alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Beatrice C. Bauer, Conservatee. Herbert C. Silberman, Appellant; Eileen A. Curley et al., Respondents.

Submitted October 10, 1995;

decided October 26, 1995

Appeal, insofar as taken from that portion of the Appellate Division order that affirmed the order awarding attorneys’ fees to the estate of Goidel, dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, *sua sponte,*upon the ground that that part of the order appealed from does not directly involve a substantial constitutional question; appeal, insofar as taken from the remainder of the Appellate Division order, dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, *sua sponte,*upon the ground that the remaining portion of the order appealed from does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution.
- 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 > Summaries of Studies on the Economic Status of Women

              																	United States. Women's Bureau					 and 	American Association of University Women. 						*Summaries of Studies on the Economic Status of Women : Women's Bureau Bulletin, No. 134*,												Washington: 								Govt. Print. Off., 										1935,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/5424,			accessed on September 25, 2024.						    

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

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
### SERVED: MAY 22, 2012
IN THE MATTER OF 

### ICE COLDINC. FAADOCKETNO. [TO BEASSIGNED] (Civil Penalty Action) FDMS NO. FAA-2011 - 1288



### HEARINGNOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that testimony and evidence will be heard and considered on 

### September 17, 2012, atthe 

### U.S. District Courtfor the District ofAlaska, 222 W. 7th

### Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska 99513. Hearings will commence at 9:00a.m. and conclude at 4:00p.m. eachday. The parties should vacate the courthouse on orbefore

# s:oo p.m. each day. 

### Settled cases will notbe removed from the docket untiltheJudgereceives theproperpleading(s). Pleadings may be forwarded by fax, express mail, courier orpostal service. Attachment- Service List



### 1SERVICE LIST 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 Jim Wolgemuth, President Ice Cold, Inc., Respondent 2020 Belmont Anchorage, AK. 99517 ONE COPY Glenn H. Brown, Complainant's Counsel Senior Attorney, Office of the Regional Counsel Alaskan Region, AAL-7 Federal Aviation Administration 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 14 Anchorage, AK. 99513-1587 TEL: 907-271-5269 FAX: 907-271-2800

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 1 Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.(E11-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 202-366-5121 Staff Assistant FAX: 202-366-7536

FDMS No. FAA-2011-1288 (Civil Penalty Action) 1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
(75 South. 816)

#### CUNNINGHAM v. STATE.

(7 Div. 443.)

(Court of Appeals of Alabama.

May 8, 1917.)

1. Intoxicating Liquors <&wkey;200 — Illegal Sale — Indictment—Sufficiency.

An indictment charging that defendant sold, offered for sale, kept for sale, gave away or otherwise disposed of spirituous, vinous, and malt liquors, is not demurrable.

[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Intoxicating Liquors, Cent. Dig. §§ 219, 220.]

2. Criminal Law <&wkey;292(2) — Defenses — Former Jeopardy — Sufficiency of Plea.

A plea of former jeopardy failing to show whether the former trial was held for violation of a statute or a municipal ordinance is insufficient.

[Ed. Note. — For other eases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. § 669.]

Appeal from Circuit Court, Shelby County; BOugb D. Merrill, Judge.

Frank Cunningham was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and be appeals.

Affirmed.

Tbe indictment charges that defendant sold, offered for sale, kept for sale, gave away, or otherwise disposed of spirituous, vinous, and malt liquors. Tbe plea of former jeopardy was that defendant bad already been tried, convicted, and punished by tbe municipal court of tbe town of Montevallo for tbe same or substantially tbe same offense, on or about' February 12, 1914, for wbicb be was indicted in this court, wbicb said municipal court bad jurisdiction of said offense, and of this defendant, and defendant pleads said jeopardy and conviction in bar of this action. (Here follows judgment of municipal court showing a plea of guilty, and a fine of $50, on February 15, 1916.)

Riddle & Ellis, of Columbiana, for appellant. W. L. Martin, Atty. Gen., and P. W. Turner, Asst. Atty. Gen., for tbe State.

BROWN, P. J.

[1] Tbe indictment is in tbe form prescribed by tbe statute and the demurrer thereto was properly overruled.

[2] Tbe defendant’s plea of former jeopardy was not sufficient, in that it did not show whether tbe former trial of tbe defendant was for the violation of the statute, or a municipal ordinance, and tbe demurrer thereto was sustained without error. Bell v. State, ante, p. 36, 75 South. 181.

There is no error in tbe record, and tbe judgment of tbe circuit court is affirmed.

