alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### SONN v KEIPER, et

Ohio Appeals, 8th Dist, Cuyahoga Co.

No. 9702.

Decided June 10, 1929

Yetta Land and J. B. Oviatt, Cleveland, for Sonn.

Philipp Bartell, Cleveland, for Keiper.

*413SULLIVAN, J.

In order to determine whether a cause is appealable, it is necessary under the former judgments of this and other courts, to recur to the pleadings, for by them only is the question ascertainable. Relieving the pleadings of much redundancy and irrelevancy, the issues projecting therefrom are, personal judgment on the note, and foreclosure under the mortgage, and it is well settled that such a proceeding is not a chancery case but a suit at law, and the only issue, after stripping the answer and cross-petition to all material matter, is a denial of the allegations with respect to the note and mortgage, a counter-claim for which judgment is prayed as an offset against the note sued upon, and the pleadings of a defense by allegations of fraud, and from this status the issues are raised and it therefore appears clear under the authorities that the questions raised are jury issues as either party could have demanded a jury, but it appears that a jury was waived and the cause was tried to the court, but this does not alter the right of either party to have had a jury to try the issues of fact.

The off-set alleged by way of counterclaim discloses that what the cross-petitioner really seeks to do is to have a judgmen for damages rendered in its favor in money, because of breach of warranty and this element in the case does not transfer the issue to one in chancery. The cause remains a suit at law.

In the 30 OS. 375, Brundridge v. Goodlove, the court held that an action for money and personal judgment, even though equitable relief was also sought, is not appealable, and in Ladd v James, 10 OS. 437; Realty Co. v. Tweedy 34 Cir. Ct. Rep (NS) 495; Lumber Co. v. Troxel, 10 Cir. Ct. (NS) 83; Toledo v. Barnes 8 Cir. Ct. 684, there are the same holdings and the authorities are equally applicable to the offset of the defendants on the cross-petition by way of counter-claim. In other words, these authorities cited apply to the defendants’ cross-petition as well as to the allegations of the petition.

It is conclusive from the cross-petition that the basis of the claim is defensive and not .affirmative and although an accounting is asked for, it is irrelevant to the naked issues.

It will be noted that we are undertaking to solve this question from the pleadings alone for it is only from these sources that the question under discussion can be determined. While it is true that a petition may denote a law case purely and that it may be transformed into a case in chancery by reason of a cross-petition, yet we do not see such a situation in the present case, because the primary issue is whether the plaintiff is entitled to a money judgment for the amount claimed or for a lesser amount by reason of the counterclaim, and in either-event the question is one of law instead of chancery.

Holding these views the motion to dismiss the appeal is hereby sustained^

Vickery, PJ and Levine, J, concur.
#### WRIGHT v. CLARK, et.

Ohio Supreme Court.

No. 21080.

Decided Dec. 19, 1928.

MARSHALL, C. J.

OFFICE & OFFICERS.

(400 E) The engineer of a city or village is an officer within the meaning and intent of Section' 3808, General Code, and therefore inhibited from becoming interested in the expenditures of money \of the corporation other than payment of his fixed compensation.

Sections 4364 and 4366, General Code, create the office of engineer of a municipality and define the powers and duties of of such office.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.

' (360 S2) Neither fraud, nor conspiracy, nor unreasonable profits, are necessary for recovery of money from an-officer of a city or village, under the provisions of Section 3808, General Code.

