alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                       1,759,718
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  835,230
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,659,528
<PP&E>                                             279
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,945,285
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          900,482
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             8
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,044,795
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,945,285
<SALES>                                      3,645,004
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,064,960
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               143,063
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,921,897
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,700
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          3,914,197
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,914,197
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.96
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.96
        

</TABLE>
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A2 0 A1 09 0 . SHANI TA R. GRAY v . J EFFREY COOPER et a l

.
Sh an i t a Gray fi l ed a m ed i cal m al p ract i ce cl ai m ag ai n s t D r. Jeffrey Co o p er an d Co o p e r P ed iat ri cs

. On J u l y 2 , 2 0 1 9 , t h e t ri al co u rt d is m i ss ed t he co m p l ai n t b as ed

u p o n Gray ’ s fai l u re t o fi l e an ex p ert affi d av i t

. Gray fi l ed a m ot i o n fo r reco n s id erat i o n, wh i ch t h e t ri al co urt d en i ed o n J u ly 3 0 , 2 01 9

. On Au g u s t 2 6 , 2 0 1 9 , G ray fi l e d t h i s d i rect ap p eal . W e l ack ju ri sd i ct i o n

. A n o t i ce o f ap p eal m

u s t b e fi l ed wi t h i n 30 d ay s aft er t h e en t ry o f t h e t ri al

co u rt ’ s o rd er. OCGA § 5 -6 -3 8 (a). “ Th e p ro p er an d t im el y fi li n g o f a n o t i ce o f ap p eal i s an ab s o l u t e req ui rem en t t o co n fer ju ri s d i ct io n u po n an ap p el l at e co urt .” Per l ma n

v. Per l m a n , 3 18 Ga. A p p

. 7 3 1 , 73 9 (4 ) (7 3 4 SE2 d 5 6 0 ) (2 0 1 2 ) (p un ct u at io n o m i t t ed ). Th e fi l i n g of a m o ti on fo r reco n s i d erat i o n d o es n o t ex t en d t h e ti m e fo r fi li n g a n o t i ce

o f ap p eal
, a n d t h e d e n i al o f a m o t i o n fo r reco n s i d erat i o n i s no t i t sel f a d i rect l y ap p eal ab l e o rd er. See B el l v. Co h r a n , 2 4 4 Ga. Ap p. 5 1 0 , 5 1 1 (5 3 6 SE2 d 1 8 7 ) (2 0 0 0 ); S a va ge v. News o me , 17 3 Ga. Ap p

. 2 7 1 , 2 7 1 (3 2 6 SE2 d 5 ) (1 9 8 5 ). Here, Gray ’ s n o t i ce

o f ap p eal
, was fi l ed 5 5 d ay s aft er en t ry o f t h e ord er d i s m is si n g h er co m p l a i n t

. T h e

n o t i ce o f ap p eal i s t h u s u n t i m el y

. February 10, 2020Fo r t h es e reas o n s , th is ap p eal i s h ereb y DISM ISSED fo r l ack o f ju ri s d i ct i o n.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d th e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 02/10/2020
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 905 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

  1st Session
                                 S. 905

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to eliminate the taxable 
 income limit on percentage depletion for oil and natural gas produced 
                       from marginal properties.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 15, 2007

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to eliminate the taxable 
 income limit on percentage depletion for oil and natural gas produced 
                       from marginal properties.

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

SECTION 1. ELIMINATION OF TAXABLE INCOME LIMIT ON PERCENTAGE DEPLETION 
              FOR OIL AND NATURAL GAS PRODUCED FROM MARGINAL 
              PROPERTIES.

