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

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 17 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 17

     Authorizing the use of Capitol grounds for Live Earth Concert.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 9, 2007

Mr. Reid (for himself and Ms. Snowe) submitted the following concurrent 
     resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules and 
                             Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
     Authorizing the use of Capitol grounds for Live Earth Concert.

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring),

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF USE OF CAPITOL GROUNDS FOR LIVE EARTH 
              CONCERT.

    (a) In General.--The Live Earth organization and the Alliance for 
Climate Protection (in this resolution referred to as the 
``sponsors''), may sponsor the Live Earth Concert (in this resolution 
referred to as the ``event'') on the Capitol Grounds.
    (b) Date of Event.--The event shall be held on July 7, 2007, or on 
such other date as the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the 
Committee on Rules and Administration of the Senate jointly designate.

SEC. 2. TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

    (a) In General.--Under conditions to be prescribed by the Architect 
of the Capitol and the Capitol Police Board, the event shall be--
            (1) free of admission charge and open to the public; and
            (2) arranged not to interfere with the needs of Congress.
    (b) Expenses and Liabilities.--The sponsors shall assume full 
responsibility for all expenses and liabilities incident to all 
activities associated with the event.

SEC. 3. EVENT PREPARATIONS.

    (a) Structures and Equipment.--Subject to the approval of the 
Architect of the Capitol, the sponsors may cause to be placed on the 
Capitol grounds such stage, seating, booths, sound amplification and 
video devices, and other related structures and equipment as may be 
required for the event, including equipment for the broadcast of the 
event over radio, television, and other media outlets.
    (b) Additional Arrangements.--The Architect of the Capitol and the 
Capitol Police Board may make any additional arrangements as may be 
required to carry out the event.

SEC. 4. ENFORCEMENT OF RESTRICTIONS.

