alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
PARENT AND CHILD.

[Hamilton Circuit Court,

1900.]

Smith, Swing and Giffen, JJ.

#### In re Edwin Muench, Ex parte.

Parent and Child — III Treatment by Stepmother.

A father cannot be deprived of the custody of his child on account of cruel and unlawful punishment inflicted by a step-mother in his absence, unless it appears that the father countenanced or encouraged such ill-treatment.

Heard on Error.

Gieeen, J.

While the court below found that the child had been cruelly treated by his stepmother, it does not appear that it was done with the knowledge or approval of the father; but the custody of the. child was taken from the father and given to the grandmother until September 1, 1900, when the father was to be reinvested with it. This order seems to have been made with a view of punishing the father for permitting the stepmother to mistreat the child, for if- the father was an unfit person to have the custody and control of his child, it does not appear that he will be better qualified on September 1. We doubt if such interference in the government of the family by writ of *habeas corpus*should be encouraged and upheld; but, on the other hand, believe that it would be pro*125ductive of much mischief. If the stepmother, in the absence of the father, cruelly and unlawfully punishes the child, she in turn may be punished under the statutes of this state, and unless the father countenances or encourages such ill treatment he ought not to be deprived of, the custody of the child in favor of one who has no legal claim thereto.

*Ed. M.*Spangenberg, for the petitioner.

*August H. Bode,*contra.

We think the evidence fails to show that the welfare of the' child' required that he be removed from the care and control of his father; yet we are satisfied that kind and patient treatment, rather than corporal punishment, would better teach him to respect and obey his parents.

The judgment will be reversed.
#### §§ 4907.171-4907.999 [Reserved]
§ 4211.6 Disregarding benefit reductions and benefit suspensions. ( a ) *In general.* A plan must disregard the following nonforfeitable benefit reductions and benefit suspensions in determining a plan's nonforfeitable benefits for purposes of determining an employer's withdrawal liability under section 4201 of ERISA: ( 1 ) *Adjustable benefit.* A reduction to adjustable benefits under section 305(e)(8) of ERISA and section 432(e)(8) of the Code.
( 2 ) *Lump sum.* A benefit reduction arising from a restriction on lump sums or other benefits under section 305(f) of ERISA and section 432(f) of the Code.
( 3 ) *Benefit suspension.* A benefit suspension under section 305(e)(9) of ERISA and section 432(e)(9) of the Code, but only for withdrawals not more than 10 years after the end of the plan year in which the benefit suspension takes effect.
( b ) *Simplified methods.* See § 4211.16 for simplified methods for meeting the requirements of this section.
[86 FR 1271, Jan. 8, 2021]
SCWC-19-0000452

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

WILLIE JAMES JONES,

Petitioner/Petitioner-Appellant,

vs.

STATE OF HAWAI#I,

Respondent/Respondent-Appellee.

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(CAAP-19-0000452; S.P.P. NO. 17-1-0012; CR. NO. 1PC950001384)

ORDER DISMISSING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.,

and Circuit Judge Loo, in place of McKenna, J., recused)

It appearing that the judgment on appeal in the abovereferenced matter not having been filed by the Intermediate Court

of Appeals at the time the application for writ of certiorari was

filed, see Hawai#i Revised Statutes § 602-59(a) (2017)); see also

Hawai#i Rules of Appellate Procedure (HRAP) Rule 36(b)(1) (2016),

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner/PetitionerAppellant’s application for writ of certiorari, filed March 11,

2021, is dismissed without prejudice to re-filing the application

pursuant to HRAP Rule 40.1(a) (2017) (“The application shall be

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-19-0000452

16-MAR-2021

09:45 AM

Dkt. 11 ODSAC
filed within thirty days after the filing of the intermediate

court of appeals’ judgment on appeal or dismissal order, unless

the time for filing the application is extended in accordance

with this rule.”).

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, March 16, 2021.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

/s/ Todd W. Eddins

/s/ Rhonda I.L. Loo

2
#### § 408.9 Personal responsibility of signatories of reports.

