alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Civ. No. 2287.

First Appellate District.

October 22, 1917.]

#### ARTURO WOLF, Petitioner, v. HARRY I. MULCREVY, County Clerk, etc., Respondent.

Estates of Deceased Persons—Filing and Indexing Separate Petitions for Probate—County 'Clerk—Mandamus.—The appellate court -will not issue a writ of *mandamus*to compel the clerk of the superior court to file, number, and index a petition for the probate of the estate of a deceased person separately from a similar petition in the matter of the same estate theretofore filed and pending, as the clerk is not invested with power to determine whether or not the two other petitions are identically the same, but even if he were, the only right which the petitioner has, is to have his petition filed, and if the clerk fails to file it properly, he has his remedy in the superior court.

APPLICATION for a Writ of Mandamus originally made to the District Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District to direct a county clerk to file, number, and index a petition for probate of will.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Dozier & Dozier, and Theodore A. Bell, for Petitioner.

Edgar D. Peixotto, Leon Samuels, and J. R. Pringle, for Respondent.

THE COURT.

Application for a writ of mandate directing the respondent to file, number, and index a petition for the probate of the estate of Tobe Funkenstein, deceased, separately from a similar petition in the matter of the same estate theretofore filed and pending in the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco, of which respondent is clerk.

*81We are. of the opinion that the clerk of the court is not invested with power to determine whether or not these two petitions for the probate of the estate of Funkenstein are identically the same, but even if he were, we are strongly impressed with the contention made by the respondent that the only right which the petitioner has is to have his petition filed, and if the clerk fails to file it properly, the petitioner then has his remedy in the superior court by an application there to have his paper filed, numbered, and indexed by the clerk as it ought to be. In short, no injury comes to him because his petition is filed and numbered with a similar pending petition, and the presumption is that the superior court will do what the law demands in the premises. It is conceded that the writ of mandate is issued by this court as a matter of discretion and not as of right, and in the present case there does not appear to be any injury suffered by the petitioner because of the action of the clerk. Moreover we are of the opinion that if the petitioner is entitled to the remedy prayed for, it may be plainly, speedily, and adequately had in the court below upon proper application and showing made there.

. For these reasons the writ is denied.
# EUR-Lex - 31995R2988R(01) - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31995R2988R(01)

**Corrigendum to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 of 18 December 1995 on the protection of the European Communities financial interests (Official Journal of the European Communities L 312 of 23 December 1995) **

*
Official Journal L 036 , 10/02/1998 P. 0016 - 0016 *

Corrigendum to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 of 18 December 1995 on the protection of the European Communities financial interests (Official Journal of the European Communities L 312 of 23 December 1995)

On page 3, in Article 7, fifth line:

for: '. . . the irregularity and to those who are . . .`,

read: '. . . the irregularity. They may also apply to persons who have taken part in the irregularity and to those who are . . .`.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 16, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 31155]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12216]



[[Page 31155]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER-2356-000]


Entergy Services; Inc.; Notice of Filing

May 10, 2000.
    Take notice that on April 28, 2000 Entergy Services, Inc., acting 
as agent for Entergy Arkansas, Inc., Entergy Gulf States, Inc., Entergy 
Louisiana, Inc., Entergy Mississippi, Inc., and Entergy New Orleans, 
Inc. (collectively, the Entergy Operating Companies), tendered for 
filing a Network Integration Transmission Service Agreement and a 
Network Operating Agreement, both between Entergy Services, Inc., as 
agent for the Entergy Operating Companies, and Cleco Utility Group, 
Inc.
    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 385.214). All such motions and 
protets should be filed on or before May 19, 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).

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-12216 Filed 5-15-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
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.                  

###### Railroad Retirement Board

## Notice of Public Meeting

The meeting of the Railroad Retirement Board which was to be held on May 17, 2000, 9 a.m., at the Board's meeting room on the 8th floor of its headquarters building, 844 North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois, 60611, has been canceled.

The person to contact for more information is Beatrice Ezerski, Secretary to the Board. Phone No. 312-751-4920.

Dated: May 15, 2000.

Beatrice Ezerski,

Secretary to the Board.

[FR Doc. 00-12607  Filed 5-16-00; 9:50 am]

BILLING CODE 7905-01-M
#### § 1915.171 Scope and application of subpart.