    The Capitol Police Board shall provide for enforcement of the 
restrictions contained in section 4 of the Act of July 31, 1946 (40 
U.S.C. 193d; 60 Stat. 718), concerning sales, displays, advertisements, 
and solicitations on the Capitol Grounds, as well as other restrictions 
applicable to the Capitol Grounds in connection with the event.
                                 <all>
```
III 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 38 

Recognizing that the plight of Kashmiri Pandits has been an ongoing concern 

since 1989 and that their physical, political, and economic security should 

be safeguarded by the Government of the Republic of India and the 

state government of Jammu and Kashmir. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 18, 2007 

Mr. BROWN submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred 

to the Committee on Foreign Relations 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Recognizing that the plight of Kashmiri Pandits has been 

an ongoing concern since 1989 and that their physical, 

political, and economic security should be safeguarded 

by the Government of the Republic of India and the 

state government of Jammu and Kashmir. 

Whereas Jammu and Kashmir has an ancient culture of religious tolerance and pluralism, and Hindus, Muslims, 

Sikhs, Buddhists, and Christians were able to practice 

their faith in an atmosphere of mutual respect and peace 

until 1989; 

Whereas Kashmiri Pandits are the original inhabitants of 

Kashmir, tracing their heritage and culture back several 

millennia; 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
2 

•SCON 38 IS 

Whereas Kashmiri Pandits have been the victims of a sustained ethnic cleansing campaign initiated in 1989 by 

Pakistan-based terrorist groups, which forced a mass exodus of Pandits from Jammu and Kashmir, many of 

whom now live in Indian refugee camps; 

Whereas the Kashmiri Pandit population has declined from 

400,000 in 1989 to a current level of only 8,000; 

Whereas international human rights organizations have failed 

to accurately report the campaign of intimidation and violence directed against Kashmiri Pandits; 

Whereas hundreds of Kashmiri Pandit civilians, elected officials, and military personnel have been killed in terrorist 

attacks; and 

Whereas Harakat ul-Mujahidin, Jaish-e-Mohammed, and 

Lashkar-e Tayyiba, which are Pakistan-based terrorist 

groups and have been designated by the Department of 

State as foreign terrorist organizations, are seeking to 

drive out Kashmiri Pandits from Jammu and Kashmir 

and fight the security forces of the Government of the 

Republic of India: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 

2 concurring), That Congress— 

3 (1) condemns the human rights violations com4 mitted against Kashmiri Pandits; 

5 (2) urges the Government of the Islamic Repub6 lic of Pakistan to end cross-border terrorism by dis7 mantling the infrastructure for terrorist activities in 

8 territory under its control, so that all Kashmiris can 

9 live, work, and worship in peace; and 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
3 

•SCON 38 IS 

1 (3) encourages the Government of the Republic 

2 of India and the state government of Jammu and 

3 Kashmir to ensure that Kashmiri Pandits are treat4 ed with respect and dignity and are able to safely re5 turn to Kashmir. 

Æ 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
III 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. CON. RES. 67 

Establishing the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 8 (legislative day, FEBRUARY 6), 2008 

Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. BENNETT) submitted the following 

concurrent resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Establishing the Joint Congressional Committee on 

Inaugural Ceremonies. 

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 

2 concurring), 

3 SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF JOINT COMMITTEE. 

4 There is established a Joint Congressional Committee 

5 on Inaugural Ceremonies (in this resolution referred to as 

6 the ‘‘joint committee’’), consisting of 3 Senators and 3 

7 Members of the House of Representatives appointed by 

8 the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House 

9 of Representatives, respectively. The joint committee is 

10 authorized to make the necessary arrangements for the 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•SCON 67 ATS 

1 inauguration of the President-elect and the Vice Presi2 dent-elect of the United States. 

3 SEC. 2. SUPPORT OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE. 

4 The joint committee— 

5 (1) is authorized to utilize appropriate equip6 ment and the services of appropriate personnel of 

7 departments and agencies of the Federal Govern8 ment, under arrangements between the joint com9 mittee and the heads of the departments and agen10 cies, in connection with the inaugural proceedings 

11 and ceremonies; and 

12 (2) may accept gifts and donations of goods 

13 and services to carry out its responsibilities. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
VI 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 933 

For the relief of Joseph Gabra and Sharon Kamel. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 20, 2007 

Mrs. FEINSTEIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

For the relief of Joseph Gabra and Sharon Kamel. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi5 sion of law, for the purposes of the Immigration and Na6 tionality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), Joseph Gabra and 

7 Sharon Kamel shall each be deemed to have been lawfully 

8 admitted to, and remained in, the United States, and shall 

9 be eligible for adjustment of status to that of an alien law10 fully admitted for permanent residence under section 245 

11 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1255) 

12 upon filing an application for such adjustment of status. 


ccoleman on PROD1PC60 with BILLS
2 

•S 933 IS

1 (b) APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF FEES.—Sub2 section (a) shall apply only if the application for adjust3 ment of status is filed with appropriate fees not later than 

4 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

5 (c) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBERS.— 

6 Upon the granting of permanent resident status to Joseph 

7 Gabra and Sharon Kamel, the Secretary of State shall in8 struct the proper officer to reduce by 2, during the current 

9 or subsequent fiscal year, the total number of immigrant 

10 visas that are made available to natives of the country of 

11 Joseph Gabra and Sharon Kamel’s birth under section 

12 202(e) or 203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 

13 (8 U.S.C. 1152(e), 1153(a)), as applicable. 

Æ 


ccoleman on PROD1PC60 with BILLS
[No. 49148-2-I.

Division One.

November 12, 2002.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Andrew Garfield Hagen, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 00-1-09239-0, Dale B. Ramerman, J., entered July 9, 2001. *Affirmed in part, reversed in part,*and *remanded*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4932 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4932

 To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to ensure appropriate 
      global surgical package code values in the Medicare program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            December 1, 2020

   Mr. Paul introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to ensure appropriate 
      global surgical package code values in the Medicare program.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Medicare Reimbursement Equity Act of 
2020''.

SEC. 2. ENSURING APPROPRIATE GLOBAL SURGICAL PACKAGE CODE VALUES IN 
              MEDICARE.

    Section 1848(c)(8) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-
4(c)(8)) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
subparagraph:
                    ``(D) Ensuring appropriate global surgical package 
                code values.--For services furnished on or after 
                January 1, 2021, the Secretary shall ensure that the 
                valuation of evaluation and management (E/M) post-
                operative visits is equal to the valuation of 
                evaluation and management (E/M) services identified as 
                of January 1, 2021, by HCPCS codes 99211-99215, 99217, 
                99224-99226, 99231-99233, 99238-99239, 99291-99292, and 
                99354-99357 (or any successor codes).''.
                                 <all>
```
#### STATE ex HUNT, Prosecuting Attorney v SULLIVAN, et as Board of Elections of Lucas County

Ohio Appeals, 6th Dist, Lucas Co

No 2387.

Decided April 30, 1930

Leroy W. Hunt, Prosecuting Attorney, Harry W. Commager, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney and James Nye, all of Toledo, for State ex.