    (a) In General.--Subparagraph (H) of section 613A(c)(6) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to oil and natural gas produced 
from marginal properties) is amended to read as follows:
                    ``(H) Nonapplication of taxable income limit with 
                respect to marginal production.--The second sentence of 
                subsection (a) of section 613 shall not apply to so 
                much of the allowance for depletion as is determined 
                under subparagraph (A).''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2006.
                                 <all>
```
InThe Matter Of: 

## SERVED: JANUARY 19, 2016
U.S. DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION OFFICE OFHEARINGS WASHINGTON, DC

Docket No. FAA-2015-0635 HORTMAN AVIATION SERVICES, INC. ) ) 

### ) ) ) ) Case No. 2010EA170043 Respondent


### ORDER GRANTING TEMPORARY STAY OF PROCEEDINGSNUNCPRO TUNC

OnDecember 29,2015, an Order Granting FAA Motion for Extension ofTime was filed. This Order extended the FAA's deadline to file a Motion for Default from December 31, 2015 to January 15, 2016. OnJanuary 15,2016, the FAA filed the Agency's Request for 60-Day Stay of Proceedings, citing multiple grounds. Pursuant to 14 C.P.R. 

### § 13.205(a)(8), and after reviewing all relevant caselaw, regulations, statutory authority, and being fully advised; 

### IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
1. The FAA's Motion for a temporary Stay ofProceedings for 60 days is granted, 

### nuncpro tunc, from January 15,2016to March 15, 2016. 2. On orbefore March 25, 2016, the FAA should file a Motion for Default, a Case Status Report, or a Withdrawal ofthe Complaint.

Attachment: Service List

### Docket No. FAA-2015-0635 (Civil PenaltyAction) 

### SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL ORIGINAL & 

### ONE COPY Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000 1



### Mr. Zachary M. Berman 

### Complainant's Counsel Federal Aviation Administration Office ofthe ChiefCounsel EnforcementDivision, Northeast Team 1 Aviation Plaza Jamaica, NY 11434 TEL: 718-553-3258 FAJ(: 718-995-5699 Mr. H.M. Hortman, President Hortman Aviation Services, Inc. 

### Respondent 9800 Ashton Road Philadelphia, PA 19114 TEL: 215-969-0311 FAJ(: 215-677-6408 Judge J.E. Sullivan 

### U.S. Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 

### ONE COPY

1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-6941 FAJ(: 202-366-7536

1 Service was byU.S. Mail. For service in person orby expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
**SECTION      32.0**

**SECTION      1350 CERTIFICATIONS**

|   | 1. | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                and |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | The                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company                as of and for the period covered by the                Report. |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/                Michael H. Head                        |
|-----------------------------------------------------------|
| Michael                H. Head                            |
| President and Chief Executive Officer |

| /s/                George J. Smith                        |
|-----------------------------------------------------------|
| George                J. Smith                            |
| Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer |

----
§ 37.64 What procedures must the Director follow when CRC has completed a post-approval compliance review? ( a ) Where, as the result of a post-approval review, the Director has made a finding of noncompliance, he or she must issue a Letter of Findings. This Letter must advise the recipient, in writing, of: ( 1 ) The preliminary findings of the review;
( 2 ) Where appropriate, the proposed remedial or corrective action to be taken, and the time by which such action should be completed, as provided in § 37.94;
( 3 ) Whether it will be necessary for the recipient to enter into a written assurance and/or Conciliation Agreement, as provided in §§ 37.96 and 37.97; and
( 4 ) The opportunity to engage in voluntary compliance negotiations.
( b ) Where no violation is found, the recipient must be so informed in writing.
#### ELRAC, Inc., Doing Business as Enterprise Rent-A-Car, Respondent, v Gladys Ward, Appellant.

[698 NYS2d 714]

—In an action for indemnification, the defendant appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Henry, J.), entered May 12, 1998, which, *inter alia,*granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of contractual indemnification, denied her cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and is in *501favor of the plaintiff and against her in the principal sum of $2,073.99.

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant rented a vehicle from the plaintiff. The rental agreement provided that the defendant would indemnify the plaintiff for all claims arising out of the use of the rental vehicle. The defendant does not dispute that she was involved in an accident while driving the rental vehicle and that a third party sustained damages as a result. The plaintiff compensated the third party for its damages, and now seeks indemnification from the defendant.

