alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of the Will of Edward W. Browning, Deceased. Alex P. Watts et al., as Executors of Florence Biggs, Deceased, et al., Appellants; Title Guarantee and Trust Company, as Executor of Edward W. Browning, Deceased, Respondent, Impleaded with Others.

Argued April 21, 1937;

decided May 25, 1937.

*509
      *Benjamin F. Schreiber, Morris Buchter, Harold M. Hoffman*and *Edward J.-Chapman*for appellants.

*Joseph V. McKee, Henry Cohen*and *William T. Griffin*for respondent.

*Daniel A. Shirk, Edwin R. Wolff*and *Alexander Pfeiffer*for Dorothy B. Hood.

*John J. Bennett, Jr., Attorney-General (Robert P. Beyer*of counsel), for State of New York.

*510Order affirmed, with costs. First question certified answered in the affirmative. Second question not answered, an answer being unnecessary in view of the affirmative answer to the first question certified. No opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Loughran, Finch and Rippey, JJ.
#### § 19.2 Purpose.

The purpose of these regulations is to authorize Departmental units to request financial records from a financial institution pursuant to the formal written request procedure authorized by section 1108 of the Act, and to set forth the conditions under which such requests may be made.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                   Year        2 1/2 Months       9 1/2 Months
                                                   Ended          Ended         Ended
                                                December 31,   December 31,   October 13,     Year Ended December 31,
                                                                                           -------------------------------
                                                                                           ---------  ---------  ---------
                                                   1998            1997          1997        1996       1995       1994
                                               --------------  ------------- ------------- ---------  ---------  ---------
Fixed Charges:
<S>                                                  <C>              <C>         <C>       <C>        <C>           <C> 
     Interest on debt                                $ 8,874          $ 628       $ 4,160   $ 4,853    $ 4,081       $ 17
     Amortization of debt issuance costs                 464              -             -         -          -          -
     Interest portion of rental expense                2,038            420         1,448     2,045      2,016      1,616
                                               --------------  ------------- ------------- ---------  ---------  ---------
                                               ==============  ============= ============= =========  =========  =========
            Total fixed charges                     $ 11,376        $ 1,048       $ 5,608   $ 6,898    $ 6,097    $ 1,633
                                               ==============  ============= ============= =========  =========  =========

Earnings:
     Pre-tax income (loss) from continuing operations$ 4,808          $ 517      $ (2,478) $ (2,232)  $ (2,541)   $ 6,873
     Add back fixed charges                           11,376          1,048         5,608     6,898      6,097      1,633
                                               --------------  ------------- ------------- ---------  ---------  ---------
                                               ==============  ============= ============= =========  =========  =========
            Total earnings                          $ 16,184        $ 1,565       $ 3,130   $ 4,666    $ 3,556    $ 8,506
                                               ==============  ============= ============= =========  =========  =========

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges                         1.42           1.49          0.56      0.68       0.58       5.21
                                               ==============  ============= ============= =========  =========  =========

Deficit of Earnings to Fixed Charges                     $ -            $ -       $ 2,478   $ 2,232    $ 2,541        $ -
                                               ==============  ============= ============= =========  =========  =========
</TABLE>
#### § 99.43 Contiguous U.S. ADIZ.

