alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### WORTHINGTON, MURFEY & CO v S KORACH CO

Ohio Appeals, 8th Dist, Cuyahoga Co

No 9296.

Decided Feb 11, 1929

Garfield, Cross, MjacGregor, Daoust & Baldwin, Cleveland, for Worthington Murfey Co.

Mooney, Hahn, Loeser & Keough, Cleveland, for Korach Co.

MIDDLETON, PJ, and MAUCK, J, of the 4th Dist, and ROBERTS, J, of the 7th Dist, sitting.

MIDDLETON, PJ.

It is manifest we-think, that counsel for the plaintiff in this proceeding has overloo_ked entirely the fact that such judgment by the court under the conditions named has all the vitality and legal effect of the verdict of the jury. It follows from this that this court is not hearing the case de novo, nor does it have any right to reverse the judgment for any reason other than would obtain in the review of a judgment following the verdict of the jury.

It is contended, first, that the judgment was and is against the manifest weight of the evidence. There is no merit in this contention. The evidence is not only conflicting, but there is substantial proof in the record that the contract as claimed by the plaintiff was not the actual contract beween the parties. Not only does the correspondence between the parties which the plaintiff claims constitutes the alleged contract appear wholly insufficient to support such claim without further evidence, but where all the facts by way of explanations of the alleged written contract are shown, the conclusion of this court is that the judgment of the lower court was in accord with the whole evidence. There are, however, other facts in the judgment on which this conclusion may rest. There is no satisfactory evidence that the contract, .as claimed by the plaintiff, was ever ratified by the stockholders. This is so for the reason that there is no proof that said contract was ever brought to the attenion of the stockholders in any manner whatever or was ever known to them. These observations make it wholly unnecessary to discuss any further the contentions in respect to the weight of ¿he evidence.

It is contended that the trial court erred in the admission of certain oral testimony or evidence which tended to explain some of the things appearing in the correspondence between the parties. This evidence went to conversations between the parties in person and by telephone. This evidence was certainly competent, as the correspondence admittedly required some explanation. It was not error to show by oral testimony what the trust was, for which Sigmund Korach was trustee. In fact, we are persuaded that this evidence was essential to a fair understanding, of what was the actual agreement between the parties, and was essential to the claim of the plaintiff that the defendant company was the beneficiary of the trust.

There is nothing in .the whole case which affords any substantial reason for interfering with the judgment of the trial court, which judgment, as before observed, this court not only affirms, but approves.

Mauck ancj Roberts, JJ, concur.
§ 13.3 Coverage. ( a ) This part applies to any new contract with the Federal Government, unless excluded by § 13.4, provided that: ( 1 ) ( i ) It is a procurement contract for construction covered by the Davis-Bacon Act;
( ii ) It is a contract for services covered by the Service Contract Act;
( iii ) It is a contract for concessions, including any concessions contract excluded from coverage under the Service Contract Act by Department of Labor regulations at § 4.133(b); or
( iv ) It is a contract in connection with Federal property or lands and related to offering services for Federal employees, their dependents, or the general public; and
( 2 ) The wages of employees performing on or in connection with such contract are governed by the Davis-Bacon Act, the Service Contract Act, or the Fair Labor Standards Act, including employees who qualify for an exemption from the Fair Labor Standards Act's minimum wage and overtime provisions.
( b ) For contracts covered by the Service Contract Act or the Davis-Bacon Act, this part applies to prime contracts only at the thresholds specified in those statutes. For procurement contracts where employees' wages are governed by the Fair Labor Standards Act, this part applies when the prime contract exceeds the micro-purchase threshold, as defined in 41 U.S.C. 1902(a). For all other prime contracts covered by Executive Order 13706 and this part and for all subcontracts awarded under prime contracts covered by Executive Order 13706 and this part, this part applies regardless of the value of the contract.
( c ) This part only applies to contracts with the Federal Government requiring performance in whole or in part within the United States. If a contract with the Federal Government is to be performed in part within and in part outside the United States and is otherwise covered by the Executive Order and this part, the requirements of the Order and this part would apply with respect to that part of the contract that is performed within the United States.
( d ) This part does not apply to contracts for the manufacturing or furnishing of materials, supplies, articles, or equipment to the Federal Government, including those that are subject to the Walsh-Healey Public Contracts Act, 41 U.S.C. 6501 *et seq.*
#### § 102.178 Normal operations should continue.

