M. A. McMullen, Judge.

*Bradley*& *Bradley, for*Plaintiffs in Error;

*John B. Singletary,*for Defendant in Error.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and arguments of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the court that there is no error in the said judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the court that the said judgment of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby, affirmed.

All concur.
#### Patrick M. MAYNARD *v.*STATE of Arkansas

CR 73-61

496 S.W. 2d 427

Opinion delivered July 9, 1973

*William C. McArthur,*for appellant.

*Jim Guy Tucker,*Atty. Gen., by: *Charles A. Banks,*Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Lyle Brown, Justice.

Appellant was convicted of robbery and on appeal the conviction was affirmed. Thereafter we granted appellant permission to proceed in the trial court under Rule I. That hearing was restricted to two points, (1) that he was denied compulsory process for his witnesses, and (2) that he was refused the right to testify.

Before discussing the two recited points, we will dispose of appellant’s charge that the Rule I hearing did not meet the basic requirements of due process because his subpoenaed witnesses were unduly restricted and the judge conducting the hearing was prejudiced against ap*846pellant. Neither allegation has merit. Appellant subpoenaed a host of witnesses, so many as to cause the court to inquire of the nature of their testimony. Appellant replied that the witnesses would testify that they were present at the trial and heard certain remarks by the court and his counsel which would establish that the court was prejudiced against him at the time. In the first place, that allegation was not included in the two items which this court enumerated to be developed at the Rule I hearing. The court therefore did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant the right to call the witnesses. In the second place, the court categorically denied having made the statement attributed to him, and the trial judge was corroborated by appellant’s trial counsel.

Appellant’s next complaint is that he was denied compulsory process for his trial witnesses. After hearing the testimony of two witnesses called by appellant, a court clerk and a deputy sheriff, appellant’s counsel agreed that insofar as the records disclosed, there were no requests for defense witnesses which were refused. Attorney Floyd Lofton, called by appellant as a witness at the Rule I hearing, testified unequivocally that appellant was not denied any witness. Mr. Lofton represented appellant in the trial of the case.

Nor do we find any merit in petitioner’s allegation that he was refused the right to testify at the trial. Attorney Lofton testified “that Mr. Maynard expressly in writing approved of every step arid phase of the trial as it was conducted. Including his not wanting to testify . . . He also approved and made no objections to the list of witnesses that were subpoenaed”. Petitioner did not testify at the Rule I hearing. He candidly stated that “the only thing I’m interested in is exhausting the state remedies at this time”.

Affirmed.
<PAGE>   1
                   EXHIBIT 23.1 TO ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K
                   ------------------------------------------
                    FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JANUARY 3, 1998
                    -----------------------------------------
                         BY D.I.Y. HOME WAREHOUSE, INC.
                         ------------------------------



                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement of
D.I.Y. Home Warehouse, Inc. on Form S-8 (File No. 33-87020) of our report, dated
February 19, 1998, on our audits of the Financial Statements of D.I.Y. Home
Warehouse, Inc. as of January 3, 1998 and December 28, 1996 and for each of the
three years in the period ended January 3, 1998, which report is included in
Exhibit 13.1 of this Form 10-K.


/s/ Coopers & Lybrand


Cleveland, Ohio
March 20, 1998
§ 308.529 The hearing and burden of proof. ( a ) The ALJ will conduct a hearing on the record in order to determine whether the defendant is liable for a civil penalty or assessment under § 308.502 of this subpart, and, if so, the appropriate amount of any such civil penalty or assessment considering any aggravating or mitigating factors.
( b ) The FDIC must prove defendant's liability and any aggravating factors by a preponderance of the evidence.
( c ) The defendant must prove any affirmative defenses and any mitigating factors by a preponderance of the evidence.
( d ) The hearing will be open to the public unless otherwise ordered by the ALJ for good cause shown.
#### § 619.9330 Speculative purposes.

To buy or sell with the expectation of profiting by fluctuations in price.