Scott Stahl and Seeley, Wolfe & Rogers, all of Toledo, for Sullivan, et.

PER CURIAM

This court has concluded that the power to enter into a lease to commence after the personnel of the Board changes exists in the Board in the absence of an abuse of discretion in the exercise thereof and that when questioned the burden rests upon the members thereof to show that the lease so sought to be made is for the public interest and therefore justified in the exercise of a sound discretion. The court of common pleas granted a temporary injunction on motiofi of the plaintiff therefor and thereafter, on hearing had thereon, dissolved the injunction so granted. From this order plaintiff appeals to this court, seeking a temporary injunction.

It is important to note that the defendants have offered proof, in the shape of two affidavits, and that the plaintiff has offered none except the petition, which is positively sworn to. An examination of the affidavits filed on behalf of the defendants discloses that many facts are set forth therein tending tó show that reasons of economy and the suitability of the present quarters justify the making of a new lease demising the same. These facts are not denied in* the petition, and as no counter affidavits have been filed, we must take them to be true and we can only find from the evidence adduced in defendants’ affidavits and not contradicted, that the proposed action in making- a new lease for the present quarters is not an abuse of discretion.

■We note, however, that defendants say that they are satisfied to enter into a lease of the present quarters for not more than one year and at a rental not exceeding that which is paid at the present time. In view of the situation presented, this court grants a temporary injunction restraining the defendants from entering into a contract leasing the present quarters for a period which exceeds one year, and from paying an .additional or increased rental during said period of one year, but no further temporary injunction will be allowed, in view of the state of the record.

Williams, Lloyd and Richards, J., concur.
#### § 4003.51 Who may appeal or participate in appeals.

Any person aggrieved by an initial determination to which this subpart applies may file an appeal. Any person who may be aggrieved by a decision under this subpart granting the relief requested in whole or in part may participate in the appeal in the manner provided in § 4003.57.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 101 (Wednesday, May 24, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33612-33613]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-13001]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

[General Counsel Designation No. 250]


Appointment of Members of the General Counsel Panel of the Legal 
Division Performance Review Board

    Under the authority granted to me as General Counsel of the 
Department of the Treasury by 31 U.S.C. 301 and 26

[[Page 33613]]

U.S.C. 7801, Treasury Department Order No. 101-5 (Revised), and 
pursuant to the Civil Service Reform Act, I hereby appoint the 
following individuals to the General Counsel Panel of the Legal 
Division Performance Review Board;

Joan E. Donoghue, Deputy General Counsel, who shall serve as 
Chairperson;
Thomas M. McGivern, Counselor to the General Counsel;
Kenneth R. Schmalzbach, Assistant General Counsel (General Law and 
Ethics);
Roberta K. McInerney, Assistant General Counsel (Banking and Finance);
Stephen J. McHale, Assistant General Counsel (Enforcement);
Russell L. Munk, Assistant General Counsel (International Affairs);
Rochelle F. Granat, Deputy Assistant General Counsel (General Law and 
Ethics);
Francine J. Kerner, Deputy Assistant General Counsel (Enforcement);
Marilyn L. Muench, Deputy Assistant General Counsel (International 
Affairs);
Eleni Constantine, Deputy Assistant General Counsel (Banking and 
Finance);
John J. Manfreda, Chief Counsel, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms;
Alfonso Robles, Chief Counsel, United States Customs Service;
Walter Eccard, Chief Counsel, Bureau of Public Debt.

    Dated: May 10, 2000.
Neal S. Wolin,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 00-13001 Filed 5-23-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-25-M
# SUMMARY:

 In accordance with the requirement of Section 3506 (c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 which provides opportunity for public comment on new or revised data collections, the Railroad Retirement Board will publish periodic summaries of proposed data collections. 

## Comments Are Invited On 

(a) Whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information has practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the RRB's estimate of the burden of the collection of the information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden related to the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. 

## Title and Purpose of Information Collection 

#### Employer's Deemed Service Month Questionnaire; OMB 3220-0156 

Section 3(i) of the Railroad Retirement Act (RRA), as amended by Pub. L. 98-76, provides that the Railroad Retirement Board (RRB), under certain circumstances, may deem additional months of service in cases where an employee does not actually work in every month of the year, provided the employee satisfies certain eligibility requirements, including the existence of an employment relation between the employee and his or her employer. The procedures pertaining to the deeming of additional months of service are found in the RRB's regulations at 20 CFR part 210, Creditable Railroad Service. 

