alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### MATYE GOLDSTEIN, PLAINTIFF, v. HARRY E. WEIR, DEFENDANT.

Submitted October 3, 1939

Decided April 2, 1940.

Before Justices Trenchard, Case and Heher.

For the plaintiff, Matye Goldstein, *William S. Darnell*and *Anthony J. Cafiero (Jonathan W. Acton,*of counsel).

For the defendant, Harry Weir, *Waddington & Mathews (Frank A. Mathews, Jr.,*of counsel).

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Trenchard, J.

In the brief of the so-called petitioner we find this statement: “This matter is now before this court on petition and rule to show cause why the execution and levy made in this cause should not be vacated and set aside, or postponed, and the funds to be made, applied to the satisfaction of the junior execution of Mae A. Kirby, petitioner herein.”

*328.Few our examination.of the state of the case discloses that the proceeding purports to he based upon a petition which is not in the state of the case, has never been served upon the defendant, and the contents of which are legally unknown to the defendant, his counsel, and to the court.

There does appear in the state of the ease what purports to be an amended rule to show cause, and that recites that the original rule to show cause “may have been, or was, in view of the provisions of *R. S.*2:27-156, improvidently entered.”

It does appear, and is in fact admitted, that the original rule to show cause was void for the reason stated, and perhaps for other reasons; and in passing we remark that we believe a new rule should have been procured, rather than such an amendment thereof as was here attempted.

While'the *ex parte*affidavits of a party may be the foundation of a rule to show cause, yet they are not competent for the purpose of proving facts necessary to sustain the rule. In all cases where the testimony of a party can be received for such purposes it must be by depositions upon notice. *Cooper*v. *Galbraith,*24 *N. J. L.*219.

How the only proofs submitted in support of the rule are *ex parte*affidavits, and as we have pointed out it is fundamental that they cannot be used in support of the rule upon the hearing in this court, as they may possibly be in the Court of Chancery. *Peer*v. *Bloxham,*82 *N. J. L.*288; *Baldwin*v. *Flagg,*43 *Id.*495; *Adams Express Co.*v. *Klein,*61 *Id.*530. The amended rule to show cause provides in part that either party have leave to take depositions upon notice. But no such depositions were ever taken, and to attempt to proceed on *ex parte*affidavits onty, would not only be in violation of the established practice of this court but would deprive parties of the opportunity of cross-examination.

The result is that there was no proof or evidence before this court which could be properly used in a determination of this controversy upon its merits, and the rule and proceedings in question must be dismissed, but without costs; and such will be the order.
###### Editorial Note on Part 747

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 747 appear at 84 FR 1609, Feb. 5, 2019.

#### § 747.701 Applicability.

The rules in this subpart apply only to informal and formal investigations conducted by the NCUA Board itself or its delegates. They do not apply to adjudicative or rulemaking proceedings or to routine, periodic or special examinations conducted by the NCUA Board's staff.
§ 611.1216 Public availability of documents related to the termination. ( a ) We may post on our Web site, or require you to post on your Web site: ( 1 ) Results of any special assessments, analyses, studies, and rulings required under § 611.1211;
( 2 ) Documents you submit to us or file with us under § 611.1215; and
( 3 ) Documents you submit to us under section 7.11 of the Act that are related directly or indirectly to the proposed termination, including but not limited to contracts entered into in connection with or relating to the proposed termination and any related transactions.
( b ) We will not post confidential information on our Web site and will not require you to post it on your Web site.
( c ) You may request that we treat specific information as confidential under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552 (*see* 12 CFR part, 602 subpart B). You should draft your request for confidential treatment narrowly to extend only to those portions of a document you consider to be confidential. If you request confidential treatment for information that we do not consider to be confidential, we may post that information on our Web site after providing notice to you. On our own initiative, we may determine that certain information should be treated as confidential and, if so, we will not make that information public.
Skip Links

USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS

Open-File Report 2006-1325

Pubs Warehouse

## Aeromagnetic  Survey in Western Afghanistan: A Web Site for Distribution of Data

#### By Ronald E. Sweeney, Robert P. Kucks, Patricia L. Hill, and Carol A. Finn

| **USGS Afghanistan Product Number 73**
This web site contains digital data files and descriptions of aeromagnetic data digitized from 1976 western Afghanistan magnetic field and survey route location maps.

Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.
For more information about this report contact: Pat Hill | Version 1.0

Posted October 2006
-  Western Afghanistan **Data** 
-  Data Products **Directory** 
Refer to the readme_RUS_datafiles.pdf file describing data in above directory.
-  West Afghanistan **Metadata** TXT file 
-  **Crustal Team** |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----

Download the latest version of Acrobat Reader, free of charge
access.adobe.com

AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices

U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological Survey	URL: *http://pubsdata.usgs.gov/pubs/of/2006/1325/index.html*	Questions or Assistance: Contact USGS	Last modified: Saturday, 12-Jan-2013 22:12:28 EST
#### MORETON *v.*REESE.

Contract of purchase of land — rights of a purchaser in possession — fraud in the original purchase.

One in possession of land under a contract of purchase with time of payment, may contract for clearing the land, and sell the wood, rails, &c. as he would his crop, and it does not lie in the mouth of a purchaser of either, to avoid payment by setting up fraud in the purchase of the land from the vender.

*382If the purchaser is wasting the estate, or so proceeding as to lessen the security of the vendei, he must rescind the contract, or enjoin him in chancery; he cannot interfere with the purchaser’s contracts with others.

Error to the Court of Common Pleas. The case below was assumpsit. On the trial, the following facts appeared. Moreton representing himself of ability to pay, induced one Crandall to sell him a piece of woodland, upon his contract to keep down the taxes, and to pay a stipulated sum at a future day. Crandell went into possession of the land, sold the timber upon it to Reese, and took his note, which was the foundation of the suit. After he began chopping the wood, Crandell, being informed that Moreton was worthless, gave notice to Reese to desist from chopping, but he after notice, hauled off a part of the wood.

The court below charged the jury—

1. That if Moreton’s purchase was induced by false representations, it was void, provided the representations went to the whole consideration.

2. If the contract was void, Moreton acquired no right in the land.

3. And if the note of the defendant was given for the timber on land held under such contract, and taken by Moreton without disclosing the true state of the contract, the taking it was a fraud on Reese, which would vitiate the note. There was judgment for the defendant.

For error in this charge it is sought to reverse the judgment.

Wright, J.

Moreton claimed the land under a contract with Crandell, which is in form, valid. While in possession of the land, so claiming, he contracted with the defendant for the timber upon it. It is the universal custom for purchasers to clear the land, and he is fortunate, that can reduce the expense by a sale of the wood instead of being compelled to pay for the entire work, and to burn the wood on the land in order to clear it out of the way. If the vendee proceeds in an unusual way, or is injuring the freehold, the vender must restrain him in equity or rescind the contract. But while the vendee is in possession under a contract he may contract for wood, or his crops, and it does not lie in the mouth of one purchasing of him wood, rails, or the crop, to object against paying, that the purchaser of the land defrauded his vender. Such appears to us the case before us, in its strongest aspect for the defendant. The court below erred in ruling differently.

The judgment is reversed with costs.
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.                  

###### Commodity Futures Trading Commission

# AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission. 

# TIME AND DATE: 

11:00 a.m., Friday, May 5, 2000. 

# PLACE: 

1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Conference Room. 

# STATUS: 

Closed. 

# MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED: 

Surveillance Matters. 

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100. 

