alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
42612.

#### JEFFERS v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY et al.

Frankum, Presiding Judge.

Findings of fact by the State Board of Workmen’s Compensation are, in the absence of fraud, final and conclusive and are binding on the courts when there is any evidence to support them. *Maryland Cas. Co. v. England,*160 Ga. 810 (129 SE 75); *Montgomery v. Maryland Cas. Co.,*169 Ga. 746 (151 SE 363); *Maryland Cas. Co. v. Sanders,*182 Ga. 594 (186 SE 693); *American Mut. &c. Ins. Co. v. Sisson,*198 Ga. 623 (32 SE2d 295). One of the facts upon which a finding of the board is conclusive is whether or not the claimant has given to the employer notice of the occurrence of an accident within 30 days as required by the provisions of *Code*§ 114-303, or whether his failure to do so comes within one of the exceptions set forth in the statute. *James v. Fite,*38 Ga. App. 759 (145 SE 536); *Federated Mut. &c. Ins. Co. v. Elliott,*88 Ga. App. 266, 268 (1) (76 SE2d 568). The only exception to the requirement that the employee shall give notice within 301 days of the accident thus provided for is where the employee by reason of physical or mental incapacity, or by reason of fraud or deceit is prevented from giving the notice. Where the evidence on behalf of the employee showed that he was injured on December 18, 1964; that from that date to December 28, 1964, the plant (his place of employment) was shut down for Christmas holidays, but thereafter was operating, and where it appeared that on December 28, the employee entered the hospital where he was treated for the back condition which he alleges resulted from his accident, and where it does not appear that *529he was at any time unconscious or unable to send words to his employer by his wife, who visited him in the hospital virtually every day, and where he did not notify the employer of the occurrence of the accident until February 9, 1965, some 53 days thereafter, such evidence failed to show that the employee was prevented by reason of physical or mental incapacity from giving the notice within the time required by law. The mere fact that the employee was an illiterate, and that the employer failed to advise him orally that he should notify the employer of any accident which he might sustain, did not constitute fraud so as to relieve him of his obligation to report the accident. *Indemnity Ins. Co. v. O’Neal,*104 Ga. App. 305, 306 (2) (121 SE2d 689); *U. S. Casualty Co. v. Owens,*109 Ga. App. 834 (137 SE2d 543). It follows that the superior court did not err in affirming the award of the State Board of Workmen’s Compensation which denied compensation to the claimant on account of his failure to timely notify the employer of the occurrence of the accident.

*Deen and Quillian, JJ., concur.*

Submitted February 8, 1967

Decided April 4, 1967.

*Johnson & Johnson, William P. Johnson,*for appellant.

*Greene, Buckley, DeRieux, Moore & Jones, Burt DeRieux, James A. Eichelberger,*for appellees.

*Judgment affirmed.*
**Exhibit 23.1****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-62243, 33-00020,333-94121, 333-38725, 333-107092, 333-107093, 333-125390 and 333-127580 on Form S-8, RegistrationStatement Nos. 33-81772, 333-47399, 333-80427, and 333-44722 on Form S-3 and Registration StatementNo. 333-139581 on Form S-3ASR of our report dated February 28, 2008, relating to the consolidatedfinancial statements and financial statement schedule of Post Properties, Inc., and theeffectiveness of Post Properties, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting (which reportexpresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the adoption ofStaff Accounting Bulletin No.108, Quantifying Misstatements in Financial Statements), appearing inthis Annual Report on Form 10-K of Post Properties, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2007./s/Deloitte & Touche LLPAtlanta, Georgia
#### FUTCH, administrator, *et al. v.*OLMSTEAD *et al.*

No. 8688.

August 12, 1932.

Rehearing denied September 17, 1932.

*565
      *J. P.*Dulces, for plaintiffs. *W. C.*Hodges, for defendants.

Hill, J.