The policy of the National Labor Relations Board is that during any period when the Board lacks a quorum normal Agency operations should continue to the greatest extent permitted by law.
Editorial Note on Part 47
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 47 appear at 75 FR 41979, July 20, 2010.

§ 47.35 Aircraft last previously registered in the United States. ( a ) A person who is the owner of an aircraft last previously registered under 49 U.S.C. Sections 44101-44104, or under other law of the United States, may register it under this part if he complies with §§ 47.3, 47.7, 47.8, 47.9, 47.11, 47.13, 47.15, and 47.17, as applicable and submits with his Aircraft Registration Application, AC Form 8050-1 an Aircraft Bill of Sale, AC Form 8050-2, signed by the seller or an equivalent conveyance, or other evidence of ownership authorized by § 47.11. ( 1 ) If the applicant bought the aircraft from the last registered owner, the conveyance must be from that owner to the applicant.
( 2 ) If the applicant did not buy the aircraft from the last registered owner, he must submit conveyances or other instruments showing consecutive transactions from the last registered owner through each intervening owner to the applicant.
( b ) If, for good reason, the applicant cannot produce the evidence of ownership required by paragraph (a) of this section, he must submit other evidence that is satisfactory to the FAA. This other evidence may be an affidavit stating why he cannot produce the required evidence, accompanied by whatever further evidence is available to prove the transaction.
[Doc. No. 7190, 31 FR 4495, Mar. 17, 1966, as amended by Amdt. 47-16, 37 FR 25487, Dec. 1, 1972; Amdt. 47-20, 44 FR 61940, Oct. 29, 1979; Amdt. 47-27, 70 FR 245, Jan. 3, 2005; 73 FR 55722, Sept. 26, 2008; Amdt. 47-29, 75 FR 41979, July 20, 2010]
§ 89.405 Submission of a means of compliance for FAA acceptance. ( a ) *Eligibility.* Any person may submit a means of compliance for acceptance by the FAA.
( b ) *Required information.* A person requesting acceptance of a means of compliance must submit the following information to the FAA in a form and manner acceptable to the Administrator: ( 1 ) The name of the person or entity submitting the means of compliance, the name of the main point of contact for communications with the FAA, the physical address, email address, and other contact information.
( 2 ) A detailed description of the means of compliance.
( 3 ) An explanation of how the means of compliance addresses all of the minimum performance requirements established in subpart D of this part so that any standard remote identification unmanned aircraft or remote identification broadcast module designed and produced in accordance with such means of compliance meets the remote identification requirements of this part.
( 4 ) Any substantiating material the person wishes the FAA to consider as part of the request.
( c ) *Testing and validation.* A means of compliance submitted for acceptance by the FAA must include testing and validation procedures for persons responsible for the production of standard remote identification unmanned aircraft or remote identification broadcast modules to demonstrate through analysis, ground test, or flight test, as appropriate, how the standard remote identification unmanned aircraft or the remote identification broadcast module performs its intended functions and meets the requirements in subpart D of this part, including any applicable FAA performance requirements for radio station operation.
§ 61.429 May I exercise the privileges of a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating if I hold a flight instructor certificate with another rating? If you hold a flight instructor certificate, a commercial pilot certificate with an airship rating, or a commercial pilot certificate with a balloon rating issued under this part, and you seek to exercise the privileges of a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating, you may do so without any further showing of proficiency, subject to the following limits: ( a ) You are limited to the aircraft category and class ratings listed on your flight instructor certificate, commercial pilot certificate with an airship rating, or commercial pilot certificate with a balloon rating, as appropriate, when exercising your flight instructor privileges and the privileges specified in § 61.413.
( b ) You must comply with the limits specified in § 61.415 and the recordkeeping requirements of § 61.423.
( c ) If you want to exercise the privileges of your flight instructor certificate in a category or class of light-sport aircraft for which you are not currently rated, you must meet all applicable requirements to provide training in an additional category or class of light-sport aircraft specified in § 61.419.
[Doc. No. FAA-2001-11133, 69 FR 44875, July 27, 2004, as amended by Amdt. 61-124, 74 FR 42562, Aug. 21, 2009; Amdt. 61-125, 75 FR 5222, Feb. 1, 2010]
#### § 1209.09 Requests for records under Freedom of Information Act.