Each individual required to sign a report under this part shall be personally responsible for the filing of such report and for any statement contained therein which he knows to be false.
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Your Questions as to Women in War Industries

              																	United States. Women's Bureau. 						*Your Questions as to Women in War Industries : Women's Bureau Bulletin, No. 194*,												Washington: 								Govt. Print. Off., 										1942,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/5467,			accessed on September 25, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
§ 4050.105 Filing with PBGC. ( a ) *What to file.* The plan administrator of a subpart A plan must file with PBGC the information specified in the missing participants forms and instructions and, for a missing distributee referred to in § 4050.103(a)(2), payment of— ( 1 ) The benefit transfer amount for the missing distributee;
( 2 ) If the benefit transfer amount is paid more than 90 days after the benefit determination date, interest on the benefit transfer amount computed at the missing participants interest rate for the period beginning on the 90th day after the benefit determination date and ending on the date the benefit transfer amount is paid to PBGC; and
( 3 ) Any fee provided for in the missing participants forms and instructions.
( b ) *When to file.* The plan administrator must file the information and payments referred to in paragraph (a) of this section in accordance with the missing participants forms and instructions. Payment of a benefit transfer amount will, if considered timely made for purposes of this paragraph (b), be considered timely made for purposes of part 4041 of this chapter.
( c ) *Place, method and date of filing; time periods.* ( 1 ) For rules about where to file, see § 4000.4 of this chapter.
( 2 ) For rules about permissible methods of filing with PBGC under this subpart, see subpart A of part 4000 of this chapter.
( 3 ) For rules about the date that a submission under this subpart was filed with PBGC, see subpart C of part 4000 of this chapter.
( 4 ) For rules about any time period for filing under this subpart, see subpart D of part 4000 of this chapter.
( d ) *Supplemental information.* Within 30 days after a written request by PBGC (or such other time as may be specified in the request), the plan administrator of a subpart A plan required to file under paragraph (a) of this section must file with PBGC supplemental information for any proper purpose under the missing participants program.
( e ) *Reliance.* As administrator of the missing participants program, PBGC will rely on determinations made and information reported by plan administrators in connection with the program. This reliance does not affect PBGC's authority as administrator of the title IV insurance program to audit or make inquiries of subpart A plans, including about the amount to which a missing distributee may be entitled.
#### § 36.210 Military and merchant marine educational institutions.

These Title IX regulations do not apply to an educational institution whose primary purpose is the training of individuals for a military service of the United States or for the merchant marine.
<PAGE>



                                                               Exhibit 23.2


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-90784) pertaining to the registration of
12,458,333 shares of its common stock, Form S-8 No. 333-44680 dated August 28,
2000 pertaining to the Employee Stock Purchase Plan and Form S-8 No. 333-50498
dated November 22, 2000 pertaining to the Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan
and the 2000 Stock Incentive Plan of ServiceWare Technologies, Inc., of our
report dated January 25, 2002, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements of ServiceWare Technologies, Inc., included in this Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2003.


/s/ Ernst & Young LLP



Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
March 29, 2004
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T ESA U RO G ERS, P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. S . R IV A S , C orre ct i on al O ff i ce r, D ef

endant- A pp el l ee . N o. 11- 55439 D . C . N o . 3 : 0 7 - c v - 0 2 0 1 0 - W- J MA ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e S o u th e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia T hom a s J . W he l a n, D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d O c t obe r9, 2012 ** B efo re: R A W L IN S O N , M U R G U IA , an dW A T F O R D , C i rcu i tJu d g es. C alifo rn ia state p riso n erE sa u R o g er s ap p ea ls p ro se fr o m th e d istrict co u rt’s s u m m a ryju d g m e n t in h is 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 9 8 3 a c tio n a lle g in g th a t R iv a s s e a r c h e dh is cel l i n ret al i at i o n fo r an ad m i n i strat i v e g ri ev an ce th atR o g ers h adfi l edag ai n st 

# FI LED OC T 17 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS11- 55439 2 R iv a s o v e ray e are a r lie r . W e h a v e ju r is d ic tio n u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . W e r e v ie w d e n o v o , B ro dh ei m v. Cry , 5 8 4 F . 3 d1 2 6 2 , 1 2 6 7 ( 9 th C i r . 2 0 0 9 ) , a n dwe a f f i rm. T he di stri ctcourtprop er l y grant ed sum m ary j ud gm entbecause R og er s f ai l ed t o rai se a genui ne di sput e of m at er i al fa ctas t o w hether hi s prot ec t ed cond uct m ot i va t e d the s e a r c h of

hi s c e l l a nd w he the rthe s e a r c h r e a s onabl ya dva nc e d a le g itim a te p e n o lo g ic a l g o a l. Se e i d. a t1270 ( e xpl a i ni ng e l e m e nt s of ar e t a l i a t i on c la im ) ; see a l