The area bounded by a line from 43°15′ N, 65°55′W; 44°21′ N; 67°16′W; 43°10′ N; 69°40′W; 41°05′ N; 69°40′W; 40°32′ N; 72°15′W; 39°55′ N; 73°00′W; 39°38′ N; 73°00′W; 39°36′ N; 73°40′W; 37°00′ N; 75°30′W; 36°10′ N; 75°10′W; 35°10′ N; 75°10′W; 32°00′ N; 80°30′W; 30°30′ N; 81°00′W; 26°40′ N; 79°40′W; 25°00′ N; 80°05′W; 24°25′ N; 81°15′W; 24°20′ N; 81°45′W; 24°30′ N; 82°06′W; 24°41′ N; 82°06′W; 24°43′ N; 82°00′W; 25°00′ N; 81°30′W; 25°10′ N; 81°23′W; 25°35′ N; 81°30′W; 26°15′ N 82°20′W; 27°50′ N; 83°05′W; 28°55′ N; 83°30′W; 29°42′ N; 84°00′W; 29°20′ N; 85°00′W; 30°00′ N; 87°10′W; 30°00′ N; 88°30′W; 28°45′ N; 88°55′W; 28°45′ N; 90°00′W; 29°25′ N; 94°00′W; 28°20′ N; 96°00′W; 27°30′ N; 97°00′W; 26°00′ N; 97°00′W; 25°58′ N; 97°07′W; westward along the U.S./Mexico border to 32°32′03′′ N, 117°07′25′′ W; 32°30′ N; 117°25′W; 32°35′ N; 118°30′W; 33°05′ N; 119°45′W; 33°55′ N; 120°40′W; 34°50′ N; 121°10′W; 38°50′ N; 124°00′W; 40°00′ N; 124°35′W; 40°25′ N; 124°40′W; 42°50′ N; 124°50′W; 46°15′ N; 124°30′W; 48°30′ N; 125°00′W; 48°20′ N; 128°00′W; 48°20′ N; 132°00′W; 37°42′ N; 130°40′W; 29°00′ N; 124°00′W; 30°45′ N; 120°50′W; 32°00′ N; 118°24′W; 32°30′ N; 117°20′W; 32°32′03′′ N; 117°07′25′′ W; eastward along the U.S./Mexico border to 25°58′ N, 97°07′W; 26°00′ N; 97°00′W; 26°00′ N; 95°00′W; 26°30′ N; 95°00′W; then via 26°30′ N; parallel to 26°30′ N; 84°00′W; 24°00′ N; 83°00′W; then Via 24°00′ N; parallel to 24°00′ N; 79°25′W; 25°40′ N; 79°25′W; 27°30′ N; 78°50′W; 30°45′ N; 74°00′W; 39°30′ N; 63°45′W; 43°00′ N; 65°48′W; to point of beginning.

[Doc. No. FAA-2001-10693, 66 FR 49822, Sept. 28, 2001. Redesignated at 69 FR 16756, Mar. 30, 2004]
#### Osborn *v.*Robertson Tire & Auto Co.

Assumpsit.

(Decided November 14, 1916.

73 South. 229.)

1. Appeal and Error; Judgment to Support. — An order of the circuit court overruling appellant’s motion to dismiss the petition and writ of certiorari granted by the judge of probate under section 4714, Code 1907, is not a final appealable judgment within section 2837, Code 1907, or such an interlocutory judgment as would support an appeal under section 2841, Code 1907.

2. Same; Jurisdiction. — Where the appeal does not confer jurisdiction upon the appellate court to review the matters sent to be reviewed, the appeal will be dismissed at appellant’s cost.

Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court.

Heard before Hon. E. C. CROW.

The Robertson Tire & Auto Company procured certiorari from the judge of probate to bring up to the circuit court the cause pending between it and R. E. Osborn. Osborn interposed a motion to dismiss the petition and writ of certiorari, which motion the court overruled, and Osborn appealed.

Appeal dismissed.

Wheeler *&*Whitaker, for appellant.

John S. Stone, for appellee.

BROWN, J.—

(1) This appeal is prosecuted from an order of the circuit court of’ Jefferson county overruling the appellant’s motion to dismiss the petition and writ of certiorari theretofore granted by the judge of probate of Jefferson county under the provisions of section 4714 of the Code of 1907.

Manifestly, this is not a “final judgment” from which an appeal is authorized by the statute, Code 1907, § 2837. Nor is it such an interlocutory judgment as will support an appeal. — Code 1907, § 2841.

(2) The appeal not conferring jurisdiction upon this court to review the order, it will be dismissed at appellant’s *cost.*— Led*better v. Vinton,*108 Ala. 644, 18 South. 692; *Crumley v. Bryan,*69 Ala. 91.

Appeal dismissed.
#### § 1450.15 Referrals to the Department of Justice or the General Accounting Office.

