alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### BRIDGEPORT ENGRAVERS SUPPLY COMPANY, a corporation, a/k/a Besco v BOSTON, d/b/a Anchor Printing

Case No. 89-12-AP

Fourth Judicial Circuit, Duval County

August 8, 1989

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

Michael Bowlus, for appellant.

Raymond Boston, pro se.

OPINION OF THE COURT

PETER L. DEARING, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal taken by the Plaintiff from a judgment entered in the County Court which awarded the Plaintiff its liquidated damages but denied recovery of prejudgment interest. A default was taken in the trial court against the Defendant/Appellee because of his failure to file an answer to the Complaint. Not unexpectedly, the Appellee has likewise failed to respond to this appeal.

The only issue raised in this appeal is whether or not the Plaintiff is entitled to prejudgment interest in his suit, which combines claims on an invoice and claims on dishonored checks. Both the invoice and the checks establish as of a date certain a liquidated claim for a specific *30amount owed by the Defendant to the Plaintiff. Under such circumstances, even though the contract documents themselves do not call for interest, the Plaintiff is entitled to recover prejudgment interest at the legal rate of 12% from the date that payment was due on the invoice and on the checks. *Argonaut Insurance Co. v May Plumbing Co.,*474 So.2d 212 (Fla. 1985); *Fla. Stat.*§687.01 (1987). Accordingly, the County Court should have allowed the Plaintiff’s claim for prejudgment interest, although the Court was correct in denying the claim for attorney’s fees. It is therefore

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

This cause is hereby remanded to the County Court with instructions that an amended judgment be entered which includes the award of prejudgment interest from the date payment was due on the invoice and checks up through and including the date of the amended judgment at the legal rate of 12%.

DONE AND ORDERED in chambers at Jacksonville, Florida, the 8th day of August, 1989.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certificationof the Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I, Herbert Lindo,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Kenilworth SystemsCorporation on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such AnnualReport on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financialcondition and results of operations of Kenilworth Systems Corporation.

 
| By:    | /s/ Herbert Lindo       |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|
| Name:  | Herbert Lindo           |   |
| Title: | Chief Financial Officer |   |
| Date:  | March 19, 2008     |   |

 

 

***Remainder of page intentionally left blank***

 

 

 

 

 

 

----
§ 36.115 Assurance required. ( a ) *General.* Either at the application stage or the award stage, Federal agencies must ensure that applications for Federal financial assistance or awards of Federal financial assistance contain, be accompanied by, or be covered by a specifically identified assurance from the applicant or recipient, satisfactory to the designated agency official, that each education program or activity operated by the applicant or recipient and to which these Title IX regulations apply will be operated in compliance with these Title IX regulations. An assurance of compliance with these Title IX regulations shall not be satisfactory to the designated agency official if the applicant or recipient to whom such assurance applies fails to commit itself to take whatever remedial action is necessary in accordance with § 36.110(a) to eliminate existing discrimination on the basis of sex or to eliminate the effects of past discrimination whether occurring prior to or subsequent to the submission to the designated agency official of such assurance.
( b ) *Duration of obligation.* ( 1 ) In the case of Federal financial assistance extended to provide real property or structures thereon, such assurance shall obligate the recipient or, in the case of a subsequent transfer, the transferee, for the period during which the real property or structures are used to provide an education program or activity.
( 2 ) In the case of Federal financial assistance extended to provide personal property, such assurance shall obligate the recipient for the period during which it retains ownership or possession of the property.
( 3 ) In all other cases such assurance shall obligate the recipient for the period during which Federal financial assistance is extended.
( c ) *Form.* ( 1 ) The assurances required by paragraph (a) of this section, which may be included as part of a document that addresses other assurances or obligations, shall include that the applicant or recipient will comply with all applicable Federal statutes relating to nondiscrimination. These include but are not limited to: Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. 1681-1683, 1685-1688).
( 2 ) The designated agency official will specify the extent to which such assurances will be required of the applicant's or recipient's subgrantees, contractors, subcontractors, transferees, or successors in interest.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4971 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4971

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 229 Minnetonka Avenue South in Wayzata, Minnesota, as the ``Jim 
                         Ramstad Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            December 7, 2020

  Ms. Klobuchar (for herself, Ms. Smith, Mr. Cramer, and Mr. Hoeven) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
        Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 229 Minnetonka Avenue South in Wayzata, Minnesota, as the ``Jim 
                         Ramstad Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. JIM RAMSTAD POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 229 Minnetonka Avenue South in Wayzata, Minnesota, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Jim Ramstad Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Jim 
Ramstad Post Office''.
                                 <all>
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, *v.*Aniello De Simone, Appellant.