[40 FR 49078, Oct. 21, 1975]
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 200 (Monday, October 19, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53541-53542]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-24950]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 6788]


Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``The Lost World of Old Europe: The Danube Valley 5000-
3500BC''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to

[[Page 53542]]

the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 
985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the 
Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, 
et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of Authority No. 234 
of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 of October 19, 
1999, as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003 
[68 FR 19875], I hereby determine that the objects in the exhibition: 
``The Lost World of Old Europe: The Danube Valley 5000-3500BC,'' 
imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, 
are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan 
agreements with the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that 
the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the Institute for 
the Study of the Ancient World, New York University, New York, NY, from 
on or about November 11, 2009, until on or about April 25, 2010, and at 
possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in 
the national interest. Public Notice of these Determinations is ordered 
to be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact Julie Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6467). The address is U.S. Department of State, L/PD, SA-5, 2200 C 
Street, NW., Suite 5H03, Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Dated: October 9, 2009.
Maura M. Pally,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional and Cultural Exchanges, 
Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-24950 Filed 10-16-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
p. 1


# OAR Box 

# 1384 Prepped by Charmelle Mathews



### ^Document

Number: 

# §?iJX$) U-E-W8 Docket Number: 

# A-94-5 2

Printed 7/2/2008 8:42:11 AM

Sheet 218 of 2640^,;\ft- 19 S:l7 :2 8«Jl91lfiRTESIfl N ft CRftN E COPE S RT P -iw ; NO.97 4 P. 2 — P. 2

From : Date : Contact : 

### A 945 2 . 

# W-£ J 

# f\ Contac t Repor t Rober t Jemison , Pacifi c Environmenta l Services , Inc
. (PES ) Augus t 6,199 8 Mr
. Richar

dMartin s Company : CR/P L Limite dPartneiship (Crane Plumbing ) Telephon e Number : (419 ) 521-328 2 Fa x Number : (419 ) 524-050 1 Contac t Summary : Mr
. Richar

dMatthi s wa s contactedo

n behalf o f th e U.S
. EP

A t o updat e informatio n provide d i n th e 199 3 EP

A Reinforce dPlasti c Composite s Screening Surve y submitte db y CR/PL Limite d Partnership fo

r thei r facilit y locatedi n Mansfield , Ohio
. I n respons e t o m y question s Mr
. Matthi s indicate dtiie following : Th e facilit y use s atomize dspra

y lay-u p t o appl y clea r andpigmente dproductio n ge l coat s i n th e fabricatio n o f

th e facility' s products
. The amoun t o f hazardou s ai r

pollutan t (HAP ) presen t i n eac h ge l coa

t i s shown i n th e tabl e below
. Typ e o f 

### Ge l Coa t Productio n Productio n Productio n Color o f Ge l Coa t Clea r Whit e Beig e HA P Conten t 

### (%byw u 49.83 % 36.64 % 36.96 % Styrene

Conten t 

### (%bywO 49.83 % 31.74 % 32.86 % MM A

Content (% b v wt/ i 0.00 % 4.90 % 4.10 % N o additiona

l HA P i s adde dt o thes e gel coat s during o r prio r t o th e fabricatio n proces s with th e exceptio n o f

smal l amount s o f

HA P tha t ma y (or ma y not ) b e present

i n initiators , promoter s and/o r catalyst s adde dt o th e ge l coats . CR/P L Limite dPartnershi

p ha s recentl

y acquire d(purchased

) Universal-Rundl e Corporation
. Note : Th e tota

l amoun t of HA P presen t i n age l coa t i s th e su mo f tiie amoun t o f styren e andmethy l methacrylate (MMA ) presen t i n th e ge l coat .

INFORMATIO N I S ACCURAT E 

# £^[/Y^^ ¥°/ 98. P. 3

RUG.10.199 8 7:28A M ARTESIA

Nft CRAN

E C O NO.97 4 P. 1 !

_ 

# CRAN E PLUMBIN G CR/PL, LP. /j 4 1 Cairn s Roa d Page 1 of __h_ Mansfield , Ohi o 4490 3 Te l 419/522-421 1 Fa x 419/524-050 1 Fa x 41 9 / 521-335 0 SPECIA L ORDER S ONL Y Fa x 41 9 / 525-316 9 CUSTOME R SERVIC E ONL Y 