Day, Allen, ¡Kinkade and Jones, JJ., concur.
§ 5.9 Requirements for commuter and on-demand operations or passenger-carrying flights for compensation or hire. ( a ) Any person authorized to conduct operations under part 135 of this chapter or that holds a Letter of Authorization issued under § 91.147 of this chapter before May 28, 2024, must: ( 1 ) Develop and implement an SMS that meets the requirements of this part no later than May 28, 2027.
( 2 ) Submit to the FAA, a declaration of compliance with this part in a form and manner acceptable to the Administrator no later than May 28, 2027.
( b ) Any person applying for authorization to conduct operations under part 135 of this chapter or a Letter of Authorization under § 91.147 of this chapter, or with such application pending on or after May 28, 2024, must develop and implement an SMS that meets the requirements of this part.
( c ) Any person required to develop and implement an SMS under this section must maintain the SMS as long as the person is authorized to conduct operations under either part 135 or § 91.147 of this chapter.
( d ) Any person required to develop and implement an SMS under this section must make available to the Administrator, upon request, all necessary information and data that demonstrates that the person has an SMS that meets the requirements set forth in this part.
( e ) The following requirements do not apply to those organizations with a single pilot who is the sole individual performing all necessary functions in the conduct and execution related to, or in direct support of, the safe operation of the aircraft: §§ 5.21(a)(4), 5.21(a)(5), 5.21(c), 5.23(a)(2), 5.23(a)(3), 5.23(b), 5.25(b)(3), 5.25(c), 5.27(a), 5.27(b), 5.71(a)(7), 5.93, and 5.97(d) of this part.
§ 91.303 Aerobatic flight. No person may operate an aircraft in aerobatic flight— ( a ) Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement;
( b ) Over an open air assembly of persons;
( c ) Within the lateral boundaries of the surface areas of Class B, Class C, Class D, or Class E airspace designated for an airport;
( d ) Within 4 nautical miles of the center line of any Federal airway;
( e ) Below an altitude of 1,500 feet above the surface; or
( f ) When flight visibility is less than 3 statute miles.
For the purposes of this section, aerobatic flight means an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude, an abnormal attitude, or abnormal acceleration, not necessary for normal flight. [Doc. No. 18834, 54 FR 34308, Aug. 18, 1989, as amended by Amdt. 91-227, 56 FR 65661, Dec. 17, 1991]
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATE
      OF THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





Solely
      for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the undersigned Principal
      Executive Officer of Auriga Laboratories, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify
      that, to the best of my knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A of
      the
      Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with
      the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.





/s/
                Philip S. PesinPhilip
                S. PesinChief
                Executive OfficerOctober
                18, 2007
EX-10.8






Exhibit 10.8




Summary of the Oral Agreements between

China Medstar Pte. Ltd. and Mr. Yaw Kong Yap



From November 30, 2006 to September 30, 2009, Yaw Kong Yap agreed to provide to China Medstar
Limited, the predecessor entity of China Medstar Pte. Ltd., loans in the aggregate amount of
30,255.3 Singapore Dollars. The loans were agreed to be used by China Medstar Limited to pay for
certain of its administrative expenses. The loans were unsecured, interest-free and repayable on
demand.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 93 (Friday, May 12, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 30614]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-11891]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Manufacturer of Controlled Substances; Notice of Application

    Pursuant to Section 1301.33(a) of Title 21 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR), this is notice that on March 29, 2000, Dupont 
Pharmaceuticals, 1000 Stewart Avenue, Garden City, New York 11530, made 
application by renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) for 
registration as bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled 
substances listed below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Drug                               Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oxycodone (9143)............................  II
Hydrocodone (9193)..........................  II
Oxymorphone (9652)..........................  II
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The firm plans to manufacture the listed controlled substances to 
make finished products.
    Any other such applicant and any person who is presently registered 
with DEA to manufacture such substance may file comments or objections 
to the issuance of the proposed registered.
    Any such comments or objections may be addressed, in quintuplicate, 
to the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control. 
Drug Enforcement Administration, United States Department of Justice, 
Washington, DC 20537, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative 
(CCR), and must be filed no later than July 11, 2000.

    Dated: May 1, 2000.
John H. King,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug, 
Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-11891 Filed 5-11-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M
# L_2010046DE.01003401.xml

| 23.2.2010 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 46/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.2.2010

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 46/34

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 88/97 der Kommission vom 20. Januar 1997 betreffend die Genehmigung der Befreiung der Einfuhren bestimmter Fahrradteile mit Ursprung in der Volksrepublik China von dem mit der Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 2474/93 eingeführten und mit der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 71/97 des Rates ausgeweiteten Antidumpingzoll

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften L 17 vom 21. Januar 1997
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften L 17 vom 21. Januar 1997

Seite 26, KN-Code 8714 96 30:

anstatt:

„Tretlager“

muss es heißen:

„Kurbelgarnituren“.