Because the plaintiff seeks indemnification for sums it has actually paid to the third party, the policy underlying Vehicle and Traffic Law § 388 is not undercut by enforcement of the indemnification clause (see, *Morris v Snappy Car Rental,*84 NY2d 21). Therefore, the plaintiff established entitlement to summary judgment on its second cause of action for contractual indemnification (see, *ELRAC, Inc. v Beckford,*250 AD2d 725; *ELRAC, Inc. v Rudel,*233 AD2d 417). S. Miller, J. P., Thompson, Krausman, Florio and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF

FRANCIS CASIMIR KAJENCKI,

DECEASED

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-18-00109-CV

Appeal from

Probate Court No. 1

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC # 2008-P01293)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Anthony Kajencki, is attempting to appeal from an order authorizing payment 

of attorney’s fees and expenses. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

It is well settled that appellate courts have jurisdiction over final judgments and 

interlocutory orders made appealable by statute. De Ayala v. Mackie, 193 S.W.3d 575, 578 (Tex. 

2006); Lehmann v. Har-Con Corporation, 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001); TEX.CIV.PRAC.&

REM.CODE ANN. § 51.014 (West Supp. 2017)(authorizing appeals from certain interlocutory 

orders). The Estates Code provides that a final order issued by a probate court is appealable to 

the court of appeals. TEX.ESTATES CODE ANN. § 32.001(c)(West 2014). In a probate proceeding, 

an order is final and appealable before the entire proceeding is concluded if the order disposes of 

a discrete phase of the litigation or if a statute expressly provides a specific type of order is 

appealable. De Ayala, 193 S.W.3d at 579. An order which does not end a discrete phase of the 
- 2 -

probate proceedings, but only “sets the stage” for the resolution of all proceedings, is interlocutory. 

De Ayala, 193 S.W.3d at 579.

The notice of appeal identifies an order signed by the Probate Court No. 1 on June 8, 2018 

approving payment of expenses as the subject of this appeal. The order in question approves the 

application of Carreon & Beltran, PLLC, for payment of attorney’s fees and expenses from 

December 1, 2017 through March 31, 2018 in the total sum of $840.06. The Probate Code does 

not expressly provide that this type of order is appealable. Further, the order granting the 

application for payment of attorney’s fees and expenses during this four-month period does not 

indicate that it ended a discrete phase of the proceeding. 

We directed the Clerk of the Court to send Appellant a letter stating that the Court intended 

to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because there is no final judgment or appealable order 

unless he responded within ten days and established grounds for the appeal to continue. See

TEX.R.APP.P. 42.3(a). Appellant has not filed any response to the inquiry. Accordingly, we 

dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See TEX.R.APP.P. 42.3(a), (c).

July 31, 2018

ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.

Rodriguez, J., not participating
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.
 Postal Regulatory Commission [Docket No. N2011-1; Order No. 778]
 AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission.
 ACTION: Notice; correction.
 SUMMARY: The Postal Regulatory Commission published a notice in the 
                        **Federal Register**
                         of August 4, 2011 concerning a Postal Service request for an advisory opinion on an initiative involving examination of the continuation of service at postal retail locations. The procedural schedule included an incorrect date for the close of discovery on the Postal Service's direct case.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, 202-789-6820 or 
                        *stephen.sharfman@prc.gov.* Correction In the 
                        **Federal Register**
                         of August 4, 2011, FR Doc. 2011-19725, on page 47276, in the Procedural Schedule table appearing after the signature block, correct the second line in the left-hand column to read: August 30, 2011
Close of discovery on Postal Service direct case.
 Dated: August 4, 2011. Ruth Ann Abrams, Acting Secretary.


[FR Doc. 2011-20196 Filed 8-9-11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
#### Josephine Drakeford, Appellant, v Brooklyn District Attorney, Respondent.

[700 NYS2d 1]

