alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### PATIENCE MANSFIELD *v.*ROSWELL MANSFIELD.

Divorce — certainty—agreement—collusion—condonation—adversary proceedings.

A charge of adultery with *a certain*woman, is too uncertain to admit proof under it.

The court will not decree a divorce when there has been an agreement to separate, or there is collusion, or a condonation of the complaint has taken place; the proceeding in divorce is strictly *adversary.*

Divorce. Cause, wilful absence and adultery with *a certain woman.*It appeared in evidence that these parties removed into Butler county in 1819, and there lived together until 1823. He left her eight or nine years since and went to Cincinnati, saying, he *could not live with that*woman, *and would not.*She soon followed him to Cincinnati, but shortly returned, and said, her husband was to pay her one hundred and seventy dollars, and Esq. Chittenden one hundred more, and she was to apply for and obtain a divorce. The proof showed her character good, though she has been occasionally deranged in mind.

By the Court.

This bill must be dismissed. We do not sit here to enforce contracts of separation between husband and wife, in the *285shape of a decree for a divorce. The whole proceeding for divorce is strictly *adversary;*if it appear there is collusion between the parties, or an agreement, or that a divorce is prayed for, for a cause which has been forgiven by the parties, a divorce is never decreed. The proof of adultery cannot be received under this petition.
§ 105.23 Parachute operations over or onto airports. No person may conduct a parachute operation, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow a parachute operation to be conducted from that aircraft, over or onto any airport unless— ( a ) For airports with an operating control tower: ( 1 ) Prior approval has been obtained from the management of the airport to conduct parachute operations over or on that airport.
( 2 ) Approval has been obtained from the control tower to conduct parachute operations over or onto that airport.
( 3 ) Two-way radio communications are maintained between the pilot of the aircraft involved in the parachute operation and the control tower of the airport over or onto which the parachute operation is being conducted.
( b ) For airports without an operating control tower, prior approval has been obtained from the management of the airport to conduct parachute operations over or on that airport.
( c ) A parachutist may drift over that airport with a fully deployed and properly functioning parachute if the parachutist is at least 2,000 feet above that airport's traffic pattern, and avoids creating a hazard to air traffic or to persons and property on the ground.
§ 1203a.104 Violation of security areas. ( a ) *Removal of unauthorized persons.* The Center Directors, including Component Facilities and Technical and Service Support Centers, and the Executive Director for Headquarters, NASA Headquarters may order the removal or eviction of any person whose presence in a designated security area is in violation of the provisions of this part or any regulation or order established pursuant to the provisions of this part.
( b ) *Criminal penalties for violation.* Whoever willfully violates, attempts to violate, or conspires to violate any regulation or order establishing requirements or procedures for authorized entry into an area designated controlled, limited, or exclusion pursuant to the provisions of this part may be subject to prosecution under 18 U.S.C. 799 which provides penalties for a fine of not more than $5,000 or imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or both.
[38 FR 8056, Mar. 28, 1973, as amended at 78 FR 5124, Jan. 24, 2013]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Balance Sheet at June 30, 1999 (Unaudited) and the Statement of Operations
for the Six Months Ended June 30, 1999 (Unaudited) and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         115,680
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  174,445
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               290,125
<PP&E>                                       8,426,672
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,509,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,207,797
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,126
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,206,671
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,207,797
<SALES>                                        367,946
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               369,729
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               164,931
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                204,798
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            204,798
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   204,798
<EPS-BASIC>                                       9.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     9.22