The RRB utilizes Form GL-99, Employers Deemed Service Month Questionnaire, to obtain service and compensation information from railroad employers needed to determine if an employee can be credited with additional deemed months of railroad service. Completion is mandatory. One response is required for each RRB inquiry. 

No changes are proposed to Form GL-99. The completion time for Form GL-99 is estimated at 2 minutes per response. The RRB estimates that approximately 4,000 response are received annually. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

 To request more information or to obtain a copy of the information collection justification, forms, and/or supporting material, please call the RRB Clearance Officer at (312) 751-3363. Comments regarding the information collection should be addressed to Ronald J. Hodapp, Railroad Retirement Board, 844 N. Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611-2092. Written comments should be received within 60 days of this notice. 

Chuck Mierzwa, 

Clearance Officer, 

[FR Doc. 00-1203 Filed 1-18-00; 8:45am]

BILLING CODE 7905-01-M
<PAGE>

                                                                EXHIBIT 23.2



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



K-V Pharmaceutical Company
St. Louis, Missouri

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (File Numbers 2-56793, 2-76173, 33-46400, 33-44927,
333-00199, 333-48252 and 333-85516) and Registration Statement on Form S-3
(File Number 333-87402 and 333-106294) of our reports dated June 4, 2004,
relating to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of K-V
Pharmaceutical Company appearing in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K
as of and for the year ended March 31, 2004.



/s/ BDO Seidman, LLP


Chicago, Illinois
June 13, 2005
#### JOHN McLEAN v. GEORGE F. DEAN.1

December 7, 1896.

Nos. 10,156 — (136).

Action by Guardian — Real Party in Interest.

A guardian may sue in his own name on a note payable to himself, although the consideration paid for it was funds of his ward, and the note was taken or purchased by him for the benefit of the ward.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the municipal court of Minneapolis, Kerr, J., denying a motion for a new trial, after a verdict in favor of plaintiff for $250.44.

Affirmed.

*370*Henry If. Farnam,*for appellant.

*Fryberger dé Jolumson*and *Ohild dé*Fryberger, for respondent.

1

 Reported in 69 N. W. 140.

MITCHELL, J.

The action was brought on two promissory notes executed by the defendant to one McGregor, and by the latter transferred to the plaintiff! by the following indorsement, to wit: “Pay to the order of John McLean.” The execution of the notes by defendant was admitted. The only evidence introduced or offered on the trial was the notes and indorsements. In response to a defense attempted to be set up in defendant’s answer, to the effect that the plaintiff, individually, was not the real party in interest, but held, the notes in some representative capacity, the plaintiff, in his reply,, admitted that the consideration which he paid for the notes belonged to the estate of certain minors, of whom he was guardian. On this state of the pleadings and evidence, the court correctly directed a verdict for the plaintiff.

The action being upon an express contract made by the guardian himself, it might be brought by him personally, although he may have made the contract for the benefit of his wards. This was the law,, independently of any statute. 9 Am. & Eng. Enc. Law, 111, and cases, cited. The same rule still obtains under the second clause of section 5158, G. S. 1894. Lake v. Albert, 37 Minn. 453, 35 N. W. 177; Cremer v. Wimmer, 40 Minn. 511, 42 N. W. 467; Murphin v. Scovell, 44 Minn. 530, 47 N. W. 256. See, also, Huntsman v. Fish, 36 Minn. 148, 30 N. W. 455.

Order affirmed.
#### Thomas Martin, Pl’ff and Resp’t, *v.*Lucy E. Stoddard *et al.,*Def’ts and App’lts.

*(City Court of Brooklyn,*

*General Term,*

*Filed January 28, 1889.)*

Taxes—Sale of land fob—Effect of want of notice to mobtgagee— Laws 1883, chap. 114.

The owner of land sold for taxes cannot complain because the mortgagee was not notified of the sale, as required by § 4, chapter 114, Laws of 1883.

*William J.*Gaynor, for resp’t; *A. H. & W. E. Osborn,*for app’lts.

Per Curiam.

—All the questions presented by the records in this case have already been passed upon by this court, except the point that the notice of sale was not served upon the mortgagee of the lands sold for taxes. Laws 1883, chapter 114, section 4, requires notice of sale to be served on the owner and mortgagee of the premises. Notice was served on the defendants, who were the owners. They cannot complain that the mortgagee was not served.

Judgment must be affirmed, with costs.