From the statement of facts it appears that the case of *566
      *Futch*v. *Olmstead,*172 *Ga.*233 (supra), was dismissed in the Supreme Court because it appeared that the bill of exceptions was not filed in the office of the clerk of the superior court within the time prescribed by law. After the remittitur from the Supreme Court was made the judgment of the superior court, and the sheriff proceeded under an execution to advertise for sale the property in controversy, the administrator of the estate of Wiley Futch filed the present, an equitable petition, attaching copies of the pleadings and judgment in the former case, seeking to modify or set aside the former judgment, etc. To this petition the defendant filed a demurrer, which was sustained and the case was dismissed. In the petition it is'not alleged that the judgment of dismissal in this court was procured by fraud, accident, or mistake. In these circumstances the court did not err in sustaining the demurrer. *Dixie Realty Co.*v. *Morgan,*174 *Ga.*807 (164 S. E. 200), which is similar in its facts to the present case.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*

ON MOTION ROE REHEARING.

There is but one ground relied on in the motion for rehearing, and that is that this court overlooked the case of *Alexander*v. *Chip-stead,*152 *Ga.*851, 862 (111 S. E. 552), where it was held that property could not be sold as the property of the deceased, but must be advertised and sold as the property of the estate of the deceased. This ground goes to the merits of the case, whereas the court in the instant case decided the same on a question of practice and dismissed the case on demurrer, for the reason stated in the opinion. The motion for rehearing must therefore be denied.
#### Everett Thompson, *Plaintiff in Error,*v. The State of Florida, *Defendant in Error.*

Opinion Filed January 25, 1923.

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

*H. S. Glazier,*for Plaintiff in Error;

*Rivers Buford,*Attorney General, for the State.

Per Curiam.

In bastardy proceedings under the statute the judgment contains an item of $60.00 for incidental expenses attending the birth of the child. There is nc evidence to sustain this part of the judgment; therefore the judgment is reversed and the cause will be remanded for a new trial. See Flores v. State, 72 Fla. 302, 73 South. Rep. 234, as to testimony admissible in proceedings of this character.

Reversed.

Taylor, C. J., and Whitpield, Ellis and Browne, J. J., concur.

*87West, J., specially concurs.

West, J.

Concurring.

The reversible error in this record is in the judgment. Anterior proceedings are free from error. This error should not be given retroactive effect. The judgment should be reversed for proper judgment, not for new trial. Poyner v. State, 81 Fla. 726, 88 South. Rep. 762; Roberts v. State, 30 Fla. 82, 11 South. Rep. 536; Palatka & Indian River R. R. Co. v. State, 23 Fla. 546, 3 South. Rep. 158; Keech v. State, 15 Fla. 561.
| USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS                                                                                                                    |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Measurements of Wind, Aeolian Sand Transport, and Precipitation in the Colorado River Corridor, Grand Canyon, Arizona; January 2005 to January 2006 |

##### U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2006-1188

# Measurements of Wind, Aeolian Sand Transport, and Precipitation in the Colorado River Corridor, Grand Canyon, Arizona; January 2005 to January 2006

### *By* Amy E. Draut and David M. Rubin

### 2006

| *Photograph of one instrument station.  Four sand traps are shown on a vertical pole at the right of the photo. A tripod with two anemometers (at heights 2.0 m and 0.5 m above ground level) is at left; the data logger is also attached to this tripod. In the center is a tipping-bucket rain gauge.  (click image to view a larger version).* |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
§ 701.30 Services for nonmembers within the field of membership. Federal credit unions may provide the following services to persons within their fields of membership, regardless of membership status: ( a ) Selling negotiable checks including travelers checks, money orders, and other similar money transfer instruments (including international and domestic electronic fund transfers and remittance transfers, as defined in section 919 of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act); and
( b ) Cashing checks and money orders for a fee.
[71 FR 62876, Oct. 27, 2006, as amended at 76 FR 44762, July 27, 2011]
§ 792.27 Can fees be reduced or waived? You may request that NCUA waive or reduce fees if disclosure of the information you request is in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the government, and is not primarily in your commercial interest. ( a ) NCUA will make a determination of whether the public interest requirement above is met based on the following factors: ( 1 ) Whether the subject of the requested records concerns identifiable operations or activities of the government, with a connection that is direct and clear;
( 2 ) Whether the disclosable portions of the requested records are meaningfully informative about government operations and activities in order to be likely to contribute to an understanding of government operations or activities. Information already in the public domain, either in a duplicate or substantially identical form where nothing new would be added to the public's understanding, would not be meaningfully informative;
( 3 ) Whether disclosure of the requested information will contribute to public understanding, meaning a reasonably broad audience of persons interested in the subject, as opposed to the individual understanding of the requester. A requester's expertise in the subject area and ability and intention to effectively convey information to the public will be considered. Representatives of the news media are presumed to satisfy this consideration; and
( 4 ) Whether the disclosure is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of government operations or activities. The level of public understanding before disclosure must be enhanced by the disclosure to a significant extent.
( b ) If the public interest requirement is met, NCUA will make a determination on the commercial interest requirement based upon the following factors: ( 1 ) Whether you have a commercial interest that would be furthered by the requested disclosure; and if so
( 2 ) Whether the magnitude of your commercial interest is sufficiently large in comparison with the public interest in disclosure, that disclosure is primarily in your commercial interest.
( c ) If the required public interest exists and your commercial interest is not primary in comparison, NCUA will waive or reduce fees.
( d ) If you are not satisfied with our determination on your fee waiver or reduction request, you may submit an appeal to the General Counsel in accordance with § 792.28.
[63 FR 14338, Mar. 25, 1998, as amended at 73 FR 56938, Oct. 1, 2008]
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 4.2