---
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4855 

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

1305 U.S. Highway 90 West in Castroville, Texas, as the ‘‘Lance Corporal Rhonald Dain Rairdan Post Office’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 23 (legislative day, OCTOBER 19), 2020 

Mr. CORNYN (for himself and Mr. CRUZ) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 1305 U.S. Highway 90 West in Castroville, 

Texas, as the ‘‘Lance Corporal Rhonald Dain Rairdan 

Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LANCE CORPORAL RHONALD DAIN RAIRDAN 

4 POST OFFICE. 

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

6 Postal Service located at 1305 U.S. Highway 90 West in 

7 Castroville, Texas, shall be known and designated as the 

8 ‘‘Lance Corporal Rhonald Dain Rairdan Post Office’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4855 IS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Lance Corporal 

5 Rhonald Dain Rairdan Post Office’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
§ 65.53 Eligibility requirements: General. ( a ) To be eligible to take the aircraft dispatcher knowledge test, a person must be at least 21 years of age.
( b ) To be eligible for an aircraft dispatcher certificate, a person must— ( 1 ) Be at least 23 years of age;
( 2 ) Be able to read, speak, write, and understand the English language;
( 3 ) Pass the required knowledge test prescribed by § 65.55 of this part;
( 4 ) Pass the required practical test prescribed by § 65.59 of this part; and
( 5 ) Comply with the requirements of § 65.57 of this part.
1930 Huguenot Road PO Box35655 Richmond, VA 23235 (804) 320-9100 CowanGates.com

Federal Aviation Administration ATTN: Hearing Docket Clerk 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Room924A Washington, DC 20591 Re: Docket No. 2012EA210024 December 12, 2012

Federal Aviation Administration v. Dennis F. Harrnp, III and Central VirginiaAviation, Inc. Beech B90 Aircraft, ID No.: N603PA Dear Sir or Madam: KATHERINE G. GRAY (804) 320-9100 (804) 320-2900 KGRAY@COWANGATES.COl\'l Matter No. 2463-033

Please consider this letter Dennis F. Hanup, III and Central Virginia Aviation, Inc.'s request for ahearing inthe above-referenced matter. David Gates and I are representing Mr. Han-up and Central VirginiaAviation, Inc. in the proceedings. Thankyoufor your assistance with this matter. Shouldyou have any questions, please do not hesitate to contactme. Verytruly yours,
Katherine G. Gray cc: Zachary M. Berman, Esq. Dennis F. Harrup, III 

# CowANGATES In any case.
§ 71.33 Class A airspace areas. ( a ) That airspace of the United States, including that airspace overlying the waters within 12 nautical miles of the coast of the 48 contiguous States, from 18,000 feet MSL to and including FL600 excluding the states of Alaska and Hawaii.
( b ) That airspace of the State of Alaska, including that airspace overlying the waters within 12 nautical miles of the coast, from 18,000 feet MSL to and including FL600 but not including the airspace less than 1,500 feet above the surface of the earth and the Alaska Peninsula west of longitude 160°00′00′′ West.
( c ) The airspace areas listed as offshore airspace areas in subpart A of FAA Order JO 7400.11J (incorporated by reference, see § 71.1) that are designated in international airspace within areas of domestic radio navigational signal or ATC radar coverage, and within which domestic ATC procedures are applied.
[Amdt. 71-14, 56 FR 65654, Dec. 17, 1991] Editorial Note
Editorial Note: For Federal Register citations affecting § 71.33, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov .*
Effective Date Note
Effective Date Note: By Docket No. FAA-2024-2061; Amendment No. 71-56, 89 FR 68339, Aug. 26, 2024, § 71.33(c) was amended by removing the words “FAA Order JO 7400.11H” and adding, in their place, the words “FAA Order JO 7400.11J, effective Sept. 15, 2024 through Sept. 15, 2025.
#### Abernathy *v.*The State.

Violating Prohibition Law.

(Decided March 23, 1917.

74 South. 725.)

Intoxicating Liquors; Police Powers; Statutes. — The provisions of § 16, Acts 1915, p. 13, are intended to prevent an evasion of the laws prohibiting the sale of intoxicants, and its enactment was a legitimate exercise of the police powers of the state.

Appeal from Colbert Circuit Court.

Heard before Hon. C. P. Almon.

E. D. Abernathy was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

James Jackson, for appellant.

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

BROWN, P. J.

The defendant was tried before the court without a jury on an indictment charging that the defendant “was engaged in the business of selling beverages and kept or stored on the premises where said beverage business was conducted prohibited liquors or beverages, the sale, offering for sale, or other disposition of which was prohibited by law.” This indictment is in the language of the statute, and charges the offense denounced by section 16 of the act approved January 23, 1915 (Acts 1915, p. 13).

The evidence shows that the defendant was engaged in selling Coca-Cola and other beverages at his place of business in Sheffield, Ala.; that such beverages were kept in an ice box. In the *596same building and in a compartment thereof separated from the soft drink stand by a curtain, the officers found a half gallon jug containing about one quart of whisky, and the defendant testified that he kept this liquor there for his own personal use, and that it had been there for three or four days. The purpose of this statute is to prevent an evasion of the laws prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquors, and its enactment was a legitimate exercise of the police powers of the state.