Jean A. Webb, 

Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 00-10346  Filed 4-21-00; 11:32 am]

BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
§ 712.1 What does this part cover? ( a ) This part establishes when a federal credit union (FCU) can invest in and make loans to credit union service organizations (CUSOs). CUSOs are subject to review by NCUA. This part does not apply to corporate credit unions that have CUSOs subject to § 704.11 of this chapter.
( b ) All sections of this part apply to FCUs. Sections 712.2(d)(2)(ii), 712.3(d), 712.4 and 712.11(b) and (c) of this part apply to federally insured, state-chartered credit unions (FISCUs), as provided in § 741.222 of this chapter. FISCUs must follow the law in the state in which they are chartered with respect to the sections in this part that only apply to FCUs.
( c ) As used in this part, federally insured credit union (FICU) means an FCU or FISCU.
( d ) As used in this part, CUSO means any entity in which a FICU has an ownership interest or to which a FICU has extended a loan, and that entity is engaged primarily in providing products or services to credit unions or credit union members, or, in the case of checking and currency services, including cashing checks and money orders for a fee, and 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, 15 U.S.C. 1693o-1), to persons eligible for membership in any credit union having a loan, investment or contract with the entity. A CUSO also includes any entity in which a CUSO has an ownership interest of any amount, if that entity is engaged primarily in providing products or services to credit unions or credit union members.
[78 FR 72548, Dec. 3, 2013]
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_________________________________________ Clerk April 29, 2013

t0429 

# Order

April 29, 2013

145116

PATRICK J. KENNEY,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v SC: 145116

COA: 304900

Wayne CC: 11

- 003828

- AH

WARDEN RAYMOND BOOKER,

Defendant

- Appellee.

_________________________________________/

On January 10, 2013, the Court heard oral argument on the application for leave to

appeal the April 3, 2012 judgment of the Court of Appeals. The application was again

considered and leave to appeal was granted on January 25, 2013. Oral argument is

scheduled for May 8, 2013. On order of the Court, the parties shall submit additional

briefing regarding the impact of the f ollowing events on the Court’s analysis of the legal

issues presented in this case and whether the case has, or soon may, become moot: (1) at

the parole revocation hearing, plaintiff pleaded guilty to violating parole by failing to

report to his parole of ficer; (2) after plaintiff’s parole was revoked and subsequently

reinstated, plaintiff failed to report to his parole officer on at least two occasions resulting

in additional independent bases for revocation; and (3) when plaintiff was most recently

relea sed on parole, on June 1, 2011, he was paroled for a 24

- month term (Appellant’s

Appendix at 88a

- 90a), which would terminate on June 1, 2013. The parties’ briefs must

be submitted no later than May 6, 2013.
§ 621.8 Application of payments and income recognition on nonaccrual loans. Each institution shall employ the following practices with respect to application of cash payments on nonaccrual loans: ( a ) If the ultimate collectibility of the recorded investment, in whole or in part, is in doubt, any payment received on such loan shall be applied to reduce the recorded investment to the extent necessary to eliminate such doubt.
( b ) Once the ultimate collectibility of the recorded investment is no longer in doubt, payments received in cash on such loan may qualify for recognition as interest income if all of the following characteristics are met at the time the payment is received: ( 1 ) The loan does not have a remaining unrecovered prior chargeoff associated with it, except in cases where the prior chargeoff was taken as part of a formal restructuring of the loan;
( 2 ) The payment received has come from a source of repayment detailed in the plan of collection;
( 3 ) The loan, after considering the payment, is not contractually past due more than 90 days and is not expected to become 90 days past due, or a repayment pattern has been established that reasonably demonstrates future repayment capacity.
( c ) The institution shall employ the following practices with respect to earned but uncollected interest income on loans, leases, contracts, and similar assets that are determined not to be fully collectible: ( 1 ) Earned but uncollected interest income that was accrued in the current fiscal year and is determined to be uncollectible shall be reversed from interest income; and
( 2 ) Earned but uncollected interest income that was accrued in prior fiscal years and is determined to be uncollectible shall be charged off against the allowance for credit losses.
[58 FR 48786, Sept. 20, 1993, as amended at 87 FR 27492, May 9, 2022]
Exhibit 32.1

 

SECURED INVESTMENT RESOURCES FUND, L.P. II

 

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 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 Secured Investment Resources Fund, L.P. II (the “Partnership”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, W. Robert Kohorst, President and Chief Executive Officer of the General Partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 Partnership as of March 31, 2007 (the last date of the period covered by the Report).

