alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. ER00-1655-001]

Take notice that on May 8, 2000, Southern Company Services, Inc. (SCSI), acting as agent for Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company, Gulf Power Company, Mississippi Power Company, and Savannah Electric and Power Company (collectively referred to as the Operating Companies), submitted for filing a response to the Staff's deficiency letter issued in this docket on April 14, 2000.

Copies of the filing were served on all intervenors in the proceeding and upon the affected State commissions.

Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 285.214). All such motions and protests should be filed on or before May 22, 2000. Protests will be considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on the Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-12330 Filed 5-16-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
§ 1915.165 Ship's deck machinery. ( a ) Before work is performed on the anchor windlass or any of its attached accessories, the employer shall ensure that the following steps are taken: ( 1 ) The devil claws (also known as chain stoppers) shall be made fast to the anchor chains.
( 2 ) The riding pawls shall be in the engaged position.
( 3 ) In the absence of devil claws and riding pawls, the anchor chains shall be secured to a suitable fixed structure of the vessel.
[47 FR 16986, Apr. 20, 1982, as amended at 67 FR 44545, July 3, 2002]
[No. 46923-1-I.

Division One.

December 2, 2002.]

#### Warn/Williams & Associates, *Respondent,*v. Quick Check, Inc., et al., *Appellants.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Snohomish County, No. 98-2-09667-3, Kenneth L. Cowsert, J., entered June 12, 2000. *Affirmed in part*and *reversed in part*by unpublished opinion per Kennedy, J., concurred in by Baker and Ellington, JJ.
# EUR-Lex - 31998R1442 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31998R1442

**Commission Regulation (EC) No 1442/98 of 6 July 1998 on the maximum amount of the Community financial contribution to be paid to the Member States concerned in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 723/97 **

*
Official Journal L 191 , 07/07/1998 P. 0041 - 0042 *

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1442/98 of 6 July 1998 on the maximum amount of the Community financial contribution to be paid to the Member States concerned in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 723/97

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 723/97 of 22 April 1997 on the implementation of Member States' action programmes on control of EAGGF Guarantee Section expenditure (1), and in particular Articles 1 and 4 thereof,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1780/97 (2) laying down the rules of application for Regulation (EC) No 723/97, and in particular Article 3 thereof,

Whereas Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 723/97 provides that the Community shall contribute towards the costs incurred by Member States in implementing new action programmes, arising out of new Community obligations; whereas Article 4(2) of the same Regulation provides that the Commission shall, after consulting the Fund Committee, set the maximum annual amount of the Community financial contribution having regard to the appropriations and on the basis of the information supplied by the Member States concerned; whereas the amount in question shall be granted in accordance with Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1780/97; whereas the Member States concerned have supplied the relevant information to the Commission for the year 1998;

Whereas the Fund Committee has been consulted on the amounts set out in the Annex to this Regulation,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The maximum amount of the Community financial contribution in national currencies towards the costs incurred by the Member States concerned in implementing action programmes on control of EAGGF Guarantee Section expenditure for 1998, provided for by Regulation (EC) No 723/97 is set out in the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 6 July 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 108, 25. 4. 1997, p. 6.

(2) OJ L 252, 16. 9. 1997, p. 20.

ANNEX

>TABLE>
#### § 1915.1009 beta-Naphthylamine.

Note:

The requirements applicable to shipyard employment under this section are identical to those set forth at [§ 1910.1003 of this chapter](/on/2024-09-19/title-29/section-1910.1003).

[[61 FR 31430](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/61-FR-31430), June 20, 1996]
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

January 30, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

129728 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 129728 

 COA: 255632 

Kent CC: 03-003846-FC 

LEON LAVIL WILSON, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 20, 2005 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

t0123 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

January 30, 2006 

Clerk
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-17-00335-CR

Josiah David LEWIS,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015CR9616

Honorable Dick Alcala, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION, JUSTICE MARTINEZ, AND JUSTICE RIOS

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is 

AFFIRMED.

SIGNED April 10, 2019.

_____________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice
#### In the Matter of Allstate Insurance Company, Appellant, v David R. Frederick, Respondent.

[698 NYS2d 266]

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to stay arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim, the petitioner appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Joseph, J.), dated September 8, 1998, as denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the order and judgment is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the petition is reinstated, arbitration is stayed pending an evidentiary hearing on the issue of whether the alleged offending vehicle was insured by *284State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company on the date of the subject accident, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, to join State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company and Steven E. Lurie as party respondents, and for further proceedings thereafter.

The petitioner met its initial burden of proving that the alleged offending vehicle was insured by State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (hereinafter State Farm) at the time of the accident *(see, Matter of State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v Fenelon,*202 AD2d 436). Thus, the burden shifted to the respondent to prove that the offending vehicle was not insured by State Farm at the time of the accident *(see, Matter of Eagle Ins. Co. v Tichman,*185 AD2d 884, 886). The Supreme Court erred in its determination that the respondent met his burden. Under the circumstances, a hearing is required to determine if the offending vehicle was insured by State Farm on the date of the accident. Accordingly, the matter must be remitted to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, for further proceedings, including the joining of State Farm and its insured, Steven G. Lurie, as respondents.