Argued April 28, 1937;

decided May 25, 1937.

*Samuel Bosensweig*for appellant.

*John J. Bennett, Jr., Attorney-General (Sol I. Smithline*and *Joseph A. McLaughlin*of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment affirmed; no opinion.

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

 Department of the Treasury.

# ACTION:

 Notice of Meeting.

# SUMMARY:

 Under section 610 of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1999, the Secretary of the Treasury is required to establish an International Monetary Fund Advisory Committee (the “Committee”) to advise the Secretary on IMF policy.

# DATES:

 The third meeting of the Committee will be held on February 3, 2000, beginning at 1:30 p.m. in the Diplomatic Room located on the third floor of the main Department of the Treasury building, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

 Designated Federal Official: William McFadden, Senior Policy Advisor, Office of International Monetary and Financial Policy, Room 4444, Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC, 20220. Telephone number 202-622-0343, fax number (202) 622-7664.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

 Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2.

## Agenda of Meeting

The IMF Advisory Committee will discuss the legislated mandates directed at the IMF, with a focus on questions related to social policies and core labor standards, and trade liberalization.

## Procedural

This meeting is open to the public. Please note that the meeting may close early if all business is finished. If you wish to attend please FAX your full name, birthday, and social security number to the Designated Federal Official no later than 4 p.m., January 31st, for clearance into the Treasury building. Members of the public who have provided such information, must enter the main Treasury building at the entrance on 15th Street between F and G Streets, and must provide a photo ID at the entrance to be admitted into the building.

Members of the public may submit written comments. If you wish to furnish such comments, please provide 16 copies of your written material to the Designated Federal Official. If you wish to have your comments distributed to members of the Committee in advance of the third meeting, 16 copies of any written material should be provided to the Designated Federal Official no later than January 31, 2000.

Dated: January 13, 2000.

William McFadden,

Designated Federal Official.

[FR Doc. 00-1277 Filed 1-19-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4810-25-M
#### § 2700.64 Retention of exhibits.

All exhibits received in evidence in a hearing or submitted for the record in any proceeding before the Commission shall be retained with the official record of the proceeding. The withdrawal of original exhibits may be permitted by the Commission or the Judge, upon request and after notice to the other parties, if true copies are substituted, where practical, for the originals.
§ 1902.38 Evaluation of plan following certification. ( a ) Following the publication in the Federal Register under § 1902.34 of the certification acknowledging the completion of all developmental steps specified in the plan, or any portion thereof, the Assistant Secretary will evaluate and monitor the actual operations under the State plan for at least 1 year before determining whether the State is eligible for an 18(e) determination. The evaluation will assess the actual operation of the State's fully implemented program in accordance with the criteria in § 1902.37 and take into account any information available to the Assistant Secretary affecting the State's program.
( b ) The Assistant Regional Director shall prepare a semi-annual report of his evaluation of the actual operations under the State plan or any portion thereof in narrative form. The Assistant Regional Director's evaluation report will be transmitted to the Assistant Secretary who will then transmit the report to the State. The State shall be afforded an opportunity to respond to each evaluation report.
[40 FR 54782, Nov. 26, 1975, as amended at 42 FR 58746, Nov. 11, 1977]
#### DENNISON COAL & SUPPLY CO v BARTELHEIM, etc.

Ohio Supreme Court

No 22063.

Decided May 21, 1930

Robinson, Matthias, Day and Allen, JJ., concur. Kinkade, J., dissents.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

In connection with the periodic report of WT Holdings Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Ricky Tsoi, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date
hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods indicated.



|                        |  |  |  |                        
|----------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|                        |  | 
|Date: November 14, 2006 |  |  |  | /s/ Ricky Tsoi         
|                        |  |  |  | Ricky Tsoi             
|                        |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will
be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
§ 1988.100 Purpose and scope. ( a ) This part sets forth procedures for, and interpretations of, section 31307 of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), Public Law 112-141, 126 Stat. 405, 765 (July 6, 2012) (codified at 49 U.S.C. 30171). MAP-21 provides for employee protection from retaliation because the employee has engaged in protected activity pertaining to the manufacture or sale of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment.
( b ) This part establishes procedures under MAP-21 for the expeditious handling of retaliation complaints filed by employees, or by persons acting on their behalf. These rules, together with those codified at 29 CFR part 18, set forth the procedures under MAP-21 for submission of complaints, investigations, issuance of findings and preliminary orders, objections to findings and orders, litigation before administrative law judges (ALJs), post-hearing administrative review, and withdrawals and settlements. In addition, these rules provide the Secretary's interpretations on certain statutory issues.
#### § 2530.200b-5 Seasonal industries. [Reserved]
#### STATE ex rel. ORA TILESON, Respondent, v. W. L. COLEY, Appellant.