                                   AMENDMENT

                                     TO THE

                             ARTHROCARE CORPORATION

                         1999 NONSTATUTORY OPTION PLAN

     Pursuant to the authority reserved to the Board of Directors (the "Board")
of ArthroCare Corporation, a corporation organized under the laws of the State
of Delaware, under Section 15(a) of the ArthroCare Corporation 1999 Nonstatutory
Option Plan (the "Plan"), the Board hereby amends the Plan as set forth below.

     Stock Subject to the Plan. The first sentence of Section 3 of the Plan is
     -------------------------
amended to read in its entirety as follows:

     "Subject to the provisions of Section 13 of the Plan, the maximum aggregate
     number of Shares which may be optioned and sold under the Plan is 1,850,000
     Shares."


                              * * * * * * * * * *


     I hereby certify that the foregoing Amendment to the Plan was duly adopted
by the Board of Directors of ArthroCare Corporation, effective as of April 26,
2001.

     Executed on this 1st day of June, 2001.


                                       /s/ Michael W. Hall
                                       ------------------------------------
                                       Michael W. Hall, Secretary
#### § 707.10 [Reserved]
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3532

To amend the National Trails System Act to improve the efficiency and 

fairness of acquiring railroad rights-of-way for interim use as public 

trails by applying the procedures that govern other Federal real estate 

acquisitions. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 19, 2003

Mr. RYUN of Kansas introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Resources 

A BILL

To amend the National Trails System Act to improve the 

efficiency and fairness of acquiring railroad rights-ofway for interim use as public trails by applying the 

procedures that govern other Federal real estate acquisitions.

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

3 SECTION 1. CONVEYANCE OF RAILROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY 

4 FOR INTERIM USE AS PUBLIC TRAILS. 

5 Section 8(d) of the National Trails System Act (16 

6 U.S.C. 1247(d)) is amended—

7 (1) by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ after ‘‘(d)’’; and 
2

•HR 3532 IH 

1 (2) by adding at the end the following new 

2 paragraph: 

3 ‘‘(2) In the case of any donation, transfer, lease, sale, 

4 or other conveyance for interim use described in para5 graph (1), interim use shall not begin until the right to 

6 interim use has been acquired from each of the owners 

7 of the land underlying the right-of-way (and payment or 

8 deposit of compensation to those owners has been made)—

9 ‘‘(A) in accordance with—

10 ‘‘(i) the Uniform Relocation Assistance and 

11 Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 

12 (42 U.S.C. 4651); and 

13 ‘‘(ii) sections 3113 and 3114 of title 40, 

14 United States Code; 

15 ‘‘(B) and consistent with any order of a court 

16 of competent jurisdiction in a condemnation pro17 ceeding.’’. 

18 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

19 The amendment made by section 1(2) shall apply 

20 only to interim use of railroad rights-of-way pursuant to 

21 donations, transfers, leases, sales, or other conveyances 

22 entered into on or after November 19, 2003.