It is noted that the petitioner was not required to disclaim coverage, as “[t]he uninsured motorist coverage of the [petitioner’s] policy does not attach unless and until it has been established that there was no insurance coverage on the [offending] vehicle on the date of the accident” *(Matter of Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co.,*102 AD2d 772, 774; *see also, Matter of State Farm Mut. Ins. Co. v Vazquez,*249 AD2d 312). O’Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Goldstein apd Feuerstein, JJ., concur.
Rule 221. Funds of clients and third persons. Mandatory overdraft notification.

***

(h) An Eligible Institution shall be approved as a depository for Trust Accounts of attorneys if it shall be in compliance with applicable provisions of Rule 1.15 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct and the Regulations of the IOLTA Board

and shal l file with the Disciplinary Board an agreement [( ] in a form [provided] approved by the Board [)] to comply with IOLTA Regulations governing approved Eligible Institutions and to make a prompt report to the Lawyers Fund for Client Security Board whenever any check or similar instrument is presented against a Trust Account when such account contains insufficient funds to pay the instrument, regardless of

(1) whether the instrument is honored, or

(2) whether funds are subsequently deposited that cover the overdraft or the dishonored instrument is made good.

***

(k) A failure on the part of an Eligible Institution to make a report to the Lawyers Fund for Client Security Board called for by this rule or to comply with IOLTA Regulations governing approved E ligible Institutions may be cause for termination of approval by the Supreme Court, but such failure shall not, absent gross negligence, give rise to a cause of action, by any person who is proximately caused harm thereby.

* * *
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           9,326
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   18,458
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (12,530)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                28,585
<PP&E>                                         103,279
<DEPRECIATION>                                  26,101
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 157,486
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          269,163
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           111
<OTHER-SE>                                   (112,978)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   157,486
<SALES>                                        103,930
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               103,930
<CGS>                                          122,341
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  122,341
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (116)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              19,565
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (37,860)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        72
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (37,932)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (37,932)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (3.41)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.41)


</TABLE>
# EUR-Lex - 31997R2510 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31997R2510

**Commission Regulation (EC) No 2510/97 of 15 December 1997 concerning the classification of certain goods in the combined nomenclature **

*
Official Journal L 345 , 16/12/1997 P. 0045 - 0046 *

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2510/97 of 15 December 1997 concerning the classification of certain goods in the combined nomenclature

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 (1) on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2308/97 (2), and in particular Article 9 thereof,

Whereas in order to ensure uniform application of the combined nomenclature annexed to the said Regulation, it is necessary to adopt measures concerning the classification of the goods referred to in the Annex to this Regulation;

Whereas Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 has set down the general rules for the interpretation of the combined nomenclature and those rules also apply to any other nomenclature which is wholly or partly based on it or which adds any additional subdivision to it and which is established by specific Community provisions, with a view to the application of tariff and other measures relating to trade in goods;

Whereas, pursuant to the said general rules, the goods described in column 1 of the table annexed to the present Regulation must be classified under the appropriate CN codes indicated in column 2, by virtue of the reasons set out in column 3;

Whereas it is accepted that binding tariff information issued by the customs authorities of Member States in respect of the classification of goods in the combined nomenclature and which do not conform to the rights established by this Regulation, can continue to be invoked, under the provisions in Article 12 (6) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (3), for a period of three months by the holder;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Tariff and Statistical Nomenclature Section of the Customs Code Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The goods described in column 1 of the annexed table are now classified within the combined nomenclature under the appropriate CN codes indicated in column 2 of the said table.

Article 2

Binding tariff information issued by the customs authorities of Member States which do not conform to the rights established by this Regulation can continue to be invoked under the provisions of Article 12 (6) of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 for a period of three months.

Article 3

This Regulation shall enter into force on the 21st day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 15 December 1997.

For the Commission

Mario MONTI

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 256, 7. 9. 1987, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 321, 22. 11. 1997, p. 1.

(3) OJ L 302, 19. 10. 1992, p. 1.

ANNEX

>TABLE>
#### § 1910.121 [Reserved]
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,  2006,  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
                              August 4, 2006



                          /s/ Patrick W Keene
                              Patrick W. Keene, Chief Financial Officer
                              AEI Fund Management XXI, Inc.
                              Managing Member
                              August 4, 2006
#### Dennison, Appellant, *v.*Lewis.

Where two defendants wore sued jointly, and the writ was returned executed as to one of them, and *non est inventus*as to the other, a judgment generally against the defendants was held to be erroneous.

APPEAL from the circuit court of the county of Claiborne.

Collins, for appellant.

Hughes, contra.

Opinion of the court, by

Turner, Justice.