so T a ylo r v. L ist , 88 0 F . 2d 10 40 , 10 45 (9th C i r. 19 89 ) ( “ A sum m ary j udgm e ntm ot i on c a nnotbe de f e a t e d r e l y i ng s ol e l yon c onc l us orya l l e ga t i ons u n s u p p o rte db yf

a c tu a l d a ta .” ) . W e de c l i ne t o c ons i de rthos e doc um e nt s s ubm i tt e d byR oge r s tha tw e r e not p r e s e n te dto th e d is tr ic t c o u rt. See F e d . R . A p p . P . 1 0 ( a ) ; U n i ted S ta tes v. Sa n ch ezL op ez , 8 7 9 F .2 d5 4 1 , 5 4 8 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 8 9 ) . W e do n otconsi der m att er s notspec i fi ca l l y and di st i nct l y r ai se d and ar gu ed i n the ope ni ng br i e f

, ora r gum e nt s a nd a l l e ga t i ons r a i s e d f orthe f i r s tt i m e on ap p e a l. Se e P adge t t

v . W r i ght , 58 7 F . 3d 98 3, 98 5 n . 2 (9th C i r. 20 09 ) ( per c uri am ). AF F I RME D.
(75 South. 1004)

#### AVONDALE MILLS v. KINNON.

(6 Div. 295.)

(Court of Appeals of Alabama.

April 19, 1917.)

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; E. C. Crow, Judge.

John W. Altman, of Birmingham, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 100 (Tuesday, May 23, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 33262]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12950]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

49 CFR Parts 209 and 230

[FRA Docket No. RSSL-98-1, Notice No. 5]


Inspection and Maintenance Standards for Steam Locomotives

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: On November 17, 1999, FRA published the final rule on 
inspection and maintenance of steam locomotives (65 FR 62828). The 
Inspection and Maintenance Standards for Steam Locomotives, Title 49, 
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), parts 209 and 230, which took effect 
on January 18, 2000, sets forth new inspection and implementation 
requirements. FRA is holding a public meeting to explain the 
implementation schedule and general requirements for inspection and 
maintenance of steam locomotives under the rule. This meeting will also 
provide interested parties with the opportunity to discuss the rule and 
ask questions of the presenters. All parties interested in the new rule 
on inspection and maintenance of steam locomotives are invited to 
attend this meeting.

DATES: The meeting will be held on July 27, 2000, at 8 a.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held on July 27, 2000, in room 570 of 
the Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building, One Federal Drive, Fort 
Snelling, Minnesota 55111-4007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:   

George Scerbo, Motive Power & Equipment Specialist, Office of Safety, 
FRA, 1120 Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20590 (telephone 202-493-
6249); or
Paul F. Byrnes, Trial Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel, FRA, 1120 
Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20590 (202-493-6032).

Grady C. Cothen,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety Standards and Program 
Development.
[FR Doc. 00-12950 Filed 5-22-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P
<PAGE>

                            ITEM 11 EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
                                    ITEM 402(a)(3)

                            SUMMARY OF COMPENSATION TABLE

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                          Annual Compensation         Long Term Compensation
Name &                                  -----------------------       ----------------------
Principal                                                    Other       Stock    Long Term     All
Position                                                     Annual     Options   Incentive    Other
                        Year       Salary       Bonus        Comp.     & Awards    Payouts     Comp.
                        ----       ------       -----        -----     --------    -------     -----
<S>                     <C>       <C>         <C>            <C>       <C>        <C>         <C>
Edward J.               1996      $240,000    $442,000        --           --        --            --
Hussey                  1995       240,000     454,400        --           --        --            --
Chairman                1994       180,000     235,400        --           --        --            --
& President

Edward Jos              1996       104,000     273,200        --           --        --       $13,086
Hussey                  1995        83,200     253,192        --           --        --         9,250
VP & Sec                1994        72,800     134,398        --           --        --         5,800

Michael F.              1996       104,000     273,200        --           --        --        13,086
Hussey                  1995        83,200     253,192        --           --        --         9,250
VP -                    1994        72,800     134,398        --           --        --         5,800
Finance

Marc A.                 1996        66,300      68,040        --           --        --            --
Dosmann                 1995        52,800      70,968        --           --        --            --
VP - CFO                1994            --          --        --           --        --            --

Bruce A.                1996        66,300      63,040        --           --        --            --
McMillan                1995        62,400      76,144        --           --        --            --
VP - Sales              1994        61,100      54,800        --           --        --            --
</TABLE>