## Date: 6H0-°I2 > Company:

V L o Attention^_?__Rr

jEMjfOr O Fax No.: From:\_S7_Y\r\7(\l£S Subject: Co^TAc T r\E?b^ T



# 1~
§ 7.2016 Restricting transfer of national bank stock and record dates; stock certificates. ( a ) *Restricting transfer of stock and record dates* — ( 1 ) *Conditions for stock transfer.* Under 12 U.S.C. 52, a national bank may impose conditions upon the transfer of its stock reasonably calculated to simplify the work of the bank with respect to stock transfers, voting at shareholders' meetings, and related matters and to protect it against fraudulent transfers.
( 2 ) *Record dates.* A national bank may close its stock records for a reasonable period to ascertain shareholders for voting purposes. The board of directors may fix a record date for determining the shareholders entitled to notice of, and to vote at, any meeting of shareholders. The record date should be in reasonable proximity to the date that notice is given to the shareholders of the meeting.
( b ) *Bank stock certificates.* ( 1 ) A national bank may prescribe the manner in which its stock must be transferred in its bylaws or articles of association. A bank issuing stock in certificated form must comply with the requirements of 12 U.S.C. 52, including as to: ( i ) The name and location of the bank;
( ii ) The name of the holder of record of the stock represented thereby;
( iii ) The number and class of shares which the certificate represents;
( iv ) If the bank issues more than one class of stock, the respective rights, preferences, privileges, voting rights, powers, restrictions, limitations, and qualifications of each class of stock issued (unless incorporated by reference to the articles of association);
( v ) Signatures of the president and cashier of the bank, or such other officers as the bylaws of the bank provide; and
( vi ) The seal of the bank.
( 2 ) The requirements of paragraph (b)(1)(v) of this section may be met through the use of electronic means or by facsimile.
[61 FR 4862, Feb. 9, 1996, as amended at 85 FR 83735, Dec. 22, 2020]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>     5
<LEGEND> THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
         EXTRACTED FROM THE NATIONAL HEALTH & SAFETY CORPORATION
         FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31,
         1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
         SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
<MULTIPLIER>  1

<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                             DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         3,145
<SECURITIES>                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                152,672
<ALLOWANCES>                                   8,200
<INVENTORY>                                        0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             147,617
<PP&E>                                             0
<DEPRECIATION>                                     0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               198,521
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      4,748,869
<BONDS>                                            0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                       14
<COMMON>                                      59,634
<OTHER-SE>                                 9,564,513
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 198,521
<SALES>                                       80,340
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              80,340
<CGS>                                         41,045
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              2,342,739
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               2,388
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            35,601
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          (2,198,736)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      (2,198,736)
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                             (2,198,736)
<EPS-BASIC>                                 (0.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (0.04)


</TABLE>
#### Nealey Augusta, *Plaintiff in Error,*v. The State of Florida, *Defendant in Error.*

Decision Filed January 30, 1923.

A Writ of Error to the Circuit Court for Yolusia County; James W. Perkins, Judge.

*Scarlet & Jordan*and *J. E. Peacock,*for Plaintiff in Error;.

*150
      *Rivers. Buford,*Attorney General, and *Marvin G. McIntosh,*assistant, for the State.

Per Curiam.

The record of the conviction of the plaintiff in error of murder in the first degree discloses no material error that could reasonably have prejudiced the rights of the defendant in the trial; and as the evidence amply sustains the verdict, the judgment entered thereon accords with law and is affirmed.

All concur.
#### § 408.5 Ensuring environmental documents are actually considered in Agency decision-making.

Section 1505.1 of the NEPA Regulations contains requirements to ensure adequate consideration of environmental documents in agency decision-making. To implement these requirements, Eximbank officials will:

(a) Consider all relevant environmental documents in evaluating applications for Eximbank financing;

(b) Ensure that all relevant environmental documents, comments and responses accompany the application through Eximbank's review processes;

(c) Consider only those alternatives encompassed by the range of alternatives discussed in the relevant environmental documents when evaluating an application which is the subject of an EIS.

| Eximbank actions | Start of NEPA process | Completion of NEPA process | Key officials or offices required to consider environmental documents |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Issuance of Preliminary Commitment (P.C.) | When application is received | When the Board of Directors meets to consider application. The Board may notify applicant that environmental effects will be considered when final commitment is requested and request information on environmental matters | Under § 408.4(b)(1)(i) and (ii), General Counsel to determine whether requested Eximbank financing is a major action and Engineer to determine whether proposed Transaction may significantly affect the quality of the human environment in the United States, its territories or possessions. |
| Issuance of Final Commitment | When application is received | When the Board of Directors meets to consider application | (If no P.C. has been issued, key offices will make determinations mentioned above.) Engineer to collect, prepare or arrange for preparation of all environmental documents. |
§ 614.4910 Basic authorities. ( a ) Any bank or association of the Farm Credit System, except a bank for cooperatives, with direct lending authority may originate agricultural real estate loans for sale to one or more certified agricultural mortgage marketing facilities under title VIII of the Act.
( b ) Any bank or association of the Farm Credit System, except a bank for cooperatives, may operate as an agricultural mortgage marketing facility under title VIII of the Act, either acting alone or jointly with other banks and/or associations, if so certified by the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation.
[54 FR 1155, Jan. 12, 1989]
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>               9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                      $ 9,041,071
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   667,358
<ALLOWANCES>                                          0
<INVENTORY>                                           0
<CURRENT ASSETS>                              9,709,846
<PP&E>                                                0
<DEPRECIATION>                                        0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                9,709,846
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           599,627
<BONDS>                                               0
<COMMON>                                     13,631,263
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (4,521,044)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  9,709,846
<SALES>                                               0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                      0
<CGS>                                                 0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                         0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST EXPENSE>                                    0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                       0
<INCOME-TAX>                                          0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                   0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (147,661)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (147,661)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (0.03)