</TABLE>
§ 792.26 Will I be asked to pay fees in advance? NCUA will require you to give an assurance of payment or an advance payment only when: ( a ) NCUA estimates or determines that allowable charges that you may be required to pay are likely to exceed $250. NCUA will notify you of the likely cost and obtain satisfactory assurance of full payment where you have a history of prompt payment of FOIA fees, or require an advance payment of an amount up to the full estimated charges in the case where you have no history of payment; or
( b ) You have previously failed to pay a fee charged in a timely fashion. NCUA may require you to pay the full amount owed, plus any applicable interest, or demonstrate that you have, in fact, paid the fee, and to make an advance payment of the full amount of the estimated fee before we begin to process a new request or a pending request from you.
( c ) If you are required to make an advance payment of fees, then the administrative time limits prescribed in § 792.16 will begin only after NCUA has received the fee payments described.
§ 1203a.101 Definitions. For the purpose of this part, the following definitions apply: ( a ) *Security area.* A physically defined area, established for the protection or security of facilities, property, or classfied/proprietary information and material in the possession of NASA or a NASA contractor located at a NASA Center or Component Facility, entry to which is subject to security measures, procedures, or controls. Security areas which may be established are: ( 1 ) *Controlled area.* An area in which security measures are taken to safeguard and control access to property and hazardous materials or other sensitive material or to protect operations that are vital to the accomplishment of the mission assigned to a Center or Component Facility. The controlled area shall have a clearly defined perimeter, but permanent physical barriers are not required.
( 2 ) *Limited area.* An area in which security measures are taken to safeguard or control access to classified material or unclassified property warranting special protection or property and hazardous materials or to protect operations that are vital to the accomplishment of the mission assigned to a Center or Component Facility. A Limited Area shall also have a clearly defined perimeter, but differs from a Controlled Area in that permanent physical barriers and access control devices, including walls and doors with locks or access devices, are emplaced to assist the occupants in keeping out unauthorized personnel. All facilities designated as NASA Critical Infrastructure or a key resource will be designated at a minimum as “Limited” areas.
( 3 ) *Exclusion area.* An area that is a permanent facility dedicated solely to the safeguarding and use of Classified National Security Information. It is used when vaults are unsuitable or impractical and where entry to the area alone provides visible or audible access to classified material. To prevent unauthorized access to an exclusion area, visitors will be escorted or other internal restrictions implemented, as determined by the Center Security Office.
( b ) *Temporary security area.* A designated interim security area, the need for which will not exceed 30 days from date of establishment. A temporary security area may also be established, pending approval of its establishment as a permanent security area.
( c ) *Permanent security area.* A designated security area, the need for which will exceed 30 days from date of establishment.
[38 FR 8056, Mar. 28, 1973, as amended at 78 FR 5123, Jan. 24, 2013]
§ 120.211 Applicable Federal regulations. The following applicable regulations appear in 49 CFR and 14 CFR: ( a ) 49 CFR Part 40—Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug Testing Programs
( b ) 14 CFR: ( 1 ) § 67.107—First-Class Airman Medical Certificate, Mental.
( 2 ) § 67.207—Second-Class Airman Medical Certificate, Mental.
( 3 ) § 67.307—Third-Class Airman Medical Certificate, Mental.
( 4 ) § 91.147—Passenger carrying flights for compensation or hire.
( 5 ) § 135.1—Applicability
[Doc. No. FAA-2008-0937, 74 FR 22653, May 14, 2009; Amdt. 120-0A, 75 FR 3154, Jan. 20, 2010]
### IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 21

- 00035

- CV

MATTSNOW PROPERTIES, LLC,

MARK D. MATTLAGE

- THURMOND

AND ROBERT J. SNOWDEN

, Appellant s

v.

FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MCGREGOR

D/B/A YOUR BANK FOR LIFE,

AND WALT FAIR, PLLC

, Appellee s

From the 414th District Court

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2021

- 209

- 5

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellants Mattsnow Properties, LLC, Mark Mattlage

- Thurmond, and Robert J.

Snowden have filed a motion to dismiss this appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a)(1).

Appellants explain that th is interlocutory appeal is now moot.Mattsnow Prop s. , LLC v. First Nat ’ l Bank of McGregor Page 2

Dismissal of this appeal would not prevent a party from seeking relief to which it

would otherwise be entitled. See id. Appellants’ motion to dismiss is therefore granted,

and this appeal is dismissed.

MATT JOHNSON

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Neill , and

Justice Johnson

Dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed March 24, 2021

[ CV06 ]
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                 SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         1,404,873
<SECURITIES>                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          0
<ALLOWANCES>                                           0
<INVENTORY>                                            0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1,554,764
<PP&E>                                         2,718,298
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1,068,515
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 3,461,214
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,500,667
<BONDS>                                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                       20,220
<COMMON>                                         149,842
<OTHER-SE>                                       908,965
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   3,461,214
<SALES>                                                0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 115,022
<CGS>                                                  0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                          0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               9,335,975
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               170,652
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (9,391,605)
<INCOME-TAX>                                           0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    0
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (9,391,605)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      (1.66)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      (1.07)
        


</TABLE>
###### Editorial Note on Part 741

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 741 appear at 84 FR 1608, Feb. 5, 2019.