St. Louis Court of Appeals.

Argued and Submitted January 10, 1912.

Opinion Filed February 6, 1912.

BILLS OF EXCEPTIONS: Filing Out of Time: Appellate Practice: Scope of Review. Where a bill of exceptions, filed in 1910, was filed after tbe expiration of the time granted in which to file it, the evidence and proceedings at the trial were not open to review.

Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — No. *Moses N.*Sale, Judge.

*472Affirmed.

*W. L. Coley*for appellants.

*L. Frm'ik Ottofy*for respondent.

The bill of exceptions was not filed in time. On September 17, 1910, defendants were granted fifteen days from that date for filing bill of exceptions and on, October 3, 1910, défendants were granted five days additional. October 3d is a date sixteen days after September 17th, hence the court was without authority on that date to enlarge the time. Meyer v. Meyer, 138 S. W. (Mo. App.) 70; O’Bannon v. Railroad, 106 Mo. App. 318.

REYNOLDS, P. J.

This is an action on a forthcoming bond executed by the deféndants in the case of Star Novelty "Works against William Bateman and Mrs. E. A. Fallis, that case pending before a justice of the peace. There was a trial before the court, a jury having been waived, and a special finding of fact and conclusions of law by the court, the court, on the 18th of April, 1910; entering up a judgment for the penalty of the bond, namely, $800; to be satisfied by payment of the sum of $316.50; this including the value of the property involved, a diamond ring, and interest on that from May 19, 1909. Prom this defendant Coley has duly perfected his appeal to this court.

The only errors assigned are to errors in the admission of testimony, to the finding of fact and conclusion of law, and in overruling the motion for new trial. No question is made as to the sufficiency of the petition in the case, and considering that petition, we find it sufficient to sustain the judgment. After various extensions of time for the filing of a bill of exceptions, the court on the 17th of September, 1910, entered of record an order as follows: ‘ ‘ Defendants ’ *473time for filing bill of exceptions extended for fifteen days from this date.” Fifteen days from that date expired with October 2, 1910'. The bill of exceptions before ns purports to have been filed the 6th day of October, 1910, consequently it was filed out of time. It follows that the evidence and proceedings at the trial are not open for review and we can consider nothing but the record proper, in which we find no error. We may add, however, for the satisfaction of the appellant, that we have, notwithstanding the fact that the bill of exceptions ■ was not filed in time, examined that bill and find no reversible error committed.

The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

*Nortoni*and Caulfield, *JJ.,*concur.
-95 -90 -85 -80 -75 -70

35 40 45



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 500 18 12 06 00 06/22 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 22 Jun 06

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 39.41 N 76.30 WMeters AGL
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 966 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 10, 2007 

Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

AN ACT 

To enable the Department of State to respond to a critical 

shortage of passport processing personnel, and for other 

purposes. 

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


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

S 966 RFH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Passport Backlog Re3 duction Act of 2007’’. 

4 SEC. 2. REEMPLOYMENT OF FOREIGN SERVICE ANNU5 ITANTS. 

6 Section 824(g) of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 

7 (22 U.S.C. 4064(g)) is amended— 

8 (1) in paragraph (1)— 

9 (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘; 

10 or’’ and inserting a semicolon; 

11 (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking the 

12 period at the end and inserting ‘‘; or’’; and 

13 (C) by adding at the end the following new 

14 subparagraph— 

15 ‘‘(C)(i) to provide assistance to consular posts 

16 with a substantial backlog of visa applications; or 

17 ‘‘(ii) to provide assistance to meet the demand 

18 resulting from the passport and travel document re19 quirements set forth in section 7209(b) of the Intel20 ligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 

21 2004 (Public Law 108–458; 8 U.S.C. 1185 note).’’; 

22 (2) by redesignating paragraph (3) as para23 graph (4); and 

24 (3) by inserting after paragraph (2) the fol25 lowing new paragraph: 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
3 

S 966 RFH

1 ‘‘(3) The authority of the Secretary to waive the ap2 plication of subsections (a) through (d) for an annuitant 

3 pursuant to paragraph (1)(C) shall terminate on Sep4 tember 30, 2010.’’. 