There was evidence to support the finding of the trial court, and the judgment will be *affirmed.*— Mulligan *v. State, infra,*204, 72 South. 761; *Stout v. State,*infra, 205, 72 South. 762.

Affirmed.
[No. 49476-7-I.

Division One.

December 16, 2002.]

#### The State of Washington, *Appellant,*v. Tien Lam, *Respondent.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Snohomish County, No. 01-1-00479-9, Michael E. Rickert, J., entered October 19, 2001. *Affirmed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM HOUSTON
INTERWEB DESIGN, INC. AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-2000
<CASH>                                           8,977
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  103,143
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               112,845
<PP&E>                                          85,312
<DEPRECIATION>                                  35,070
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 407,544
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,500,568
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                   (1,093,024)
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                        492,699
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               492,699
<CGS>                                          328,869
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  661,881
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,747
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (169,183)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (169,188)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.01


</TABLE>
§ 91.147 Passenger-carrying flights for compensation or hire. ( a ) *Definitions.* For the purposes of this section, *Operator* means any person conducting nonstop passenger-carrying flights in an airplane, powered-lift, or rotorcraft for compensation or hire in accordance with §§ 119.1(e)(2), 135.1(a)(5), or 121.1(d) of this chapter that begin and end at the same airport and are conducted within a 25-statute mile radius of that airport.
( b ) *General requirements.* An Operator conducting passenger-carrying flights for compensation or hire must meet the following requirements unless all flights are conducted under § 91.146. The Operator must: ( 1 ) Comply with the safety provisions of part 136, subpart A of this chapter.
( 2 ) Register and implement its drug and alcohol testing programs in accordance with part 120 of this chapter.
( 3 ) Comply with the applicable requirements of part 5 of this chapter.
( 4 ) Apply for and receive a Letter of Authorization from the responsible Flight Standards office.
( c ) *Letter of Authorization.* Each application for a Letter of Authorization must include the following information: ( 1 ) Name of Operator, agent, and any d/b/a (doing-business-as) under which that Operator does business.
( 2 ) Principal business address and mailing address.
( 3 ) Principal place of business (if different from business address).
( 4 ) Name of person responsible for management of the business.
( 5 ) Name of person responsible for aircraft maintenance.
( 6 ) Type of aircraft, registration number(s), and make/model/series.
( 7 ) Antidrug and Alcohol Misuse Prevention Program registration.
( d ) *Compliance.* The Operator must comply with the provisions of the Letter of Authorization received.
[Docket No. FAA-2021-0419; Amdt. No. 91-374, 89 FR 33108, Apr. 26, 2024]
# EUR-Lex - 31998D0658 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31998D0658

**98/658/EC: Council Decision of 24 September 1998 on the conclusion of the Additional Protocol to the Interim Agreement on trade and trade-related matters between the European Community, the European Coal and Steel Community and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and the Republic of Slovenia, of the other part, and to the Europe Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Slovenia, of the other part **

*
Official Journal L 314 , 24/11/1998 P. 0006 - 0006 *

COUNCIL DECISION of 24 September 1998 on the conclusion of the Additional Protocol to the Interim Agreement on trade and trade-related matters between the European Community, the European Coal and Steel Community and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and the Republic of Slovenia, of the other part, and to the Europe Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Slovenia, of the other part (98/658/EC)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 113 in conjunction with the first sentence of Article 228(2) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Whereas the Commission has negotiated on behalf of the Communities an Additional Protocol to the Interim Agreement on trade and trade-related matters and to the Europe Agreement with the Republic of Slovenia;

Whereas it is necessary to approve this Additional Protocol,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The Additional Protocol to the Interim Agreement on trade and trade-related matters between the European Community, the European Coal and Steel Community and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and the Republic of Slovenia, of the other part, and to the Europe Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, acting within the framework of the European Union, of the one part, and the Republic of Slovenia, of the other part, is hereby approved on behalf of the European Communities.

The text of the Additional Protocol is attached to this Decision.

Article 2

The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person empowered to sign the Additional Protocol in order to bind the Community.

The President of the Council shall, on behalf of the Community, give the notification provided for in Article 3 of the Additional Protocol.

Done at Brussels, 24 September 1998.

For the Council

The President

N. MICHALEK