This was an action of debt founded on a sealed note, made by Willoughby and Dennison, payable to the plaintiff below, who issued duplicate writs of capias ad respondendum, one directed to Marion, and the other to Perry county. The one against Dennison, or as to him, was returned executed, the other non est.— The plaintiff Lewis filed his declaration against both on a joint and several sealed note. Dennison appeared, and plea nil debit, and payment, and on issue joined, a verdict was rendered in favor of the plaintiff, for damages, and judgment followed; and no disposition was made of the cause as to Willoughby. The plaintiff in error appealed to this court, and assigns errors as follows, to Avit:

> 1st. That the court erred in rendering judgment against the appellant, Avhen it appears, &c. that the suit was instituted against the appellant and Willoughby, and the suit remains undisposed of against Willoughby, &c.

> 2d. That the note sued on is not a sealed instrument, but a promissory note.

> 3d. That the judgment is in assumpsit, Avhen the action is debt, and the judgment vague and uncertain.

*518We consider that the judgment should be reversed on the first assignment of error. The case should have been disposed of as to all the parties. There is no judgment of dismissal or discontinuance as to Willoughby.

As to the second ground, the bill of exceptions, which appears on a separate piece of paper, is not embraced in the transcript of the record of the judgment, anfl cannot be noticed; and if it could be, the exception does not appear to have been taken before the jury retired.

The plea of nil debit is irregular, and the verdict informal.

The judgment is reversed, a venire facias de novo awarded, and cause remanded.
§ 1918.1 Scope and application. ( a ) The regulations of this part apply to longshoring operations and related employments aboard vessels. All cargo transfer accomplished with the use of shore-based material handling devices is covered by part 1917 of this chapter.
( b ) Part 1910 of this chapter does not apply to longshoring except for the following provisions: ( 1 ) *Access to employee exposure and medical records.* Subpart Z, § 1910.1020;
( 2 ) *Commercial diving operations.* Subpart T;
( 3 ) *Electrical.* Subpart S when shore-based electrical installations provide power for use aboard vessels;
( 4 ) *Hazard communication.* Subpart Z, § 1910.1200;
( 5 ) *Ionizing radiation.* Subpart Z, § 1910.1096;
( 6 ) *Noise.* Subpart G, § 1910.95;
( 7 ) *Nonionizing radiation.* Subpart G, § 1910.97; Note to paragraph ( b
)(7):
Exposures to nonionizing radiation emissions from commercial vessel radar transmitters are considered hazardous under the following situations: (a) Where the radar is transmitting, the scanner is stationary, and the exposure distance is 19 feet (5.79 m) or less; or (b) where the radar is transmitting, the scanner is rotating, and the exposure distance is 5 feet (1.52 m.) or less.
( 8 ) *Respiratory protection.* Subpart I, § 1910.134;
( 9 ) *Toxic and hazardous substances.* Subpart Z applies to marine cargo handling activities except for the following: ( i ) When a substance or cargo is contained within a sealed, intact means of packaging or containment complying with Department of Transportation or International Maritime Organization requirements;[1]
( ii ) Bloodborne pathogens, § 1910.1030;
( iii ) Carbon monoxide, § 1910.1000 (See § 1918.94(a)); and
( iv ) Hydrogen sulfide, § 1910.1000 (See § 1918.94(f)); and
( v ) Hexavalent chromium § 1910.1026 (See § 1915.1026)
( 10 ) Powered industrial truck operator training, Subpart N, § 1910.178(l). Note to paragraph ( b
)(10):
The Compliance dates of December 1, 1999 set forth in 29 CFR 1910.178(l)(7) are stayed until March 1, 2000 for Longshoring.
( c ) Section 1915.1026 applies to any occupational exposures to hexavalent chromium in workplaces covered by this part.
[62 FR 40202, July 25, 1997, as amended at 63 FR 66274, Dec. 1, 1998; 64 FR 46847, Aug. 27, 1999; 65 FR 40943, June 30, 2000; 71 FR 10381, Feb. 28, 2006] Footnotes -
1918.1
[1] The International Maritime Organization publishes the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code to aid compliance with the international legal requirements of the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1960.
#### GLOBE INDEMNITY CO. ET AL. v. UNITED STATES

[84 C. Cls. 587; 302 U. S. 707]

Petition for writ of certiorari *denied*by Supreme Court October 11, 1937.
#### § 18.84 Official notice.

On motion of a party or on the judge's own, official notice may be taken of any adjudicative fact or other matter subject to judicial notice. The parties must be given an adequate opportunity to show the contrary of the matter noticed.
[No. 49896-7-I.

Division One.

November 18, 2002.]

#### *In the Matter of the Marriage of*Beryl Joan Waters, *Respondent,*and Foster Dennis Anderson, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 86-3-00498-3, Richard D. Eadie, J., entered December 26, 2001. *Reversed*by unpublished opinion per Appelwick, J., concurred in by Becker, C.J., and Schindler, J. Now published at 116 Wn. App. 211.