alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### AUTOMOBILE HOSPITAL CO v GRISSOM et

Ohio Appeals, 8th Dist, Cuyahoga Co

No. 9868.

Decided October 7, 1929

Mr. S. J. Friedman, Esq., Cleveland, for Auto Hosp Co.

Messrs. Hole, Jeremiah & Jewitt, Gross-man & Grossman, C. W. Swartzel, Esq., and Ford, Taylor & Hasselman, all of Cleveland, for Grissom et.

VICKERY, PJ.

Now the statement of facts submitted to the court in this case shows that when Grissom bought this land and gave his note for the full amount of the purchase price, Mrs. Grissom also signed this note. Subsequently this note was put in judgment and a levy was made upon her land. Now under the admissions of counsel for Mr. Buehler, we do not see how the judgment of the Common Pleas Court could have been rendered. We also think another equitable principle might be invoked, for even if the vendor’s lien existed, the vendor having additional security, the equitable doctrine would be invoked that where one party, the plaintiff in this action, has but one security, to-wit, the security of the land in question and the vendor has two securities, — the vendor’s lien, if he had not waived it and the additional security of the wife of the vendee, — that he would be compelled to exhaust the wife’s property before he could resort to the property upon which the plaintiff had secured its lien, but under the frank admissions of counsel in this case that principle is not necessary to be invoked. It is admitted in this court or proven that Buehler did not rely upon his vendor’s lien; that he took additional security, that is, the signature of the wife of the vendee, and the attorney representing Buehler admits that that destroys the vendor’s lien.

Under those circumstances we think that a proper judgment in this case should be: The first and best lien upon this property, or the funds realized from its sale, is the plaintiff’s judgment; the second is Buehler’s for the unpaid portion of the purchase price; and the third, The Union Trust Company’s mortgage, after satisfying two prior small lienholders. A journal entry may be drawn to this effect.

Decree, order see journal.

Sullivan and Levine, JJ, concur.
#### § 1905.30 Decision of the Assistant Secretary.

If exceptions to a decision of a hearing examiner are taken pursuant to § 1905.28, the Assistant Secretary shall upon consideration thereof, together with the record references and authorities cited in support thereof, and any objections to exceptions and supporting reasons, make his decision. The decision may affirm, modify, or set aside, in whole or part, the findings, conclusions, and the rule or order contained in the decision of the presiding hearing examiner, and shall include a statement of reasons or bases for the actions taken on each exception presented.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

N o. 04

- 20

- 00364

- CR

EX PARTE Bobby BORDELON

From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 15

- 2215

- CR

- C

Honorable William J. Old, III, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARTINEZ , JUSTICE WATKINS, AND JUSTICE RODRIGUEZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s order denying

appellant’s habeas application seeking to reduce the amount of his bond is AFFIRMED.

SIGNED May 1 9 , 2021.

_____________________________ Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice
ex-10_2.htm









Trilliant Exploration Corporation 8-K

 

Exhibit 10.2




 



 



 







 


Trilliant Exploration Corporation 8-K





 



 



2







 


Trilliant Exploration Corporation 8-K





 



 



3







 


Trilliant Exploration Corporation 8-K





 



 



4







 


Trilliant Exploration Corporation 8-K





 



 



5







 


Trilliant Exploration Corporation 8-K





 



 



6







 


Trilliant Exploration Corporation 8-K





 



 



7







 


Trilliant Exploration Corporation 8-K





 