Referrals to the Department of Justice or the General Accounting Office shall be made in accordance with the standards set forth in part 105 of the Federal Claims Collection Standards (4 CFR part 105).
Exhibit 32
                    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                         18 U.S.C. 1350,
                     AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
          SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In  connection with the Quarterly Report of AEI Income  &  Growth
Fund  23 LLC (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period  ended
June  30,  2007,  as  filed  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission  on  the date hereof (the "Report"), the  undersigned,
Robert  P.  Johnson, President of AEI Fund Management XXI,  Inc.,
the  Managing Member of the Company, and Patrick W. Keene,  Chief
Financial Officer of AEI Fund Management XXI, Inc., each certify,
pursuant  to  18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section  906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     1.   The  Report  fully  complies with the  requirements  of
          Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange  Act
          of 1934; and

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


                          /s/ Robert P Johnson
                              Robert P. Johnson, President
                              AEI Fund Management XXI, Inc.
                              Managing Member
                              January 7, 2008



                          /s/ Patrick W Keene
                              Patrick W. Keene, Chief Financial Officer
                              AEI Fund Management XXI, Inc.
                              Managing Member
                              January 7, 2008
Exhibit 10.13

PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL

To:
Bob Krakoff

Date:
February 19, 1999

Bob

This
will confirm the terms of my severance arrangement with the Company as agreed at the time of my commencement of employment last September.

We
agreed that if I am terminated without "cause" (as defined in section 4(c) of my AHI Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement dated September 8, 1998)
(i) before January 1, 2000, I will receive six months salary, target bonus and health benefits; (ii) on or after January 1, 2000 but before July 1, 2001, I will
receive nine months salary, target bonus and health benefits; and (iii) after July 1, 2001, I will receive twelve months salary, target bonus and health benefits. For the foregoing
severance purposes, relocation of my principal office location outside the greater Boston area without my consent will be tantamount to termination without cause.

Agreed:

Advanstar
Holdings, Inc.

Advanstar
Communications Inc.

By
/s/ROBERT L. KRAKOFF

Name:
Robert L. Krakoff

Title:
Chairman and CEO

---
#### S. D. Warfield, *et al.,*as Receivers of the Seaboard Air Line Railway Company, *Plaintiffs in*Error, v. Amelia Hepburn and O. M. Hepburn, Her Husband, *Defendants in Error.*

On Repiearing.

Per Curiam.

— A determination of the liability of the defendant was necessarily involved in affirming the judgment awarding damages to the plaintiff Amelia Hepburn. There-is evidence that the plaintiff Amelia Hepburn was injured by the derailing of the car in which she was a passenger while it was being run at a rapid rate of speed through a dense fog and smoke over a track that a few hours before and unknown to the train crew had been partially destroyed by fire. The statute affords a presumption of negligence and consequent liability of the *419defendant upon proof of tbe injury to tbe plaintiff by tbe running of the railroad company’s train, and tbe evidence does not entirely rebut tbe statutory presumption, since it does' not clearly appear that “all ordinary and reasonable care and diligence” to prevent tbe injury was exercised by tbe defendants whose duty it was to use tbe highest degree of care and diligence for tbe safety of passengers. Tbe evidence as to the speed of tbe train in tbe presence of a dense fog and smoke' before and at tbe time tbe train reached tbe burned track indicates at least some lack of due care and diligence for tbe safety of passengers. This establishes tbe liability of tbe defendants and tbe amount of damages that should be allowed on tbe evidence was adjudicated in affirming the judgment..

Whitfield, C. J., and Taylor, J., are of opinion that tbe evidence does not support tbe amount of tbe damages awarded in tbe finding and judgment.