Affirmed.
- 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 > Employed Women and Family Support

              																	United States. Women's Bureau					,	Pidgeon, Mary Elizabeth					 and 	Mettert, Margaret T. (Margaret Thompson), 1907-2009. 						*Employed Women and Family Support : Women's Bureau Bulletin, No. 168*,												Washington: 								Govt. Print. Off., 										1939,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/5441,			accessed on September 17, 2024.						    

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

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
ARIZONADEPARTMENTOFENVIRONMENTALQUALITY1110WestWashingtonStreet•Phoenix,Arizona85007JaniceK.Brewer(602)771-2300www.azdeq.govHenryR.DarwinGovernorDirectorDEC192013Mr.JaredBlumenfeld,RegionalAdministratorU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency,RegionIXMailCodeORA-l75HawthorneStreetSanFrancisco,CA94105RE:SubmittalofPimaCountyRulesrevisingthePimaCountyPortionoftheArizonaStateImplementationPlanforSection110(a)(2)InfrastructureDearMr.Blumenfeld:ConsistentwiththeprovisionsofArizonaRevisedStatutes§49-104,49-404,49-406,andtheCodeofFederalRegulations(CFR)Title40,§§51.102through51.104,theArizonaDepartmentofEnvironmentalQuality(ADEQ)herebyadoptsandsubmitstotheU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA)PimaCountyRules17.04.190,Composition,adoptedSeptember28,1993,17.12.040,ReportingforComplianceEvaluations,adoptedSeptember28,1993,and17.24.040,ReportingRequirements,adoptedApril19,2005,asarevisiontothePimaCountyportionoftheArizonaStateImplementationPlan(SIP).ThisrevisionstrengthenstheexistingrulesandalsoreplacesRule622withRule17.12.040.Rules17.04.190,17.12.040,and17.24.040werereferencedaspartofADEQ’sSIPsupplementtotheCleanAirActSections110(a)(1)and(2):Implementationof2006PM2.5NationalAmbientAirQualityStandards,1997PM2.5NationalAmbientAirQualityStandards,and19978-hourOzoneNationalAmbientAirQualityStandards,whichwassubmittedtotheEPAonAugust24,2012.ThissubmissioncorrectsthedeficienciesrequiredforCleanAirAct(CAA)Section110(a)(2)(e)(ii),whichspecifieshearingboardscompositionrequirements,and110(a)(2)(F)regardingstationarysourcemonitoringandreporting.Thesedeficiencieswereoutlinedin77FR66398and77FR66405(November5,2012).SouthernRegionalOffice400WestCongressStreet•Suite433•Tucson,AZ85701(520)628—6733PrintedonrecycledpaperMr.JaredBlumenfeldPage2of2TheSIPrevisionconsistsofadocumentdemonstratingthattherequirementsof40C.F.R.Part51AppendixVaresatisfied,thetextofeachrulesubmittedforinclusionandrelevantexcerptsfromcertifiedordinances(Appendices2through4),documentsshowingpublicprocesswascompleted(Appendices5and6),forEPAreviewandapproval.AhardcopyoftheSIPrevisionandanelectronicexactduplicateofthehardcopyonCDareincludedwiththisletter.Sincerely,seyDirect,AirQualityEnclosures(2)cc:BillWiley,MaricopaCountyAirQualityDepartmentUrsulaKramer,PimaCountyDepartmentofEnvironmentalQualityDonGabrielson,PinalCountyAirQualityDepartmentColleenMcKaughan,EPARegionIXNoahSmith,EPARegionIX
§ 4221.14 PBGC-approved arbitration procedures. ( a ) *Use of PBGC-approved arbitration procedures.* In lieu of the procedures prescribed by this part, an arbitration may be conducted in accordance with an alternative arbitration procedure approved by the PBGC in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section. A plan may by plan amendment require the use of a PBGC-approved procedure for all arbitrations of withdrawal liability disputes, or the parties may agree to the use of a PBGC-approved procedure in a particular case.
( b ) *Scope of alternative procedures.* If an arbitration is conducted in accordance with a PBGC-approved arbitration procedure, the alternative procedure shall govern all aspects of the arbitration, with the following exceptions: ( 1 ) The time limits for the initiation of arbitration may not differ from those provided for by § 4221.3.
( 2 ) The arbitrator shall be selected after the initiation of the arbitration.
( 3 ) The arbitrator shall give the parties opportunity for prehearing discovery substantially equivalent to that provided by § 4221.5(a)(2).
( 4 ) The award shall be made available to the public to at least the extent provided by § 4221.8(g).
( 5 ) The costs of arbitration shall be allocated in accordance with § 4221.10.
( c ) *Procedure for approval of alternative procedures.* The PBGC may approve arbitration procedures on its own initiative by publishing an appropriate notice in the Federal Register. The sponsor of an arbitration procedure may request PBGC approval of its procedures by submitting an application to the PBGC. The application shall include: ( 1 ) A copy of the procedures for which approval is sought;
( 2 ) A description of the history, structure and membership of the organization that sponsors the procedures; and
( 3 ) A discussion of the reasons why, in the sponsoring organization's opinion, the procedures satisfy the criteria for approval set forth in this section.
( d ) *Criteria for approval of alternative procedures.* The PBGC shall approve an application if it determines that the proposed procedures will be substantially fair to all parties involved in the arbitration of a withdrawal liability dispute and that the sponsoring organization is neutral and able to carry out its role under the procedures. The PBGC may request comments on the application by publishing an appropriate notice in the Federal Register. Notice of the PBGC's decision on the application shall be published in the Federal Register. Unless the notice of approval specifies otherwise, approval will remain effective until revoked by the PBGC through a Federal Register notice.
[61 FR 34109, July 1, 1996, as amended at 68 FR 61356, Oct. 28, 2003]
1 

# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 1 0

- 517 V

(E

- Filed : J une 16, 2014 )

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

F RANK FALCONE and KIM FALCONE

, * UNPUBLISHED

as parents and natural guardians of K.F., a *

minor, *

Petitioner s

, * Special Master

* Hamilton

- Fieldman

v. *

* Decision on Attorneys’ Fees and Costs.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND *

HUMAN SERVICES, *

*

Respondent. *

. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

F . John Caldwell, Jr.

, M aglio, Christopher & Toale, Sarasota, FL, for P etitioner s.

M i chael P. Milmoe

, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for R espondent

.

DECISION 1 (ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS)

In this case under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 2 the

undersigned issued a decision on M ay 28, 2014 . On J une 16, 2014 , the parties filed a

stipulation concerning attorney s’ fees and costs in this matter. The parties’ stipulation

requests a total payment of $111, 523.64 , representing total attorney s’ fees and costs.

1 The undersigned intends to post this unpublished decision on the United States

Court of Federal Claims’ website, in accordance with the E

- Government Act of 2002,

Pub. L. No. 107

- 347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. §

3501 note (2006)). As provided by Vaccine Rule 18(b), ea ch party has 14 days within

which to request redaction “of any information furnished by that party (1) that is trade

secret or commercial or financial information and is privileged or confidential, or (2) that

are medical files and similar files the disclo sure of which would constitute a clearly

unw arranted invasion of privacy.” Otherwise, “the entire” decision will be available to

the public. Id.

2 The applicable statutory provisions defining the program are found at 42 U.S.C.

§ 300aa

- 10 et seq . (2006).2

Pursuant to General Order #9, Petitio ners stated that they incurred no out

- of

- pocket

litigation costs.

I find that this petition was brought in good faith and that there existed a

reasonable basis for the claim. Therefore, an award for fees and costs is appropriate,

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 15(b) and (e)(1). Further, the proposed amount seems

reasona ble and appropriate. Accordingly, I hereby award the amount of $ 1 11, 523.64

, in the form of a check made payable jointly to Petitioners and Petitioners’ counsel,

F . John Caldwell, Jr. , Esq.

In the absence of a timely

- filed motion for review filed pursuant to Appendix B of

the Rules of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, the clerk of the court shall enter judgment

in accordance herewith.

IT IS SO ORDERED

.