#### § 741.7 Conversion to a state-chartered credit union.

Any federal credit union that petitions to convert to a state-chartered federally insured credit union is required to apply to the Regional Director for continued insurance of its accounts and meet the requirements as stated in the Act and this part. If the application for continued insurance is not approved, such insurance will terminate subject to the conditions set forth in section 206(d) of the Act.
§ 50.100 Net stable funding ratio. ( a ) *Minimum net stable funding ratio requirement.* A national bank or Federal savings association must maintain a net stable funding ratio that is equal to or greater than 1.0 on an ongoing basis in accordance with this subpart.
( b ) *Calculation of the net stable funding ratio.* For purposes of this part, a national bank's or Federal savings association's net stable funding ratio equals: ( 1 ) The national bank's or Federal savings association's available stable funding (ASF) amount, calculated pursuant to § 50.103, as of the calculation date; divided by
( 2 ) The national bank's or Federal savings association's required stable funding (RSF) amount, calculated pursuant to § 50.105, as of the calculation date.
EXHIBIT
      32.2





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





Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned hereby certifies that, to his
      knowledge, the quarterly report on Form 10-Q (the “Report”) of ANTs software
      inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), for the quarter ended March 31,
      2006:





1.  Fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of
      the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




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





This
      certification is being provided pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 and is not to be
      deemed a part of this Report, nor is it to be deemed to be “filed” for any
      purpose whatsoever.











**Date:**    May
              15, 2006
            By:
            /s/
              Kenneth Ruotolo**Kenneth
              Ruotolo, Chief Financial Officer**






A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company, and will be retained by the
      Company, and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon
      request.
#### § 119.8 Safety Management Systems.

Certificate holders authorized to conduct operations under part 121 or 135 of this chapter must have a safety management system that meets the requirements of part 5 of this chapter.

[Doc. No. FAA-2021-0419; Amdt. No. 119-21, 89 FR 33109, Apr. 26, 2024]
#### CREAGER *v.*MUSTARD, ET AL.

Setoff ill Chancery by surety — depositions not taken ten days — continuance after hearing. Where the complainant is a judgment debtor of an intestate estate, and has a judgment against him in favor of a third person, as surety for the intestate, and is the assignee of a ■separate judgment for the same debt against the intestate, he will be permitted to apply the sum he owes to pay the security debt, or if the estate is insolvent, so much as would be distributed to the debt for which he is surety.

Where depositions are taken within ten days before the court, they cannot be read if objected to, but if ruled out, the court may grant a continuance that they may be taken over

In Chancery. This case is stated in the opinion of the Court.

Fishback, for the complainant.

Fox, contra.

By the Court.

The complainant purchased land of one Flommerfelt and paid him for it into $296, for which a judgment was recovered at law that is yet unsatisfied. The complainant went security for Flommerfelt to one Lowry for $600, for which debt a judgment was recovered at law against Flommerfelt alone, a part of which still remains unsatisfied, and Lowry still holds the complainant responsible, and still has a separate judgment against him. Lowry has assigned to him all his interest in the judgment against Flommerfelt, though the amount was not paid by the complainant. The real question is, can the complainant retain the sum he owes the estate and apply it to satisfy Flommerfelt’s debt, for which he is security. If the estate of Flommerfelt is solvent, he may do so; *520but if insolvent, he can only retain the share of the estate which would be distributed to Lowry’s debtors.

The depositions offered to prove the contested facts, not having been taken ten days before the court, being objected to, must under •the rule of the court, be rejected.

By agreement the cause was continued to take the depositions over again.
From: "Christopher R. Bryant" <cbryant@lawbc.com>

To: <French.Chuck@epamail.epa.gov>

CC: Mike Buckantz <MBuckantz@rsrcorp.com>, Donna Lazzari <Donna.Lazzari@erg.com>, 

<michael.burr@erg.com>, <Topham.Nathan@epamail.epa.gov>, Homer Hine <HHine@rsrcorp.com>

Date: 2/14/2011 12:16 PM

Subject: RE: Emissions data from the Rotary furnace

Chuck,

You're memory is correct. RSR was able to conduct only two successful

test runs. A point of clarification: those runs also included emissions

from the kiln. RSR has not conducted additional tests on the rotary

furnace.

Hope this helps.

Chris

Christopher R. Bryant

BERGESON & CAMPBELL, P.C. 