A rehearing is denied.
## IN THE COURT O F CRIMINA L A PPEA LS OF TEXA S NOS. WR-83,941-01 & WR-83,941-02
EX P ARTE MARCU S QUIN BUTL ER, Appl icant
ON AP P LICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NOS. W12-60367-L(A) & W12-71810-L(A) IN THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 5 OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisions of Ar t i cl e 1 1
. 07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court these applications for writs of h ab ea s co rp u s . Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of the offe nse of sexual assault and stalking and sentenc ed to imprisonment for three year s in eac h cause . The Fifth Court of Appea ls dismiss ed the appea ls filed in these convictions. But l er v. State , Nos. 05-14- 00276-CR; 05-14-00277-CR (Tex. App.—Dallas Mar . 17, 2014)(not designated f or publication). On April 1, 2015, an order desig nating issues was signe d by the trial court, but no finding s have been forwa

rded to this Court. We rema nd these applications to the Criminal District Court No.5 of Dallas County to allow the trial judge t o complete an evidentiar y investigation and enter finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law. These applications will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fac t issues. The issues shall be resolved within 90 day s of this orde r. A supplemental transcript c ontaining all aff idavits and int err og atories or the t ransc ription of t he court repor ter’s notes from any hearing or deposition, alongwith the trial court’ s supplemental finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law, shall be forwar ded to t his Court withi n 120 day s of the date of this order
. Any extensions of t ime shall be obtained f

rom this Court.

Filed: Oc tober 14, 2015 Do not publish
#### § 102.89 Initiation of proceedings.

Whenever it is charged that any person has engaged in an unfair labor practice within the meaning of Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act, the Regional Director of the office in which such charge is filed or to which it is referred will, as soon as possible after the charge has been filed, serve on the parties a copy of the charge and will investigate such charge and if it is deemed appropriate to seek injunctive relief of a district court pursuant to Section 10(l) of the Act, the Regional Director will give it priority over all other cases in the office except other cases under Section 10(l) and cases of like character.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>



This Schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
financial statements of MEDE AMERICA CORPORATION for the period ended June 30,
1999 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                       JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                            JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                4,119
<SECURITIES>                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                        16,602
<ALLOWANCES>                            636
<INVENTORY>                             211
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                     21,152
<PP&E>                               12,790
<DEPRECIATION>                        7,626
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                       78,709
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                 9,946
<BONDS>                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0
<PREFERRED>                               0
<COMMON>                                132
<OTHER-SE>                           63,533
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>         78,709
<SALES>                              55,213
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                     55,213
<CGS>                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                        52,942
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                    2,922
<INCOME-PRETAX>                        (651)
<INCOME-TAX>                            297
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                    (948)
<DISCONTINUED>                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                      (1,619)
<CHANGES>                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                         (4,011)
<EPS-BASIC>                         (0.47)
<EPS-DILUTED>                         (0.47)


</TABLE>
§ 1903.22 Definitions. ( a ) *Act* means the Williams-Steiger Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. (84 Stat. 1590 *et seq.,* 29 U.S.C. 651 *et seq.*)
( b ) The definitions and interpretations contained in section 3 of the Act shall be applicable to such terms when used in this part 1903.
( c ) *Working days* means Mondays through Fridays but shall not include Saturdays, Sundays, or Federal holidays. In computing 15 working days, the day of receipt of any notice shall not be included, and the last day of the 15 working days shall be included.
( d ) *Compliance Safety and Health Officer* means a person authorized by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, to conduct inspections.
( e ) *Area Director* means the employee or officer regularly or temporarily in charge of an Area Office of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, or any other person or persons who are authorized to act for such employee or officer. The latter authorizations may include general delegations of the authority of an Area Director under this part to a Compliance Safety and Health Officer or delegations to such an officer for more limited purposes, such as the exercise of the Area Director's duties under § 1903.14(a). The term also includes any employee or officer exercising supervisory responsibilities over an Area Director. A supervisory employee or officer is considered to exercise concurrent authority with the Area Director.
( f ) *Assistant Regional Director* means the employee or officer regularly or temporarily in charge of a Region of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, or any other person or persons who are specifically designated to act for such employee or officer in his absence. The term also includes any employee or officer in the Occupational Safety and Health Administration exercising supervisory responsibilities over the Assistant Regional Director. Such supervisory employee or officer is considered to exercise concurrent authority with the Assistant Regional Director. No delegation of authority under this paragraph shall adversely affect the procedures for independent informal review of investigative determinations prescribed under § 1903.12 of this part.
( g ) *Inspection* means any inspection of an employer's factory, plant, establishment, construction site, or other area, workplace or environment where work is performed by an employee of an employer, and includes any inspection conducted pursuant to a complaint filed under § 1903.11 (a) and (c), any reinspection, followup inspection, accident investigation or other inspection conducted under section 8(a) of the Act.
[36 FR 17850, Sept. 4, 1971, as amended at 38 FR 22624, Aug. 23, 1973. Redesignated at 62 FR 15337, Mar. 31, 1997]
#### § 1626.11 Notice of charge.