8
§ 1610.1 Definitions. ( a ) *Title VII* refers to title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by Public Law 92-261, 42 U.S.C. (Supp. II) 2000e *et seq.*
( b ) *Commission* refers to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
( c ) *Freedom of Information Act* refers to 5 U.S.C. 552 (Pub. L. 90-23 as amended by Pub. L. 93-502).
( d ) *Attestation* refers to the authentication of copies of Commission documents by an affidavit or unsworn declaration from the records custodian without the Commission Seal.
( e ) *Certification* refers to the authentication of copies of Commission documents by an affidavit or unsworn declaration from the records custodian under the Commission Seal.
( f ) *Agency record* includes any information maintained for an agency by an entity under Government contract, for the purposes of records management.
( g ) *FOIA Public Liaison* means an agency official who is responsible for assisting in reducing delays, increasing transparency and understanding of the status of requests, and assisting in the resolution of disputes.
[40 FR 8171, Feb. 26, 1975, as amended at 52 FR 13830, Apr. 27, 1987; 70 FR 57511, Oct. 3, 2005; 78 FR 36650, June 19, 2013; 81 FR 95870, Dec. 29, 2016]
\ DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR i" , . /
| UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY / .
aie +1 5°00 , r
ey |
ad a i o .
. 7 (
. 24
|
iat '700
} : 4
es v 1500
he, : + i ’
a P. 2 1300
! Salt £
pat! ; 3
Z ft g 1100
_ ey ‘
900

Anchora:

Niele” ; ibaa 100 9 100 200 300 miles
‘ a | ; | ' (sot
#3 a e i Scale
f oF: t . ‘
A i INDEX MAP OF ALASKA SHOWING LOCATION OF SEWARD PENINSULA AIRBORNE GEOPHYSICAL |
SURVEYS, 1968. SEE DETAILED INDEX FOR ACTUAL COVERAGE.

& :

RENETIOFSRADIENT NOT R
. if ‘4
‘AL INTENSITY OF FIELO:!
ION :+75° i

7
ING DETAILED LOCATION OF
SICAL SURVEYS IN SE!
COVERAGE CONFINED TO
BY DASHED LINES PLUS
LES

RNE 'GE

‘a. i
;
\ ¥;
og
~e
¥
>
e
\
“ T
oo, \
-

OPHYSICAL SURVEYS IN

IN

165°45'

eee eS F
+ “t:

>

2 mices

J

10,00 Feet

SEWARD PENI NS

. . 64-2
: We ~ OPEN FILE 1969
r “e ~.7 : 165°30"
y ae tae ( 64°35
a . ve. eT

. ae
eth,

\ i
-
.
TM j 6
athe #
7 coal
, al 4
> 1
- dl
se ae wt
eee:
bit
hoa %
Gent

wy Inc., 1968.
a
F PART OF THE

% OOS ‘
ae ACH ALASKA
i ee ge SHEET NUMBER OF I!
°S. GEOLOGICAL SUR Thi i Pie j
Relpased ‘to chen Yad ‘et a + nat nat mn LKB 1968
—. TM oF ; d for
#4 Tw pa, cote
a
o 4

% A. ; 165°
‘compiled by Lockwood, Kessler,
EXHIBIT 32.1


                                  CERTIFICATION


         Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
the Annual Report of Columbus McKinnon  Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K
for the year ended March 31,  2004,  fully  complies  with the  requirements  of
Section  13(a)  or  15(d)  of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of  1934  and  that
information contained in the such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents, in
all material respects,  the financial  condition and result of operations of the
Company.

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been  provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and  furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


Dated:  June 22, 2004
        -------------


                                                      /S/ TIMOTHY T. TEVENS
                                                      -----------------------
                                                      Timothy T. Tevens
                                                      Chief Executive Officer


                                                      /S/ ROBERT R. FRIEDL
                                                      ----------------------
                                                      Robert R. Friedl
                                                      Chief Financial Officer
## t>oT..O!;T·201\-0

## l'!6'

August 7, 2012

Dennis 

### J. DeVany Chief, Essential Air Service Division, X-53 Dear Dennis: The .Brainerd Lakes Regional Airport Commission encourages you to consider SkyWest's RFP to serve the Brainerd Community. We feel that SkyWest has a good and reliable business record and providing CRJ200 will best provide for ourpassengerneeds. The CRJ will give us the capability to use ourjet bridge, which makes boarding passengers ofall ages and physical challenges easier. This aircraft also has the ability to carry the cargo for our hockey camps and golfing passengers. Plus, SkyWest serving the Brainerd area through Delta keeps the rewards program intact for our frequent flyers. · As stewards ofthe public's money, SkyWest's RFP makes the most sense. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely,
AndyL