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), entered on or about August 13, 1998, dismissing the complaint pursuant to a prior order granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs complaint, alleging in vague and conclusory terms that the office of defendant “Brooklyn District Attorney” engaged in a continuous campaign of “harassment” and other allegedly tortious conduct against plaintiff and her son from 1985, when plaintiff resigned her position as an employee of defendant, until the commencement of this action in October 1996, is, to the extent, if any, not barred by the applicable Statute of Limitations, barred by plaintiffs failure to file a notice of claim prior to commencing this action *(see,*General Municipal Law §§ 50-e, 50-i; County Law § 52). Moreover, the notice of claim that plaintiff filed after commencement of the action, without seeking leave of the court pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (5), fails to provide the information required by General Municipal Law § 50-e (2). Concur— Ellerin, P. *J.,*Williams, Lerner, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 99 (Monday, May 22, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 32147]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12824]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2000-18]


Petitions for Exemption; Summary of Petitions Received; 
Disposition of Petitions Issued

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petitions for exemption received and of disposition 
of prior petitions.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to FAA's rulemaking provisions governing the 
application, processing, and disposition of petitions for exemption (14 
CFR part 11), this notice contains a summary of certain petitions 
seeking relief from specified requirements of the Federal Aviation 
Regulations (14 CFR chapter I), dispositions of certain petitions 
previously received, and corrections. The purpose of this notice is to 
improve the public's awareness of, and participation in, this aspect of 
FAA's regulatory activities. Neither publication of this notice nor the 
inclusion or omission of information in the summary is intended to 
affect the legal status of any petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments of petitions received must identify the petition docket 
number involved and must be received on or before July 21, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on any petition in triplicate to: Federal 
Aviation Administration, Office of the Chief Counsel, Attn: Rule Docket 
(AGC-200), Petition Docket No. ____, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20591.
    The petition, any comments received, and a copy of any final 
disposition are filed in the assigned regulatory docket and are 
available for examination in the Rules Docket (AGC-200), Room 915G, FAA 
Headquarters Building (FOB 10A), 800 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-3132.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cherie Jack (202) 267-7271 or Vanessa 
Wilkins (202) 267-8029 Office of Rulemaking (ARM-1), Federal Aviation 
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to paragraphs (c), (e), and (g) 
of Sec. 11.27 of part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 
part 11).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 16, 2000.
Donald P. Byrne,
Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: 30024.
    Petitioner: Duncan Aviation.
    Regulations Affected: 14 CFR 25.813(c)(1), 25.813(c)(2).
    Description of Petition: To allow access to the required emergency 
exists on the Israeli Aircraft Industries Astra SPX to be modified.

[FR Doc. 00-12824 Filed 5-19-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
#### § 452.7 Bill of Rights, title I.

The provisions of title I, “Bill of Rights of Members of Labor Organizations”[7] (particularly section 101(a)(1) “Equal Rights,” section 101(a)(2) “Freedom of Speech and Assembly,” and section 101(a)(5) “Safeguards against Improper Disciplinary Action”) are related to the rights pertaining to elections. Direct enforcement of title I rights, as such, is limited to civil suit in a district court of the United States by the person whose rights have been infringed.[8] The exercise of particular rights of members is subject to reasonable rules and regulations in the labor organization's constitution and bylaws.[9]

###### Footnotes -
  452.7

[7] 73 Stat. 522, 29 U.S.C. 411.

[8] But the Secretary may bring suit to enforce section 104 (29 U.S.C. 414).

[9] Act, sec. 101(a)(1), 101(a)(2), and 101(b) (29 U.S.C. 411).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          21,047
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,303
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     11,982
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                44,988
<PP&E>                                          44,664
<DEPRECIATION>                                  18,170
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  71,482
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,367
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,993
<OTHER-SE>                                      47,968
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    71,482
<SALES>                                        167,837
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               167,837
<CGS>                                          147,591
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   16,366
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,821
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,787
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,034
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,034
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .74
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .74


</TABLE>