alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### M. P. Moller, Inc., Appellant, *v.*Temple Israel of Washington Heights, Inc., et al., Respondents.

Argued January 27, 1937;

decided March 9, 1937.

*572
      *Ludwig M. Wilson*and *Francis A. Devin*for appellant.

*John B. McGuire*and *Albert C. Kelly*for Emigrant Industrial Savings Bank, respondent.

*Theodore Charnas, Emil Levitt*and *Abraham J. Gellinoff*for Temple Israel of Washington Heights, Inc., et al., respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Appeal from order denying new trial dismissed. No opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Lottghran, Einch and Rippet, JJ. Talcing no part: Htibbs, J.
<PAGE>


                                                                      EXHIBIT 23


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (Registration Statement Nos. 33-54879, 33-48490,
33-48673, 33-52797, 33-52799, 333-61351, 333-28621, 333-45212 and 333-56534)
and the Prospectus constituting part of the Registration Statements on Form S-3
(Registration Statement Nos. 333-93023 and 333-74665) of Kmart Corporation of
our report dated May 15, 2002 relating to the financial statements and
financial statement schedule, which appears in this Form 10-K.


/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Detroit, Michigan
May 15, 2002
§ 91.1013 Operational control briefing and acknowledgment. ( a ) Upon the signing of an initial program management services contract, or a renewal or extension of a program management services contract, the program manager must brief the fractional owner on the owner's operational control responsibilities, and the owner must review and sign an acknowledgment of these operational control responsibilities. The acknowledgment must be included with the program management services contract. The acknowledgment must define when a fractional owner is in operational control and the owner's responsibilities and liabilities under the program. These include: ( 1 ) Responsibility for compliance with the management specifications and all applicable regulations.
( 2 ) Enforcement actions for any noncompliance.
( 3 ) Liability risk in the event of a flight-related occurrence that causes personal injury or property damage.
( b ) The fractional owner's signature on the acknowledgment will serve as the owner's affirmation that the owner has read, understands, and accepts the operational control responsibilities described in the acknowledgment.
( c ) Each program manager must ensure that the fractional owner or owner's representatives have access to the acknowledgments for such owner's program aircraft. Each program manager must ensure that the FAA has access to the acknowledgments for all program aircraft.
#### RAGAN v. THE STATE.

(Decided June 30, 1916.)

Appeal from Cherokee Circuit Court.

Heard before Hon. W. W. Haralson.

Geo. D. Motley, for appellant.

W. L. Martin, Attorney General, and Harwell G. Davis, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Brown, J. —

The indictment follows the code form and is sufficient. Affirmed.
#### BILEK et v BROZ Exr etc

Ohio Appeals, 8th Dist, Cuyahoga Co

No 10066.

Decided May 27, 1929

Payer, Minshall, Karch & Kerr, Cleveland, for Bilek.

George Palda, Cleveland, for Broz.

PER CURIAM

The only basis upon which the defendants c,an assert title is the original journal entry which granted to them specific performance of the lease on the premises embraced in this action; but this decree granting specific performance was conditional. None of these conditions set forth in the decree were ever complied with and for that reason we are of the opinion that the decree for specific performance never became effective, nor did it invest the defendants with any title or interest in the permises. It is not a sufficient answer on the part of defendants to say that the plaintiffs declared, after the decree for specific performance was granted to défendants, that he would not comply with the terms of the lease, and because of that, tender of performance is unnecessary on the part of defendants. This is true only in cases of contracts for the sale or lease of real estate for a term of years wherein specific performance is sought. In such cases equity does not require ,a vain act and no tender of performance is necesary on the part of parties seeking specific performance, if it appears that such tender would be a vain act in view of the declaration of the other party that he would upon no circumstances accept such tender or perform his part. This case, however, is far different. The defendants rely upon a. journal entry to support their claim that they have an interest by way of lease in the land. Without their journal entry the defendants could lay no’ claim whatsoever to any interest in the land. We must look to the journal entry alone. It is conditional in its nature and it appearing that five years have elapsed without compliance with these conditions on the part of defendants, the conditional journal entry which appears of record remains as a cloud upon the title of the plaintiff, and in our opinion should be removed.