1a1r, Airport Commission Cj: 

## 5i
**EXHIBIT 31.1****CERTIFICATIONS**I, James Y. Gleasman, Chief Executive Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer of Torvec, Inc.,hereby certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Torvec, Inc. 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly presentin all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for,the periods presented in this report; 4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;  b) [Reserved] [Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8392 and 34-49313.]  c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered bythis report based upon such evaluation; and  d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.   Date: April 17,2006 S — James Y. Gleasman  James Y. Gleasman  Chief Executive Officer, Interim Chief  Financial Officer
#### College Arms Hotel Company *et al., Appellants,*v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company *et al., Appellees.*

1. Persons who own property at a town adjoining a railroad depot, and who, relying upon the continuance of the depot at the place, have improved the property, and “have enjoyed special facilities in the conduct of their business” incident to such location, have no right, on the ground of special and peculiar injury to their property rights, to enjoin the enforcement of an order of the Railroad Commissioners for the removal of the depot to another point at the town.

2. Individuals have a right of access but not of proximity to a railroad depot.

This case was decided by the court En Banc.

The i!acts in the case are stated in the opinion of the court.

*Wright & Wright*and *Geo. M. Roth ins,*for Appellants;

*Louis G. Massey,*for Appellees.

On Rehearing.

Whitfield, C. J.

Persons who own property at a town adjoining a railroad depot, and who, relying upon the continuance of the depot at the place, have improved the property, and “have enjoyed special facilities in the conduct of their business” incident to such location, have no right, on the ground of special and peculiar injury to their property rights, to enjoin the enforcement of an order of the Railroad Commissioners for the removal of the depot to another point at the town.

A railroad depot should be located with reference to *554the public convenience, and all persons are entitled to reasonable and impartial service at the depot; but except as may be lawfully authorized by section 2818, General Statutes of 1906, individuals cannot by suit enforce the location or continuance of a depot at a particular point on the ground of property rights. Individuals have a right of access but not of proximity to a railroad depot. The mere location of a depot is not *per se*a nuisance as is the obstruction of a public highway. Property losses incident to the removal of a depot that result in consequence of the exercise of lawful authority, do not afford a right of action where no trespass is committed upon private property. In the authorized removal of a depot no law is violated as in case of excessive charges or unjust discriminations. If depots are located in violation of the rights of the public, the wrong may be redressed through appropriate action taken by the proper public authorities.

A rehearing is denied.

All concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND RELATED NOTES
CONTAINED IN THIS FILING AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL INFORMATION.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-09-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1999
<CASH>                                     250,817,847
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           250,817,847
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             250,817,847
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          107,482
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,694
<OTHER-SE>                                 250,705,671
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               250,817,847
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               825,721
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  116,356
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                710,365
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            710,365
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   710,365
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .43
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .43
        

</TABLE>
#### CLEVELAND BUILDERS SUPPLY AND BRICK CO v SCHWARTZ et.

Ohio Appeals, 8th Dist, Cuyahoga Co.

No 9781.

Decided June 11, 1929

Griswald, Green, Palmer & Hadden, Cleveland, for- Bldrs. Supp. Co.

Wilbur T. Smith, Esq., Cleveland, Depew C. Freer, Esq., and William F. Waldeisen, Esq., Cleveland for Schwartz.

Judges JUSTICE & HUGHES (3rd Dist.) and MAUCK (4th' Dist.) sitting

HUGHES, J.

The Tregenne Sheet Metal and Furnace Company failed to prepare an affidavit required by 8312 GC of a subcontractor and serve notice thereof either upon the owner or head contractor.

The law of this district, touching this issue, is settled by the decision of the Cuyahoga County Court of Appeals in the case of Gannon vs. Potter and Teare Company, 30 O. C. A. 566, adverse to the claimed lien of this defendant company and hence our judgment must be against The Tregenna Sheet Metal and Furnace Company.