The standards contained in this subpart shall apply to ship repairing and shipbuilding and shall not apply to shipbreaking.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 1317

SABRINA RENEE BROWN , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. PARK PLACE FAMILY MEDICAL CENTER , Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Norfolk

. Raymond A. Jackson , District Judge. ( 2:17

- cv
- 00045

- RAJ

- DEM )

Submitted : May 25, 2017 Decided: May 30, 2017

Before MOTZ , THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed and remanded with instructions by un published per curiam opinion

.

Sabrina Renee Brown , Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Sabrina Renee Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing her ci vil complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) (2012) without prejudice for failure to state a claim. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (20 12); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541, 545

- 47 (1949). Because it is possible that Brown could cure the defects in her complaint through amendment, the order she seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appe alable interlocutory or collateral order. Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc. , 807 F.3d 619,
623

- 25, 628

- 30 (4th Cir. 2015); Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392 , 10 F.3d 1064, 1066

– 67 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we dismiss the appe al for lack of jurisdiction and remand the case to the district court with instructions to allow Brown to file an amended complaint. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS
Section 4 General ( a ) The balance sheet accounts are designed to show the financial condition of the air carrier as at a given date, reflecting the asset and liability balances carried forward subsequent to the closing or constructive closing of the air carrier's books of account.
( b ) The balance sheet accounts prescribed in this system of accounts for each air carrier group are set forth in Section 3, Chart of Balance Sheet Accounts. The balance sheet elements to be included in each account are presented in section 6.
[ER-755, 37 FR 19726, Sept. 21, 1972, as amended by Amdt. 241-58, 54 FR 5592, Feb. 6, 1989]
Exhibit 23
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
One City Centre
St. Louis, MO 63101

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
33-60996 and 33-52357 of Laclede Gas Company and its subsidiary companies on
Form S-3 and in Registration Statement Nos. 33-38413, 33-57573 and 33-64933
of Laclede Gas Company and its subsidiary companies on Form S-8 of our
report dated November 19, 1998 appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K
of Laclede Gas Company and its subsidiary companies for the year ended
September 30, 1998.


Deloitte & Touche LLP

December 17, 1998 


  


































                                    69
[No. 50017-1-I.

Division One.

November 12, 2002.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Davin Karl Galer, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 01-1-04623-0, Cheryl B. Carey, J., entered January 18, 2002. *Affirmed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
#### § 18.705 Disclosure of facts or data underlying expert opinion.

The expert may testify in terms of opinion or inference and give reasons therefor without prior disclosure of the underlying facts or data, unless the judge requires otherwise. The expert may in any event be required to disclose the underlying facts or data on cross-examination.
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 Defense

###### Department of the Air Force 

Pursuant to the provisions of Part 404 of Title 37, Code of Federal Regulations, which implements Public Law 96-517, the Department of the Air Force announces its intention to grant Killdeer Mountain Manufacturing, Inc., a company doing business in Killdeer, North Dakota an exclusive license in any right, title and interest the Air Force has in AF Invention No. RL10023. The inventors, Frank H. Born, Roy W. Stratton and Lamar R. Harris were all government employees at the time of the invention. The invention is entitled “Apparatus and Method for Detecting Conduit Chafing.” 

The license described above will be granted unless an objection thereto, together with a request for an opportunity to be heard, if desired, is received in writing by the addressee set forth below within 60 days from the date of publication of this Notice. Information concerning the application may be obtained, on request, from the same addressee. 

All communications concerning this Notice should be sent to Mr. Randy Heald, Associate General Counsel (Acquisition), SAF/GCQ, 1500 Wilson Blvd., Suite 304, Arlington, VA 22209-2310. Mr. Heald can be reached at 703-588-5091 or by fax at 703-588-8037. 

Janet A. Long, 

Air Force Federal Register Liaison Office. 

[FR Doc. 00-12195 Filed 5-15-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5000-05-U
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, *v.*David Greenberg, Appellant.

Argued December 3, 1936;

decided December 31, 1936.

*Charles Belous*for appellant.

*Paul Windels, Corporation Counsel (Paxton Blair*and *James Hurley*of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment affirmed; no opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Crouch, Loughran and Finch, JJ.
§ 1450.30 Exemptions. ( a ) The provisions of 31 U.S.C. 3717 to not apply: ( 1 ) To debts owed by any State or local government;
( 2 ) To debts arising under contracts which were executed prior to, and were in effect on (i.e., were not completed as of), October 25, 1982;
( 3 ) To debts where an applicable statute, regulation required by statute, loan agreement, or contract either prohibits such charges or explicitly fixes the charges that apply to the debts arising under the Social Security Act, the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, or the tariff laws of the United States.
( b ) However, FMCS is authorized to assess interest and related charges on debts which are not subject to 31 U.S.C. 3717 to the extent authorized under the common law or other applicable statutory authority.
The Honorable Carol E. Jackson, United States District Judge 1

for the Eastern District of Missouri.