Requests to review or obtain copies of agency records other than notices or records prepared under this part may be pursued in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Part 1208 of the Board's Rules addresses the requisite procedures under that Act.
§ 102.132 Reporting of prohibited communications; penalties. ( a ) Any Board agent of the categories defined in § 102.128 to whom a prohibited oral *ex parte* communication is attempted to be made shall refuse to listen to the communication, inform the communicator of this rule, and advise the communicator that anything may be said in writing with copies to all parties. Any Board agent who receives, or who makes or knowingly causes to be made, an unauthorized *ex parte* communication will place or cause to be placed on the public record of the proceeding: ( 1 ) The communication, if it was written;
( 2 ) A memorandum stating the substance of the communication, if it was oral;
( 3 ) All written responses to the prohibited communication; and
( 4 ) Memoranda stating the substance of all oral responses to the prohibited communication.
( b ) The Executive Secretary, if the proceeding is then pending before the Board, the Administrative Law Judge, if the proceeding is then pending before any such judge, or the Regional Director, if the proceeding is then pending before a Hearing Officer or the Regional Director, will serve copies of all such materials placed on the public record of the proceeding on all other parties to the proceeding and on the attorneys of record for the parties. Within 14 days after service of such copies, any party may file with the Executive Secretary, Administrative Law Judge, or Regional Director serving the communication, and serve on all other parties, a statement setting forth facts or contentions to rebut those contained in the prohibited communication. All such responses will be placed in the public record of the proceeding, and provision may be made for any further action, including reopening of the record which may be required under the circumstances. No action taken pursuant to this provision will constitute a waiver of the power of the Board to impose an appropriate penalty under § 102.133.
[82 FR 11778, Feb. 24, 2017]
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4892 

To amend title 54, United States Code, to provide that State law shall 

apply to the use of motor vehicles on roads within a System unit. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 10, 2020 

Mr. LEE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to 

the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend title 54, United States Code, to provide that 

State law shall apply to the use of motor vehicles on 

roads within a System unit. 

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

3 SECTION 1. APPLICATION OF STATE LAW APPLICABLE TO 

4 THE USE OF MOTOR VEHICLES ON ROADS 

5 WITHIN A SYSTEM UNIT. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 1015 of 

7 title 54, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 

8 end the following: 

9 ‘‘§ 101513. State law 

10 ‘‘(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4892 IS

1 ‘‘(1) OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE.—The term ‘off2 highway vehicle’ shall be defined by the State in 

3 which the applicable System unit is located, in ac4 cordance with the law of the State. 

5 ‘‘(2) ROAD.—The term ‘road’ means the main6 traveled surface of a roadway open to motor vehicles 

7 that is owned, controlled, or otherwise administered 

8 by the Service. 

9 ‘‘(b) APPLICABLE LAW.—The law of the State in 

10 which a System unit is located shall apply to the use of 

11 motor vehicles (including off-highway vehicles) on roads 

12 within a System unit. 

13 ‘‘(c) VIOLATIONS.—Violating a provision of State law 

14 applicable to a System unit under subsection (b) shall be 

15 prohibited in the applicable System unit.’’. 

16 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The analysis for sub17 chapter II of chapter 1015 of title 54, United States Code, 

18 is amended by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘101513. State law.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                              ACCOUNTANTS' CONSENT

The Board of Directors and Stockholders
24/7 Media, Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos.
333-47074, 333-89985 and 333-36144) on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-56308, 333-35306,
333-83287 and 333-34020) on Form S-8 of 24/7 Media, Inc. of our report dated
March 16, 2001, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of 24/7 Media, Inc.
and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2000 and 1999, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders' equity and comprehensive income (loss),
and cash flows, and the consolidated financial statement schedule, for each of
the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2000, which report appears
in the December 31, 2000 annual report on Form 10-K of 24/7 Media, Inc.

Our report dated March 16, 2001, contains an explanatory paragraph that states
that the Company has suffered recurring losses from operations since inception
that raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.
The consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule do not
include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of that uncertainty.