The lien of the defendant The Gerspacher Plumbing and Heating Company is resisted solely upon the claim that the same is void because the affidavit for lien was sworn to before a Notary Public who was also the attorney for the claimant.

With this position we are not in accord. We are unable to formulate what would seem to us any reasonable argument requiring the application of the principle that an attorney for a party in an action or proceeding shall not act as notary in administering his client’s oath to an affidavit to be used in such action or proceeding, to all cases where attorney: as notaries have sworn their clients to affidavits on chattel mortgages, on affidavits for liens, or powers of attorney, acknowledgements to deeds, mortgages, leases and the like.

We have reviewed the cases found in Corpus Juris and Ruling Case Law under the title of “Affidavits” and conclude that the rule established by the vast weight of authority is that only where the affidavit is to be used in a sense as evidence in an action or proceeding is it invalidated by the fact that it was sworn to before an officer who was also the attorney for affiant.

Holding these views our judgment is here for the defendant, The Gerspacher Plumbing and Heating Company.

Inasmuch as our judgment here pronounced is in conflict with the judgment of the Hamilton Court of Appeals, reported in the case of Conroy Bros. vs. Duggan, 17 App. 429, we make this finding of conflict also and certify this case to the Supreme Court.

Justice and Mauck, JJ, concur.
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.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice #: 3309] 

The U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy, reauthorized pursuant to Public Law 106-113 (H.R. 3194, consolidated Appropriations Act, 2000), will meet on Thursday, May 18, 2000, in Room 600, 301 4th St., SW, Washington, DC from 2:00 pm to 3:00 pm.

The Commission will discuss its plans for assessing the consolidation of USIA into the State Department and the effectiveness of U.S. public diplomacy in the former Soviet Union.

Members of the general public may attend the meeting, though attendance of public members will be limited to the seating available. Access to the building is controlled, and individual building passes are required for all attendees. Persons who plan to attend should contact David J. Kramer, Executive Director, at (202) 619-4463.

Dated: May 10, 2000.

David J. Kramer,

Executive Director, U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 00-12279  Filed 5-11-00; 3:10 pm]

BILLING CODE 4710-11-P
#### § 1603.105 Withdrawal of a complaint.

The complainant may withdraw a complaint at any time by so advising the Commission in writing.
# EUR-Lex - 31998D0295 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31998D0295

**98/295/EC: Commission Decision of 22 April 1998 on the recognition of the Hellenic Register of Shipping in accordance with Council Directive 94/57/EC (Only the Greek text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) **

*
Official Journal L 131 , 05/05/1998 P. 0034 - 0034 *

COMMISSION DECISION of 22 April 1998 on the recognition of the Hellenic Register of Shipping in accordance with Council Directive 94/57/EC (Only the Greek text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) (98/295/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 94/57/EC of 22 November 1994 on common rules and standards for ship inspection and survey organisations and for the relevant activities of maritime administration (1), and in particular Article 4(3) thereof,

Whereas Article 4(3) of Council Directive 94/57/EC states that Member States may submit to the Commission a request for a recognition of three years for organisations which meet all the criteria of the Annex other than those set out under paragraph 2 and 3 of the section 'General` of the Annex;

Whereas the Commission has verified that the Hellenic Register of Shipping, which had previously been notified on the basis of Article 4(2) of Council Directive 94/57/EC, meets all the criteria of the Annex to the abovementioned Directive other than those set out under paragraph 2 and 3 of section 'General` of such Annex;

Whereas Greece has submitted a request for adapting the recognition of the Hellenic Register of Shipping according to Article 4(3) of the abovementioned Directive;

Whereas the provisions of this Decision are in line with the opinion of the Committee set out in Article 7 of Directive 94/57/EC,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The Hellenic Register of Shipping is recognised pursuant to Article 4(3) of Council Directive 94/57/EC for a period of three years as from the date of adoption of this Decision.

Article 2

The effects of this recognition are limited to Greece.

Article 3

This Decision is addressed to the Hellenic Republic.

Done at Brussels, 22 April 1998.

For the Commission

Neil KINNOCK

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 319, 12. 12. 1994, p. 20.