Æ
180117 SCH ORDER RE NIEVES-LOPEZ RECONSIDER MTN VERSION JANUARY 18, 2018 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

----------------------------------------------------------x

In re: PROMESA

Title III

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO,

as representative of No. 17 BK 3283-LTS

THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO, (Jointly Administered)

et al.,

Debtors.1

----------------------------------------------------------x

ORDER SCHEDULING BRIEFING ON

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

The Court has received Motion for Reconsideration (the “Motion”) filed by

Beatriz Nieves-López (the “Movant”). (Docket Entry No. 2263.) The Debtors’ opposition 

papers to the Motion must be filed by February 1, 2018. Movant’s reply papers must be filed 

by February 8, 2018. The Court will thereafter take the Motion on submission.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 18, 2018

 /s/ Laura Taylor Swain 

LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN

United States District Judge

 1 The Debtors in these Title III Cases, along with each Debtor’s respective Title III case number and the last 

four (4) digits of each Debtor’s federal tax identification number, as applicable, are the (i) Commonwealth 

of Puerto Rico (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 3283-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3481); (ii) 

Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corporation (“COFINA”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 3284-LTS) (Last 

Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 8474); (iii) Puerto Rico Highways and Transportation Authority (“HTA”) 

(Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 3567-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3808); (iv) Employees 

Retirement System of the Government of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (“ERS”) (Bankruptcy Case 

No. 17 BK 3566-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 9686); and (v) Puerto Rico Electric Power 

Authority (“PREPA”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 4780-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 

3747). (Title III case numbers are listed as Bankruptcy Case numbers due to software limitations).

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:2264 Filed:01/18/18 Entered:01/18/18 19:39:07 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 1
**EXHIBIT 31.2****CERTIFICATION**I, Michael McHugh, Chief Financial Officer of The Fashion House Holdings, Inc., (the “Company),certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of The Fashion House Holdings, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand 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 andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:     (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;     (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, 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 financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee 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 ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’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 asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.   *Date: May 15, 2006* */s/ Michael McHugh*  *By: Michael McHugh*  *Chief Financial Officer*
EXHIBIT 32.1
  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
on Form 10-Q of Arrow Resources Development, Inc. (the "Company") for the
quarterly period ended on March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Peter Frugone, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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.
  /s/ Peter Frugone
 Peter Frugone
 
 Date: May 20, 2009.
# IMMC.EESC-2018-02879-AC.ENG.xhtml.EESC-2018-02879-00-00-AC-TRA-EN.docx

EN

European Economic and Social Committee

European Economic and Social Committee

NAT/746

NAT/746

Nominal quantities for the placing on the Union market of shochu

Nominal quantities for the placing on the Union market of shochu

(Category C)

(Category C)

OPINION


  European Economic and Social Committee


  Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 110/2008 as regards nominal quantities for placing on the Union market of single distilled shochu produced by pot still and bottled in Japan

  [COM(2018) 199 final – 2018/0097 COD]

OPINION

European Economic and Social Committee

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 110/2008 as regards nominal quantities for placing on the Union market of single distilled shochu produced by pot still and bottled in Japan

[COM(2018) 199 final – 2018/0097 COD]

Consultation

| Consultation | European Parliament, 02/05/2018


  Council of the European Union, 30/04/2018 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Article 114(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Section responsible | Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment |
| Adopted at plenary | 11.7.2018 |
| Plenary session No | 536 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 170/0/5 |

Consultation

European Parliament, 02/05/2018

European Parliament, 02/05/2018

Council of the European Union, 30/04/2018

Council of the European Union, 30/04/2018

Legal basis

Legal basis

Article 114(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Article 114(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Section responsible

Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment

Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment

Adopted at plenary

Adopted at plenary

11.7.2018

11.7.2018

Plenary session No

Plenary session No

536

536

Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions)

Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions)

170/0/5

170/0/5

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 536th plenary session of 11 and 12 July 2018 (meeting of 11 July), by 170 votes to none with 5 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 536th plenary session of 11 and 12 July 2018 (meeting of 11 July), by 170 votes to none with 5 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 11 July 2018

Brussels, 11 July 2018

Luca JAHIER

Luca JAHIER

The president of the European Economic and Social Committee

_______________