                                    /s/ KPMG LLP

New York, New York
March 16, 2001
# EUR-Lex - 31996D0082 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31996D0082

**96/82/EC: Commission Decision of 12 January 1996 amending Decisions 93/196/EEC and 93/197/EEC concerning animal health certificates for imports of equidae for slaughter, registered equidae and equidae for breeding and production, with regard to piroplasmosis (Text with EEA relevance) **

*
Official Journal L 019 , 25/01/1996 P. 0056 - 0056 *

COMMISSION DECISION of 12 January 1996 amending Decisions 93/196/EEC and 93/197/EEC concerning animal health certificates for imports of equidae for slaughter, registered equidae and equidae for breeding and production, with regard to piroplasmosis (Text with EEA relevance) (96/82/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 90/426/EEC of 26 June 1990 on animal health conditions governing the movement and imports from third countries of equidae (1), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden, and in particular Articles 15 and 16 thereof,

Whereas the health conditions and veterinary certification for imports of equidae for slaughter are laid down in Commission Decision 93/196/EEC (2) and for imports of registered equidae and equidae for breeding and production in Commission Decision 93/197/EEC (3), both as last amended by Decision 96/81/EC (4);

Whereas piroplasmosis (B. equi and B. caballi) is present in certain Member States of the European Community; whereas equidae seropositive for piroplasmosis are present in certain Member States;

Whereas therefore the negative serological test results required for imports of certain categories of equidae from certain third countries are no longer appropriate;

Whereas treatment of equidae to eliminate infection may be detrimental to the animals; whereas however following the treatment a shortlasting seronegativity in the required serological test does not exclude infectivity for vector ticks;

Whereas the abovementioned Decisions must be amended accordingly;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

In Annex II, chapter 'III. Health information` of Decision 93/196/EEC paragraph (j), fourth indent, is deleted.

Article 2

In the certificates D and E of Annex II, chapter 'III. Health information` of Decision 93/197/EEC paragraph (j), fourth indent, is deleted.

Article 3

This Decision shall apply from the 15th day after its notification to the Member States.

Article 4

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 12 January 1996.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ No L 224, 18. 8. 1990, p. 42.

(2) OJ No L 86, 6. 4. 1993, p. 7.

(3) OJ No L 86, 6. 4. 1993, p. 16.

(4) See page 53 of this Official Journal.
#### § 102.68 Record in pre-election proceeding; what constitutes; transmission to Board.

The record in a proceeding conducted pursuant to the foregoing section shall consist of: the petition, Notice of Hearing with affidavit of service thereof, statements of position, responses to statements of position, offers of proof made at the pre-election hearing, motions, rulings, orders, the stenographic report of the hearing and of any oral argument before the Regional Director, stipulations, exhibits, affidavits of service, and any briefs or other legal memoranda submitted by the parties to the Regional Director or to the Board, and the decision of the Regional Director, if any. Immediately upon issuance of an order granting a request for review by the Board, the Regional Director shall transmit the record to the Board.

[84 FR 69597, Dec. 18, 2019]
§ 91.130 Operations in Class C airspace. ( a ) *General.* Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, each aircraft operation in Class C airspace must be conducted in compliance with this section and § 91.129. For the purpose of this section, the primary airport is the airport for which the Class C airspace area is designated. A satellite airport is any other airport within the Class C airspace area.
( b ) *Traffic patterns.* No person may take off or land an aircraft at a satellite airport within a Class C airspace area except in compliance with FAA arrival and departure traffic patterns.
( c ) *Communications.* Each person operating an aircraft in Class C airspace must meet the following two-way radio communications requirements: ( 1 ) *Arrival or through flight.* Each person must establish two-way radio communications with the ATC facility (including foreign ATC in the case of foreign airspace designated in the United States) providing air traffic services prior to entering that airspace and thereafter maintain those communications while within that airspace.
( 2 ) *Departing flight.* Each person— ( i ) From the primary airport or satellite airport with an operating control tower must establish and maintain two-way radio communications with the control tower, and thereafter as instructed by ATC while operating in the Class C airspace area; or
( ii ) From a satellite airport without an operating control tower, must establish and maintain two-way radio communications with the ATC facility having jurisdiction over the Class C airspace area as soon as practicable after departing.
( d ) *Equipment requirements.* Unless otherwise authorized by the ATC having jurisdiction over the Class C airspace area, no person may operate an aircraft within a Class C airspace area designated for an airport unless that aircraft is equipped with the applicable equipment specified in § 91.215, and after January 1, 2020, § 91.225.
( e ) *Deviations.* An operator may deviate from any provision of this section under the provisions of an ATC authorization issued by the ATC facility having jurisdiction over the airspace concerned. ATC may authorize a deviation on a continuing basis or for an individual flight, as appropriate.
[Doc. No. 24458, 56 FR 65659, Dec. 17, 1991, as amended by Amdt. 91-232, 58 FR 40736, July 30, 1993; Amdt. 91-239, 59 FR 11693, Mar. 11, 1994; Amdt. 91-314, 75 FR 30193, May 28, 2010]