1203 Nineteenth Street, NW 

Suite 300

Washington, D.C. 20036-2401

cbryant@lawbc.com

(202) 557-3818 (phone) 

(202) 355-8281 (cell)

(202) 557-3836 (fax) 

Please visit our Web Site at 

http://www.lawbc.com

This e-mail may contain confidential or privileged information. If you

are not the intended recipient, please advise by return e-mail and

delete immediately without reading or forwarding to others. 

-----Original Message-----

From: French.Chuck@epamail.epa.gov [mailto:French.Chuck@epamail.epa.gov]

Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 11:20 AM

To: Christopher R. Bryant

Cc: Mike Buckantz; Donna Lazzari; michael.burr@erg.com;

Topham.Nathan@epamail.epa.gov

Subject: Emissions data from the Rotary furnace

Hi Chris and Mike,

 I have another question. I recall that RSR submitted emissions

test data for the Rotary furnace that included only 2 successful test

runs. Correct? Since that time, has RSR completed any additional

tests of that furnace? If so, could you please send us those test

results ASAP.

Thanks.

Chuck
UNUM Corporation and Subsidiaries
Form 10-Q
March 31, 1998

EXHIBIT 15


Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC  20549


We are aware that our report dated April 22, 1998, on our review of interim
financial information of UNUM Corporation for the three month period ended March
31, 1998, and 1997, and included in the Company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q
for the quarters then ended is incorporated by reference in the following
Registration Statements:

  o  Form S-8 No. 33-31270 pertaining to the UNUM Employees 401(k) Plan
      (formerly the UNUM Employees Retirement Savings Plan and Trust)

  o  Form S-8 No. 33-19090 pertaining to the 1987 Executive Stock Option Plan

  o  Form S-8 No. 33-38225 pertaining to the 1990 Long-Term Stock Incentive Plan

  o  Form S-8 No. 33-52741 pertaining to the 1990 Long-Term Stock Incentive Plan
      (additional shares)

  o  Form S-3 No. 33-36873 pertaining to the 1990 Debt Securities

  o  Form S-3 No. 33-69132 pertaining to the 1993 Debt Securities, Preferred
      Stock, Common Stock and Warrants

  o  Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 on Form S-8 to Registration Statement on
      Form S-4 No. 33-55870 pertaining to the issuance of UNUM Corporation 
      shares upon the exercise of stock options granted under the Colonial 
      plans as defined therein

  o  Form S-3 No. 333-08187 pertaining to the 1996 Debt Securities, Preferred
      Stock, Common Stock and Warrants

  o  Form S-8 No. 333-41917 pertaining to the 1998 Goals Stock Option Plan

  o  Form S-8 No. 333-41897 pertaining to the 1996 Long-Term Stock Incentive
      Plan

Pursuant to Rule 436 (c) under the Securities Act of 1933, this report should
not be considered a part of the registration statements prepared or certified by
accountants within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.


/s/ COOPERS & LYBRAND  L.L.P.

<PAGE>
# C_2021459EN.01001901.xml

| 12.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 459/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 459/19

---

EUROPEAN FISHERIES CONTROL AGENCY

Publication of the final accounts for the financial year 2020

(2021/C 459/19)

The complete version of the final accounts may be found at the following address:

https://www.efca.europa.eu/sites/default/files/Financial_Statements_2020.pdf

---
#### KELLOGG, TREASURER, *v.*GRAHAM.

Costs ordered to be paid by a party on obtaining leave to amend his pleadings, should not be afterwards taxed and included in the final judgment — if they have been, and paid, the court will order a retaxation, and they may be recovered back.

Costs ordered to be paid in the progress of a cause, are to be collected by process of attachment, not by judgment and execution at the will of the clerk.

*S. J. Andrews*moved the court for a retaxation of costs in this case. The clerk, in taxing costs after judgment, included in the bill $23 20 costs, accrued between the filing of the pleas, and the filing of the amended pleas. It appeared that at August term, 1826, the defendant had leave to amend his pleas, upon paying all costs, ■ since filing the defective pleas. He filed his amended pleas, and *88the above costs were taxed against him. They were afterwards taxed again, and included in the judgment.

*Card,*contra.

By the Court.

A retaxation is ordered, and the clerk is directed to strike the $23 20, ordered to be paid by defendant, out of the bill; it was improperly included in it, and the plaintiff having paid it, will have a right to recover it back again.

Where costs are taxed in the progress of a cause, and ordered to be paid, they may be collected by process of attachment — not by judgment and execution, at the will of the clerk.