A decree therefore will be ordered accordingly, quieting title in the plaintiff. A journal entry will be drawn accordingly.

Vickery, PJ, Levine and Sullivan, JJ, concur.
#### § 1602.48 Records to be made or kept.

Commencing August 1, 1975, every institution of higher education, whether public or private, with 15 or more employees, shall make or keep all records, and information therefrom, which are or would be necessary for the completion of Higher Education Staff Information Report EEO-6 whether or not it is required to file such a report under § 1602.50. The instructions for completion of Report EEO-6 are specifically incorporated herein by reference and have the same force and effect as other sections of this part.[1] Such records, and the information therefrom, shall be retained at all times for a period of three years at the central administrative office of the institution of higher education, at the central administrative office of a separate campus or branch, or at an individual school which is the subject of the records and information, where more convenient. Such records, and the information therefrom, shall be made available if requested by the Commission or its representative under section 710 of title VII and 29 U.S.C. 161. It is the responsibility of every institution of higher education to obtain from the Commission or its delegate the necessary instructions in order to comply with the requirements of this section.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 3046-0009)

[40 FR 25188, June 12, 1975, as amended at 46 FR 63268, Dec. 31, 1981]

###### Footnotes -
  1602.48

[1] Note: Instructions were published as an appendix to the regulations at 40 FR 25188, June 12, 1975.
exv10w41






Exhibit 10.41



Confidential Treatment has been requested for portions of this exhibit. The copy filed herewith
omits the information subject to the confidentiality request. Omissions are designated as “***”. A
complete version of this exhibit has been filed separately with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.




Addendum to ACCESS AGREEMENT




Between GAIN Capital Group, LLC and Questrade, Inc.




Dated December 2004



In consideration for the mutual promises Contained herein and the consideration for the Agreement,
the
parties hereto agree to amend and revise the Agreement as per Section 3 as follows:




SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED.




Payment for Order Flow



GAIN will compensate Questrade, Inc. *** on standard forex fixed spreads; ***
per million on forex fractional spreads; USD $40 per million on ForexPro; *** on GainPro per round
trip base currency unit transaction executed by Customers originated by Questrade. GAIN will
compensate Questrade the Fee for all customers selected to participate in the Default Program. All
other customers will not be affected by this Addendum.



All volume calculations to determine the Fee will begin the first trading day of each calendar
month and
end the last trading day of each calendar month. GAIN will make these fee payment to Questrade for
trade order flow during the initial term of the Agreement between GAIN and Questrade provided both
parties honor all terms and conditions of the Agreement and this Addendum.



All other terms under this provision are not affected by this Addendum.



To the extent this Addendum shall be deemed inconsistent with any terms or conditions of this
Agreement, the terms of this Agreement shall govern.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned hereby acknowledges having read this Addendum,
understands and consent to be bound by all Its terms.




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Questrade, Inc,	 	 	 	GAIN Capital Group, LLC	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	/s/ Edward Kholodenko	 	 	 	By:	 	/s/ Tom Levine	 	 
	Print Name: Edward Kholodenko	 	 	 	Name: Tom Levine	 	 
	Title: President & CEO	 	 	 	Title: Director	 	 
	Date: 10/12/07	 	 	 	Date: 10/10/07
Statement Pursuant to
Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002






The
undersigned, Daniel Dror, CEO, President and Chairman of American International
Industries Inc., a Nevada corporation, hereby makes the following certification
as required by Section 906(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, with respect to
the following of this report filed pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934: Quarterly Report of Form 10-Q for the period ended March
31, 2008.