Passed the Senate June 29, 2007. 

Attest: NANCY ERICKSON, 

Secretary. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
#### § 23.70 Waiver of rights.

Workers cannot waive, nor may contractors induce workers to waive, their rights under Executive Order 14026 or this part.
#### § 2580.412-35 Disqualification of agents, brokers and sureties.

Since 13(c) is to be construed as disqualifying any agent, broker, surety or other company from having a bond placed through or with it, if the plan or any party in interest in the plan has a significant financial interest or control in such agent, broker, surety or other company, a question of fact will necessarily arise in many cases as to whether the financial interest or control held is sufficiently significant to disqualify the agent, broker or surety. Although no rule of guidance can be established to govern each and every case in which this question arises, in general, the essential test is whether the existing financial interest or control held is incompatible with an unbiased exercise of judgment in regard to procuring the bond or bonding the plan's personnel. In regard to the foregoing, it is also to be pointed out that lack of knowledge or consent on the part of persons responsible for procuring bonds with respect to the existence of a significant financial interest or control rendering the bonding arrangement unlawful will not be deemed a mitigating factor where such persons have failed to make a reasonable examination into the pertinent circumstances affecting the procuring of the bond.
Dear Mr. Gadrim:

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket 

No. FAA−2015−5225). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA) to process your petition.

 Describe the aircraft make(s), model(s), and type(s)(i.e., fixed-wing, rotorcraft, 

lighter-than-air) for the proposed UAS operation. The description(s) should include the 

maximum weight (including payload). This information can be located in the 

aircraft manual(s).

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at 

www.regulations.gov. Once your information has been submitted, please also send a copy of the 

requested information (and any proprietary information), as well as your comment tracking 

number from regulations.gov via e-mail to 333exemptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process 

your request any further, we must receive the information described above by 1/29/15. If we do 

not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267–4549.

Sincerely,

/S/

Michael J. Cameron

Program Analyst
0.0
§ 2200.38 Employee contests. ( a ) *Secretary's statement of reasons.* Where an affected employee or authorized employee representative files a notice of contest with respect to the abatement period, the Secretary shall, within 14 days from receipt of the notice of contest, file a clear and concise statement of the reasons the abatement period prescribed by the Secretary is not unreasonable.
( b ) *Response to Secretary's statement.* Not later than 14 days after service of the Secretary's statement, referred to in paragraph (a) of this section, the contesting affected employee or authorized employee representative shall file a response. Service of the filed statement on the other parties and intervenors shall be accomplished in a manner prescribed in § 2200.7(c).
( c ) *Expedited proceedings.* All contests under this section shall be handled as expedited proceedings as provided for in § 2200.103.
#### WOODWARD v HANSON-HUBBARD-HANSEN CO

Ohio Appeals, 6th Dist, Lucas Co

No 2251.

Decided Jan. 27, 1930

Powell & Starritt, Toledo, for Woodward.

Geer & Lane, Toledo, for Hanson-Hubbard-Hansen Co.

WILLIAMS, J.

The first claim of palintiff in error is that there was no sale of the property. Under the contract of employment the real estate company was entitled to a . commission upon a transfer of the property by exchange as well as by sale, provided the exchange, was consented to by the owner, Marian A. Woodward. As the owner consented to the exchange, the contention that the commission was not earned because there was no sale of the property is not well founded.

The parties to the exchange filed their deeds in escrow, which were to' be held pending the perfecting of the title. The title was perfected and the deeds delivered. It is claimed,' however, that the deeds were not delivered until after the expiration of the contract. The contract of employment ran for three months, during which time it could not be terminated. During such three months • peribd the deeds were executed and placed In escrow, but at the time the deeds were delivered the contract had expired by reason of the written notice which had been given by letter. The contract of exchange was completed upon the execution of the deeds and deposit of them in escrow, and the mere *119fact that the deeds were not delivered until after the contract of employment had expired does not deprive the real estate company of its right to the commission.

The finding of the court below was ac-coring to the law and the evidence and the judgment will be affirmed.

Lloyd and Richards, JJ., concur.