___________

No. 96-1289

___________

United States of America, *

 *

Appellee, *

 * Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

 * Eastern District of Missouri.

Michael Freeman, *

 * [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: July 23, 1996

 Filed: August 28, 1996

___________

Before FAGG, BOWMAN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Michael Freeman appeals the forty-month sentence imposed by the

District Court after he pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute and

1

possess with intent to distribute cocaine base (crack), in violation of 21

U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846 (1994). We affirm.

At sentencing, Freeman objected to his offense-level calculation,

which was derived from the penalty scheme set forth in 21 U.S.C.

§ 841(b)(1), providing the same penalties for given amounts of crack and

100 times greater amounts of powder cocaine (the 100-to-1 ratio).

Freeman's objection was premised on Congress's rejection of a proposed

amendment to the Sentencing Guidelines (Amendment 5) which would have

eliminated the 100-to-1 ratio and equalized the penalties for crack and

powder cocaine. 
 We do not reach the government's argument that Freeman lacks 2

standing to raise this challenge because he is a caucasian.

-2-

Freeman argued the 100-to-1 ratio had a disproportionate adverse effect on

African-Americans, Congress's rejection of Amendment 5 evidenced a

discriminatory purpose on Congress's part in maintaining the penalty

scheme, and thus, continued application of the penalty scheme violated his

Fifth Amendment equal protection and due process rights. The District

Court overruled Freeman's objection, and he appeals. We rejected the

challenge Freeman raises here in United States v. Carter, No. 96-1329, 1996

WL 453275, at *2-*3 (8th Cir. Aug. 13, 1996) (per curiam).2

Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### Helen Shaw et al., Appellants, *v.*Irving Trust Company, as Trustee under the Will of Grace S. Seidler, Deceased, Respondent.

Argued May 28, 1937;

decided June 11, 1937.

*Morris Oelbman*for appellants.

*Ralph H. Terhune*and *E. C. Sherwood,*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Loughrajst, Finch and Rippey, JJ.
#### Dowling Park Naval Stores Company, a Corporation, *Plaintiff in*Error, v. J. F. Fender, *Defendant in Error.*

This case was decided by Division A.

. Writ of error to the Circuit Court for Taylor County.

*W. B.*Davis, for Plaintiff in Error.

*Hendry*ff- McKinnon, for Defendant in Error.

Per Curiam.

This cause coming on for final hearing upon transcripts of record and briefs of the respective' parties, and having been duly considered by Division A. and no reversible error having been made to appear, it is *162therefore considered, ordered and adjudged by the court that the judgment of the Circuit Court, to review which the writ of error was sued out herein, be and the same is hereby affirmed at the cost of the plaintiff in error.
§ 1960.67 Federal agency certification of the injury and illness annual summary (OSHA 300-A or equivalent). As required by 29 CFR 1904.32, a company executive must certify that he or she has examined the OSHA 300 Log and that he or she believes, based on his or her knowledge of the process by which the information was recorded, that the annual summary is correct and complete. For Federal establishments, the person who performs the certification shall be one of the following: ( a ) The senior establishment management official,
( b ) The head of the Agency for which the senior establishment management official works, or
( c ) Any management official who is in the direct chain of command between the senior establishment management official and the head of the Agency.
Note to § 1960.67 :
The requirement for certification of Federal agency injury and illness records in this section is necessary because the private sector position titles contained in 29 CFR part 1904 do not fit the Federal agency position titles for agency executives. The Federal officials listed in this section are intended to be the equivalent of the private sector officials who are required to certify records under § 1904.32(b)(4).
From: Teresa Cle mons/RTP/USEPA/US

To: Peter South/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, tsirigotis.peter@epa.gov

Cc: Nathan Topham/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Chuck

French/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Steve Fruh/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Fred

Thompson/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 11/04/2011 11:37 AM

Subject: Fw: OMB Co mpleted Review: (11/4

- NESHAP for Primary Lead

Smelting SAN 5471)

Pete

- this is the package you have now for review.

THANKS!