</TABLE>
#### § 308.169 Scope.

This subpart, and the Equal Access to Justice Act (5 U.S.C. 504), which it implements, apply to adversary adjudications before the FDIC. The types of adjudication covered by this subpart are those listed in § 308.01 of the Uniform Rules. The Uniform Rules and subpart B of the Local Rules apply to any proceedings to recover fees and expenses under this subpart.
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1284 KA 08-02025 PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, CARNI, LINDLEY, AND SCONIERS, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V ORDER
ROBERT RICHARDSON, ALSO KNOWN AS HANIF RICHARDSON, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (PHILIP ROTHSCHILD OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (JAMES P. MAXWELL OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (John J. Brunetti, A.J.), rendered July 7, 2008. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the first degree and assault in the first degree.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Entered: December 23, 2011 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
October 24, 2011 

MEMORANDUM 

From: William H. Maxwell 

EPA/SPPD/ESG (D243-01) 

To: Docket Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234 

Subject: Teleconference with Edison Electric Institute (EEI) 

Attendees: 

Robert J. Wayland, EPA/OAR/OAQPS/SPPD 

William Maxwell, EPA/OAR/OAQPS/SPPD 

Michael Rossler, EEI 

Dan Chartier, EEI 

Emily Fisher, EEI 

Karen Obenshain, EEI 

Eric Holdsworth, EEI 

John Kinsman, EEI 

Discussion: 

A general discussion was held of the comments submitted by Edison Electric Institute on the 

proposed Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS).
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3346

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the application 

of the passive loss limitations to timber activities. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 20, 2003

Mr. HERGER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify 

the application of the passive loss limitations to timber 

activities.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Timber Tax Fairness 

5 Act of 2003’’. 

6 SEC. 2. APPLICATION OF PASSIVE LOSS LIMITATIONS TO 

7 TIMBER ACTIVITIES. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (h) of section 469 of 

9 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to passive 
2

•HR 3346 IH 

1 activity losses and credits limited) is amended by adding 

2 at the end the following new paragraph: 

3 ‘‘(6) SPECIAL RULE FOR CLOSELY HELD TIM4 BER ACTIVITIES.—

5 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—In the case of any 

6 closely held timber activity the nature of which 

7 is that the aggregate hours devoted to manage8 ment of the activity for any year is generally 

9 less than 100 hours, an individual shall not fail 

10 to be treated as materially participating in such 

11 activity solely by reason of the fact that—

12 ‘‘(i) such individual participates less 

13 than 100 hours in the management of such 

14 activity, or 

15 ‘‘(ii) any other individual—

16 ‘‘(I) receives compensation de17 scribed in section 911(d)(2)(A) in 

18 consideration for services performed 

19 in connection with the management of 

20 the activity, or 

21 ‘‘(II) performs services in connec22 tion with the management of the ac23 tivity that exceed (by hours) the 

24 amount of such services performed by 

25 the individual. 
3

•HR 3346 IH 

1 ‘‘(B) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this 

2 paragraph—

3 ‘‘(i) CLOSELY HELD ACTIVITY.—An 

4 activity shall be treated as closely held if at 

5 least 80 percent of the ownership interests 

6 in the activity is held—

7 ‘‘(I) by 5 or fewer individuals, or 

8 ‘‘(II) by individuals who are 

9 members of the same family (within 

10 the meaning of section 2032A(e)(2)). 

11 ‘‘(ii) TIMBER ACTIVITY.—The term 

12 ‘timber activity’ means the planting, culti13 vating, caring, cutting, or preparation 

14 (other than milling) for market, of trees.’’

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

16 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

17 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