                                          34
FILED

August 18, 1998

Cecil W. Crowson

Appellate Court Clerk

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT NASHVILLE

APRIL SESSION, 1998

LARRY JUNIOR KEATON, ) C.C.A. NO. 01C01-9704-CR-00146

)

Appellant, )

) DEKALB COUNTY

V. ) 

)

) HON. LEON BURNS, JR., JUDGE 

STATE OF TENNESSEE ) 

)

Appellee. ) (POST-CONVICTION) 

CONCURRING OPINION

Except for the conclusion that the failure to instruct a lesser included

offense is not a constitutional abridgement, I concur entirely with the majority

opinion. The trial judge has a duty to give the complete charge of the law applicable

to the facts of each case. State v. Harbison, 704 S.W.2d 314, 319 (Tenn.), cert.

denied, 476 U.S. 1153 (1986). It is settled law that when "there are any facts that

are susceptible of inferring guilt of any lesser included offense or offenses, then

there is a mandatory duty upon the trial judge to charge on such offense or

offenses. Failure to do so denies the defendant his constitutional right of trial by

jury." State v. Wright, 618 S.W.2d 310, 315 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1981) (citations

omitted); Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-18-110(a). When there is a trial on a single charge

of a felony, there is also a trial on all lesser included offenses, "as the facts may be." 

Strader v. State, 362 S.W.2d 224, 227 (Tenn. 1962). See State v. Belser, 945

S.W.2d 776, 789 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1996). 
I concur in the results reached by the majority because the issue, as

indicated, has been waived due to the petitioner's failure to present the issue in the

motion for new trial or on direct appeal. Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-206(g), -210(f). 

_________________________________

Gary R. Wade, Presiding Judge
Exhibit 10.11 










Green Earth Manufacturing

Ron Lipson-President

6040 Russell

Detroit, MI 48211



5/16/2008



Dear Ron,



I would like to formalize our new agreement that we set forth 2
weeks ago.



Our current agreement states that you are to receive 3 million
shares of GETG stock that vests over 10 months. In recognition of services to
date we will accelerate the vesting of your 3,000,000 shares immediately.



Further we would like to add 1,000,000 shares in recognition of
the personnel, financial and controls you are putting in place. These shares
will also vest immediately. You have also agreed to process in real-time our
receivables and payables. You have also agreed to build a dashboard for GET to
access for our financial reporting.



For providing our buying capacity to meet our current forecast
for the rest of this year, we are authorizing an additional 1 million shares to
you which will be sent at the end of January of 2009.



I hope this makes our relationship an extensive, fruitful, and
rewarding combination.



Looking forward,



cc: Mathew Zuckerman-Chairman GETG




Jeff Marshall

President & Chief Executive Officer

Green Earth Technologies, Inc. Symbol (GETG)

3 Stamford Landing - Suite 200

Stamford, CT. 06902

917-913-6280




www.getg.com
§ 4245.5 Notice of insolvency benefit level. ( a ) *Requirement of notice.* The plan sponsor of an insolvent plan must file with PBGC and issue to interested parties notices of insolvency benefit level containing the information described in § 4245.6 in each of the following circumstances— ( 1 ) For the initial insolvency year, provide the notices of insolvency benefit level to PBGC and to interested parties.
( 2 ) For any insolvency year following the initial insolvency year— ( i ) If there is a change in the insolvency benefit level that affects plan payees generally, provide the notices of insolvency benefit level to PBGC and to plan payees (which, for purposes of this section, means participants and beneficiaries in pay status or reasonably expected to enter pay status during the insolvency year).
( ii ) If there is a change in the insolvency benefit level that affects only one plan payee or a class of plan payees but not plan payees generally (treating commencement of a person's benefits for this purpose as a change in the insolvency benefit level for that person), provide the notices of insolvency benefit level to PBGC and to each affected plan payee.
( b ) *Combined notices.* The plan sponsor may combine a notice of insolvency benefit level and a notice of insolvency under § 4245.3 for the same plan year.
( c ) *When to provide notice.* The plan sponsor must provide the required notices under this section at the time described in § 4281.45(c) of this chapter.
[84 FR 18724, May 2, 2019]
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Annual Report of Little Squaw Gold Mining Company, (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Becky Corigliano, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 81 U.S.C. Section 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 Little Squaw Gold Mining Company.



/s/ Becky Corigliano



DATE:  March 26, 2004

Becky Corigliano

Chief Financial Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Little Squaw Gold Mining Company and will be retained by Little Squaw Gold Mining Company to be furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.