s / Lisa D. Hamilton

- Fieldman

Lisa D. Hamilton

- Fieldman

Special Master
§ 519.4 Procedure for action upon an application. ( a ) Under certain conditions, an agricultural or retail or service establishment employer may obtain temporary authorization to employ full-time students at subminimum wages. These conditions are: ( 1 ) Attestation by the employer that he/she will employ no more than six full-time students at subminimum wages on any workday and that the employment of such students will not reduce the full-time employment opportunities of other persons, and
( 2 ) forwarding a properly completed application to the Wage and Hour Division not later than the start of such employment, and
( 3 ) posting a notice of such filing at the place(s) specified in paragraph (a) of § 519.6 of this subpart, and
( 4 ) compliance during the temporary authorization period with the requirements set forth in paragraphs (b) and (j) through (o) of § 519.6 of this subpart.
( b ) Temporary authorization under the conditions set forth in paragraph (a) of this section is effective from the date the application is forwarded to the Wage and Hour Division in conformance with § 519.3 of this subpart. This authorization shall continue in effect for one year from the date of forwarding of the application unless, within 30 days the Administrator or his/her authorized representative denies the application, issues a certificate with modified terms and conditions, or expressly extends the 30-day period of review.
( c ) Upon receipt of an application for a certificate, the officer authorized to act upon such application shall issue a certificate if the terms and conditions specified in this subpart are satisfied. To the extent he/she deems appropriate, the authorized officer may provide an opportunity to other interested persons to present data, views, or argument on the application prior to granting or denying a certificate.
( d ) Until April 30, 1976, if a certificate is issued, there shall be published in the Federal Register a general statement of the terms of such certificate together with a notice that, pursuant to § 519.9, for 45 days following such publication any interested person may file a written request for reconsideration or review. Thereafter, applications and certificates will be available for examination in accordance with applicable regulations in Washington, DC, and in the appropriate Regional Office of the Wage and Hour Division (or the Denver, Colorado Area Office for Colorado, North Dakota, and South Dakota; the Salt Lake City, Utah Area Office for Montana, Utah, and Wyoming; and the Caribbean Office for the area it covers) for establishments in its area. A period of 60 days will be provided after certificate issuance during which any interested person may file a written request for reconsideration or review.
( e ) If a certificate is denied, notice of such denial shall be sent to the employer, stating the reason or reasons for the denial. Such denial shall be without prejudice to the filing of any subsequent application.
[40 FR 6329, Feb. 11, 1975, as amended at 42 FR 58745, Nov. 11, 1977]
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

October 5, 2009 

Order 

 

October 5, 2009 

137607(56) 

CHARLES ALLEN and LISA ALLEN, 

Plaintiffs-Appellees, 

 SC: 137607 

v COA: 275797 

Oakland CC: 2005-070739-NI 

BLOOMFIELD HILLS SCHOOL DISTRICT, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_______________________________________ 

 On order of the Chief Justice, the motion by the Brain Injury Association of 

Michigan for leave to file a brief amicus curiae in this case is considered and it is 

GRANTED.
§ 551.5 Information to be submitted. Every petition filed under §§ 551.3 and 551.4 shall contain the following information: ( a ) A full statement of the facts relied upon by the petitioner to establish, under the applicable definitions in § 551.8, that the wage payment plan submitted for consideration: ( 1 ) Applies to employees employed ( i ) as drivers or drivers' helpers, or both,
( ii ) in “making local deliveries” and
( 2 ) determines, “on the basis of trip rates or other delivery payment plan”, the compensation which such employees receive for such employment; and
( b ) A complete description of the wage payment plan and full information concerning its application showing, among other things: ( 1 ) The method of compensation which it provides and the types of payments made to employees covered by the plan, together with such information as may be necessary to show how these payments are computed and how and to what extent they are actually used in determining the total compensation received by employees covered by the plan,
( 2 ) a full description of all duties performed by the employees compensated under the plan, including information as to the types of goods delivered, their points of origin and destination and the purposes for and geographical area within which they are transported by the employees, the relationship of the employer to the consignor and consignee, and the numbers, (minimum, maximum, and average or typical) of round trips made by such employees in transporting such goods during the workday and of deliveries made during each such trip, and
( 3 ) other relevant information concerning the employees compensated under the plan including the total number of such employees employed full-time as drivers or drivers' helpers making local deliveries under the provisions of the plan during the most recent representative annual period as defined in § 551.8(g)(1), the weekly hours worked and the average workweek of such employees during such period and, if there are any significant variations in the number of such employees so employed in the particular workweeks within the period, a full statement of the facts concerning such variations, information as to any workweeks in which any employees compensated under the plan devote less than eighty percent of their worktime to duties as drivers or drivers' helpers making local deliveries; and
( c ) A statement of the facts and reasons based on the history and application of the plan which are relied upon to support a finding that the plan has the general purpose and effect of reducing the hours worked by drivers or drivers' helpers covered by its provisions to, or below, the statutory maximum workweek applicable to them under the Act.
§ 503.48 Conduct of proceeding. ( a ) Upon receipt of a timely request for a hearing filed under and in accordance with § 503.43, the Chief ALJ will promptly appoint an ALJ to hear the case.
( b ) The ALJ will notify all parties of the date, time and place of the hearing. Parties will be given at least 30 calendar days' notice of such hearing.
( c ) The ALJ may prescribe a schedule by which the parties are permitted to file a prehearing brief or other written statement of fact or law. Any such brief or statement must be served upon each other party. Post-hearing briefs will not be permitted except at the request of the ALJ. When permitted, any such brief must be limited to the issue or issues specified by the ALJ, will be due within the time prescribed by the ALJ, and must be served on each other party.