The
undersigned certifies that the above quarterly report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
information contained in the above annual report fairly presents, in all
respects, the financial condition of American International Industries Inc. and
results of its operations.






Date:May 14,
2008


Daniel
Dror


Chairman


/s/ Daniel
Dror
§ 1208.4 Material relating to representation function. ( a ) The documents constituting the record of a case, such as the notices of hearing, motions, rulings, findings upon investigation, determinations of craft or class, dismissals, withdrawals, and certifications, are matters of official record and shall be made available on the NMB's Web site.
( b ) This part notwithstanding, the NMB will treat as confidential evidence submitted in connection with the showing of interest in a representation dispute, including authorization cards and signature samples, and other personally identifying information received during an investigation.
#### GORMAN v. STAR REBOUND CONTROLLER CO.

Ohio Appeals, 8th Dist., Cuyahoga Co.

No. 9507.

Decided Dec. 3, 1928.

Gerald A. Doyle, Cleveland, for Gorman.

T. J, Moffett, Cleveland, for Controller Co.

*36SULLIVAN, P. J.

We find upon examination, that the statement of claim filed in the lower court and the allegations of the petition filed in the Federal Court are substantial, in character and averments and it appearing that the parties are the same as well as the subject matter there is no question in our mind that the doctrine of res adjudicate. applies.

It is conclusive that had the plaintiff in the Federal action proceeded to trial the cause of action in the court below would necessarily have been included. This being so it is clear that the doctrine of res adjudicate operates.

The sustaining of the demurrer in the Federal Court results in a status as to the allegations of the petition that would .exist had the demurrer been overruled instead of sustained and the c,ase proceeded to trial, and from an examination of those allegations, together with the examination of the record in the case at bar, .there is no question in our minds but that the parties being the same, the subject matter being the same, and the matter having already been adjudicated, by the Federal Court, that the doctrine of res adjudicate impregnated the hearing in the court below and consequently the court was correct in its ruling.

It is unnecessary to quote a mass of authorities but we cite:

> Hull vs Norris, 14 O. App. 108, affirmed 100 O. S. 521. Covington Bridge Co. vs Sargent, 27 O. S. 233.

Holding these views, the judgment of the lower court is hereby affirmed.

Vickery and Levine ,JJ., concur.
#### § 91.601 Applicability.

This subpart applies to operation of large and transport category U.S.-registered civil aircraft.
#### § 13.22 Paid sick leave.

The contractor shall allow all employees performing work on or in connection with a covered contract to accrue and use paid sick leave as required by Executive Order 13706 and this part.
# EUR-Lex - 31995D0210 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31995D0210

**95/210/EC: Commission Decision of 7 June 1995 approving the programme for the eradication of Aujeszky's disease in certain parts of Germany **

*
Official Journal L 132 , 16/06/1995 P. 0019 - 0020 *

COMMISSION DECISION of 7 June 1995 approving the programme for the eradication of Aujeszky's disease in certain parts of Germany (Text with EEA relevance) (95/210/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 64/432/EEC of 26 June 1964 on animal health problems affecting intra-Community trade in bovine animals and swine (1), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden, and in particular Article 9 thereof,

Whereas an eradication programme was commenced in certain parts of Germany for Aujeszky's disease in 1989;

Whereas by letter dated 30 December 1994, Germany has submitted information on its eradication programme for Aujeszky's disease;

Whereas in accordance with Article 9 (2) of Directive 64/432/EEC the Commission has examined the programme; whereas it meets the criteria laid down in Article 9 (1) of the said Directive and can therefore be approved;

Whereas the programme should allow Aujeszky's disease to be eradicated from those regions listed in the Annex in the future;

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

The programme for the eradication of Aujeszky's disease from the regions of Germany listed in the Annex is hereby approved for a period of three years.

Article 2

Germany shall bring into force by 15 June 1995 the laws, regulations and administrative provisions for implementing the programme referred to in Article 1.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 15 June 1995.