 

SECURED INVESTMENT RESOURCES FUND, L.P. II

 

By: Millenium Management, LLC

General Partner

 

By: /s/ W. Robert Kohorst

W. Robert Kohorst

President and

Chief Executive Officer

Date: October 26, 2007
PUBLIC LAW 110–58—AUG. 9, 2007 121 STAT. 561 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 1260: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 153 (2007): 

May 14, considered and passed House. 

Aug. 3, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 110–58 

110th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 6301 Highway 

58 in Harrison, Tennessee, as the ‘‘Claude Ramsey Post Office’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. CLAUDE RAMSEY POST OFFICE. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 6301 Highway 58 in Harrison, Tennessee, shall 

be known and designated as the ‘‘Claude Ramsey Post Office’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Claude Ramsey Post Office’’. 

Approved August 9, 2007. 

Aug. 9, 2007 

[H.R. 1260]
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3312 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3312

 To amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act to add pears and cherries to 
the list of fruits and vegetables subject to regulation in a marketing 
  order by grade, size, quality, or maturity, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 16, 2003

Mr. Hastings of Washington (for himself, Mr. Nethercutt, and Mr. Walden 
  of Oregon) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                        Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act to add pears and cherries to 
the list of fruits and vegetables subject to regulation in a marketing 
  order by grade, size, quality, or maturity, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. PEAR AND CHERRY MARKETING ORDERS.

    Section 8e(a) of the Agricultural Adjustment Act (7 U.S.C. 608e-
1(a)), reenacted with amendments by the Agricultural Marketing 
Agreement Act of 1937, is amended in the first sentence by inserting 
after ``apples,'' the following: ``pears, cherries,''.
                                 <all>
```
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED DECEMBER 16, 2021

NO. 03

- 21

- 00246

- CV

Alison Whittington and Matthew Whittington , Appellant s

v.

Ranch at Cypress Creek Municipal Utility District No. 1 , Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE COUN TY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE, JUSTICES TRIANA AND KELLY

DISMISSED ON JOINT MOTION

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE BYRNE

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the tr i a l court on March 23, 2021

. T he p arties

have filed a joint motion to dismiss the appeal, and having considered the motion , the Court

agrees that the motion should be g ranted . T herefore, the Court grants the motion and dismiss es

the appeal

. Each party shall bear their own costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and in

the court below.
#### Sec. 1-1 Applicability of system of accounts and reports.

Each large certificated air carrier shall keep its books of account, records and memoranda and make reports to the BTS in accordance with this system of accounts and reports. The BTS reserves the right, however, under the provisions of sections 49 U.S.C. 41701 and 41708, to expand or otherwise modify the classes of carriers subject to this system of accounts and reports.

[ER-1400, 50 FR 11, Jan. 2, 1985, as amended at 60 FR 66723, Dec. 26, 1995]
§ 349.4 Variation margin. ( a ) *General.* After the date on which a covered swap entity enters into a non-cleared swap or non-cleared security-based swap with a swap entity or financial end user, the covered swap entity shall collect variation margin equal to the variation margin amount from the counterparty to such non-cleared swap or non-cleared security-based swap when the amount is positive and post variation margin equal to the variation margin amount to the counterparty to such non-cleared swap or non-cleared security-based swap when the amount is negative.
( b ) *Timing.* A covered swap entity shall comply with the variation margin requirements described in paragraph (a) of this section on each business day, for a period beginning on or before the business day following the day of execution and ending on the date the non-cleared swap or non-cleared security based swap terminates or expires.
( c ) *Other counterparties.* A covered swap entity is not required to collect or post variation margin with respect to any non-cleared swap or non-cleared security-based swap described in § 349.1(d). For any other non-cleared swap or non-cleared security-based swap between a covered swap entity and a counterparty that is neither a financial end user nor a swap entity, the covered swap entity shall collect variation margin at such times and in such forms and such amounts (if any), that the covered swap entity determines appropriately addresses the credit risk posed by the counterparty and the risks of such non-cleared swap or non-cleared security-based swap.
#### §§ 794.161-794.169 [Reserved]