Upon receipt of a charge, the Commission shall promptly notify the respondent that a charge has been filed.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l unani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T F R AN C I S C O J AV I E R L UN A, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 09- 72002 A ge nc yN o. A 030- 458- 275 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d D e c e m be r14, 2010 ** B e f o r e : G O O D W I N , W A L L A C E , an dT H O M A S , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . F r anc i s c o J a vi e rL una , ana t i ve and c i t i z e n of M e xi c o, pe t i t i ons pr o s e f or re vi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) order di sm i ss i ng hi s app ea l f r o m an i mmi g r a t i o n j u d g e ’ s r e mo v a l o r d e r . W e h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n u n d e r8 U . S. C. 

# FI LED JAN 12 2 011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS09- 72002 2 § 1 2 5 2 . W e r e v ie w d e n o v o q u e s tio n s o f law , Mi elew cz

yk v. H older , 575 F . 3d 992, 9 9 4 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 9 ) , an dw e g r an t th e p e titio n f o rr e v ie w . T h e s ta tu te o f

c o n v ic tio n , p r o s c r ib e s , a m o n g o th e ro f f e n s e s , an “o f

f e rto . . . transfe r m ar i

j uana. ” See A ri z. R ev . S t at s. § 1 3 -3 4 0 5 (A )(4 ). Itth erefo re i n cl u d es a s o lic ita tio n o f

f e n s e , se e Mi elew cz

yk, 5 7 5 F . 3 dat9 9 8 n . 4 , an di s n o tcat eg o ri cal l y a d ru g tr a f f ic k in g o f f e n s e , se e U

ni ted States v. R i ve ra-San chez , 247 F . 3d 905, 909 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) ( e n b an c ) , supers eded on other groun ds by U .S .S .G . § 2 L 1 .2 c m t. n .4 ( 2 0 0 2 ) , as re cogn i

ze d i n G uerr ero-Si lva v. H older , 599 F . 3d 1090, 1092- 93 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 1 0 ) . T h e a g e n c yth e r e f o r e e rr e din s o f

ara s it c o n c lu d e dth a t a c onvi c t i on unde rA r i z . R e v. S t a t s . § 13- 3405 i s c a t e gor i c a l l yan a ggr a va t e d f e l ony drug tra ff

i cki ng cr i m e und er8 U . S . C . § 1 10 1(a) (43)(B ). L unaa de qua t e l ye xhaus t e d thi s i s s ue be f or e the B I A and pr e s e nt e d i ton ap p e a l, se e V

i zc arra-Ayala v. Mukasey , 51 4 F . 3d 87 0, 87 3-74 (9th C i r. 20 08 ); Ab a s s iv . I

NS , 30 5 F . 3d 10 28 , 10 32 (9th C i r. 20 02 ); se e al so H uerta-G uevara v. A s h c r o ft , 3 2 1 F .3 d8 8 3 , 8 8 6 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) . B ec ause i ti s uncl ear w hether the agency app l i ed the m od i fi ed cat egori ca l ap p r o a c h , w e r e m an df

o rf u rth e rp r o c e e d in g s . See IN S v. V en tu ra , 537 U . S . 12, 16 ( 2 0 0 2 ) . I n lig h t o f

o u rd is p o s itio n , w e d o n o t r e a c h L u n a ’s r e m a in in g c o n te n tio n s . P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W GR AN T E D; RE MAND E D.
#### §§ 1602.2-1602.6 [Reserved]