Article 4

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 7 June 1995.

For the Commission Franz FISCHLER Member of the Commission

ANNEX

All Regions of Germany except the Laender of Sachsen, Thueringen and Brandenburg.
#### § 1471.930 Debarment.

*Debarment* means an action taken by a debarring official under subpart H of this part to exclude a person from participating in covered transactions and transactions covered under the Federal Acquisition Regulation (48 CFR chapter 1). A person so excluded is debarred.
Exhibit 23.0  Consent of Olive to Publish Their Consolidated Financial
              Statements Dated March 31, 2000 and 1999

                      INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S CONSENT

                      The Board of Directors
                      CGB&L Financial Group, Inc.

                      We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference, in
                      Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed with the SEC on
                      October 29, 1999 on behalf of CGB&L Financial Group,
                      Inc., of our report dated April 20, 2000 on the
                      consolidated financial statements of CGB&L Financial
                      Group, Inc. and subsidiary for the year ended March 31,
                      2000, which report is incorporated in the Company's 2000
                      Annual Report to Stockholders on Form 10-KSB of CGB&L
                      Financial Group, Inc.

                      By:   /s/ Olive LLP

                      Decatur, Illinois
                      June 27, 2000
#### PARSONS v. THE STATE.

(Decided December 19, 1916.)

Appeal from Bessemer City Court.

Heard before Hon. J. C. B. Gwin.

Lee Cowart, for appellant.

W. L. Martin, Attorney General, for the State.

Evans, J.

This cause is affirmed on authority of *Dorrough’s Case,*14 Ala. 110, 72 South. 208; *Mitchell v. State, 14*Ala. App. 104, 71 South. 982.
§ 382.31 May carriers impose special charges on passengers with a disability for providing services and accommodations required by this rule? ( a ) Except as otherwise provided in this part you must not, as a carrier, impose charges for providing facilities, equipment, or services that this rule requires to be provided to passengers with a disability. You may charge for services that this part does not require.
( b ) You may charge a passenger for the use of more than one seat if the passenger's size or condition (e.g., use of a stretcher) causes him or her to occupy the space of more than one seat. This is not considered a special charge under this section.
[Doc. No. DOT-OST-2004-19482, 73 FR 27665, May 13, 2008, as amended at 78 FR 67914, Nov. 12, 2013]
#### Charles Blum, et al., Appellants, v. Samuel J. McGehee, Appellee.

Appeal from decree of the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Appeal dismissed on motion of counsel for Appellee.

Jordan & ICaufman, for Appellants;

Bryan & Brvan, for Appellee.
###### Editorial Note on Subpart Z of Part 1910

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1910 appear at 84 FR 21597, May 14, 2019.

#### § 1910.1006 Methyl chloromethyl ether.

See § 1910.1003, *13 carcinogens.*

[61 FR 9245, Mar. 7, 1996]
II 

Calendar No. 549 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4618 

Making emergency supplemental appropriations for disaster relief for the 

fiscal year ending September 30, 2020, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 17, 2020 

Mr. PORTMAN (for himself and Mr. TILLIS) introduced the following bill; 

which was read the first time 

SEPTEMBER 21, 2020 

Read the second time and placed on the calendar 

A BILL 

Making emergency supplemental appropriations for disaster 

relief for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020, 

and for other purposes. 

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

3 That the following sums in this Act are appropriated, out 

4 of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, 

5 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020, and for 

6 other purposes, namely: 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4618 PCS

1 DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

2 PROTECTION, PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND 

3 RECOVERY 

4 FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

5 DISASTER RELIEF FUND

6 (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

7 For an additional amount for ‘‘Disaster Relief Fund’’ 

8 $86,600,000,000, to remain available until expended: Pro9 vided, That the amount provided herein is designated by 

10 the Congress as being for an emergency requirement pur11 suant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Balanced Budget 

12 and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 

13 901(b)(2)(A)(i)). 