Teresa Clemons

Sector Policies and Programs Division, IO

919

- 541

- 0252

919

- 685

- 3157 (Fax)

----- Forwarded by Teresa Clemons/RTP/USEPA/US on 11/04/2011 11:36 AM

-----

From: Joseph

- J Dougherty/DC/USEPA/US

To: Teresa Clemons/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: Mary Henigin/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Alan Rush/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 11/04/2011 11:32 AM

Subject: Fw : OMB Completed Review: (11/4

- NESHAP for Primary Lead

Smelting SAN 5471)

----- Forwarded by Joseph

- J Dougherty/DC/USEPA/US on 11/04/2011 11:31 AM

-----

From: Amy Cole/DC/USEPA/US

To: Nicole Owens/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Lesley

Sch aaff/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Alexander

Cristofaro/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Robin Kime/DC/USEPA/US@EPA,

Fred Talcott/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Joseph

- J

Dougherty/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Alan Rush/DC/USEPA/US@EPA,

Mary Henigin/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: Mariana Cubeddu/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 11/04/2011 11:29 AMSubject: OMB Completed Review: (11/4

- NESHAP for Primary Lead Smelting

SAN 5471)

OMB has completed review for NESHAP for Primary Lead Smelting (SAN 5471, RIN 2060

- AQ43).

RAPIDS has been updated.

Amy L. Cole

Regulatory Management Division

US Environmental Protection Agency

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460

Phone: 202.564.6535

Office: 6440T ARN----- Forwarded by Joseph

- J Dougherty/DC/USEPA/US on 11/04/2011 11:31 AM

-----

From: Amy Cole/DC/USEPA/US

To: Nicole Owens/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Lesley Schaaff/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Alexander Cristofaro/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Robin

Kime/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Fred Talcott/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Joseph

- J Dougherty/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Alan

Rush/DC/ USEPA/US@EPA, Mary Henigin/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: Mariana Cubeddu/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 11/04/2011 11:29 AM

Subject: OMB Completed Review: (11/4

- NESHAP for Primary Lead Smelting SAN 5471)

OMB has completed review for NESHAP for Primary Lead Smelting (SAN 5471, RIN 2060

- AQ43).

RAPIDS has been updated.

Amy L. Cole

Regulatory Management Division

US Environmental Protection Agency

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460

Phone: 202.564.6535

Office: 6440T ARN
Editorial Note on Part 1926
Editorial Notes: 1. At 44 FR 8577, Feb. 9, 1979, and corrected at 44 FR 20940, Apr. 6, 1979, OSHA reprinted without change the entire text of 29 CFR part 1926 together with certain General Industry Occupational Safety and Health Standards contained in 29 CFR part 1910, which have been identified as also applicable to construction work. This republication developed a single set of OSHA regulations for both labor and management forces within the construction industry. 2. Nomenclature changes to part 1926 appear at 84 FR 21597, May 14, 2019.

§ 1926.305 Jacks—lever and ratchet, screw, and hydraulic. ( a ) *General requirements.* ( 1 ) The manufacturer's rated capacity shall be legibly marked on all jacks and shall not be exceeded.
( 2 ) All jacks shall have a positive stop to prevent overtravel.
( b ) [Reserved]
( c ) *Blocking.* When it is necessary to provide a firm foundation, the base of the jack shall be blocked or cribbed. Where there is a possibility of slippage of the metal cap of the jack, a wood block shall be placed between the cap and the load.
( d ) ( 1 ) *Operation and maintenance.* ( i ) After the load has been raised, it shall be cribbed, blocked, or otherwise secured at once.
( ii ) Hydraulic jacks exposed to freezing temperatures shall be supplied with an adequate antifreeze liquid.
( iii ) All jacks shall be properly lubricated at regular intervals.
( iv ) Each jack shall be thoroughly inspected at times which depend upon the service conditions. Inspections shall be not less frequent than the following: ( a ) For constant or intermittent use at one locality, once every 6 months,
( b ) For jacks sent out of shop for special work, when sent out and when returned,
( c ) For a jack subjected to abnormal load or shock, immediately before and immediately thereafter.
( v ) Repair or replacement parts shall be examined for possible defects.
( vi ) Jacks which are out of order shall be tagged accordingly, and shall not be used until repairs are made.
[44 FR 8577, Feb. 9, 1979; 44 FR 20940, Apr. 6, 1979, as amended at 55 FR 42328, Oct. 18, 1990; 58 FR 35176, June 30, 1993]