14 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Ensuring Relief for 

15 Americans Impacted by Economic and Natural Disasters 

16 Act, 2020’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS

pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 549 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4618 

A BILL 

Making emergency supplemental appropriations for 

tember 30, 2020, and for other purposes. disaster relief for the fiscal year ending SepSEPTEMBER 21, 2020 

Read the second time and placed on the calendar 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
#### Stephen M. Chester, Resp’t, *v.*Francois Henry Jumel *et al.,*App’lts.

*(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department,*

*Filed May 24, 1889.)*

1. Additional allowance—When proper.

In a difficult and extraordinary action, an allowance, in addition to the costs, is proper.

2. Same—Against whom chargeable.

Where it appeared that the litigation arose principally out of the contest of the defendants, the additional allowances were properly charged against moneys belonging to them.

Appeal from an order of the special term, making addi tional allowances of costs.

*Everett P. Wheeler,*for app’lts; *Douglas Campbell,*for resp’t.

*231Daniels, J.

By the order from which the appeal has been taken, the sum of $500, in addition to the costs, was allowed to the plaintiff in the action, and, as the suit was brought for the benefit of all the parties to it, in order to secure a settlement of their rights before a distribution of the fund, or property, should be made, this allowance seems, under the circumstances, to have been proper. That the action was difficult and extraordinary is substantially free from doubt. Upon each side of the case that was clearly its character, and the allowance to the plaintiff does not appear to have been, in any manner, excessive.

A further allowance of $1,000 was made to the defendant Campbell. The sum of $500 was allowed to -the defendant Smith; and a like amount to the defendant Schermerhorn. His claim, as it was directed to be paid, should be reduced by the deduction of interest allowed from August 28, 1880 to April 3, 1888, and a corresponding reduction should, consequently, be made in this allowance of costs.

As to the others, no reason appears for interfering with them. They have been made payable out of a fund realized by the defendant Chambrun, and the Jumel heirs. Ho other person, therefore, had any reason to, or has complained of these allowances, and, as the litigation, protracted as it was, principally arose out of the contest of these defendants, .the allowances were properly charged against moneys belonging to them.

The order directing their payment, with the single exception which has been stated, seems to have been right; and, with the modification reducing the allowance to Schermerhorn in the proposition in which the moneys awarded to him have been reduced, should be affirmed without costs to either party.

Van Brunt, Oh. J., concurs.
#### § 1601.76 Right of party to request review.

The Commission shall notify the parties whose cases are to be processed by the designated, certified FEP agency of their right, if aggrieved by the agency's final action, to request review by the Commission within 15 days of that action. The Commission, on receipt of a request for review, shall conduct such review in accord with the procedures set forth in the Substantial Weight Review Procedures.

[46 FR 50367, Oct. 13, 1981. Redesignated at 56 FR 9625, Mar. 7, 1991; 85 FR 65219, Oct. 15, 2020]
**Exhibit 10.47**

 

**Base Salaries for Named ExecutiveOfficers**

 

In December 2005,the Compensation Group of E.ON U.S. approved base salary increases forexecutive officers for 2006. The 2006 salaries for LG&E’s and KU’s namedexecutive officers are as follows:

 
| **Officer Name**      | ** ** | **2006 Base  Salary** | ** ** |
|-----------------------|------------|-----------------------|------------|
| Hermann, Chris        |       | $                     | 284,000    |   |
|                  |       |                  |       |
| McCall, John R.       |       | $                     | 442,500    |   |
|                  |       |                  |       |
| Rives, S.  Bradford   |       | $                     | 360,900    |   |
|                  |       |                  |       |
| Thompson, Paul  W.    |       | $                     | 336,900    |   |
|                  |       |                  |       |
| Staffieri,  Victor A. |       | $                     | 728,170    |   |

 

The salary increases wereeffective December 19, 2005.

 

----