alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
604 P.2d 717

#### TYROLEAN ASSOCIATES, an Idaho Limited Partnership, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. CITY OF KETCHUM and Mayor and Duly Elected City Council of Ketchum, Defendants-Appellants.

No. 13015.

Supreme Court of Idaho.

Dec. 13, 1979.

*704James W. Phillips, Ketchum, for defendants-appellants.

Bruce J. Collier, Ketchum, for plaintiff-respondent.

DUNLAP, Justice Pro Tem.

The City of Ketchum appeals a district court decision holding that its zoning ordinance is unconstitutional. In April 1974 the City of Ketchum passed a comprehensive zoning ordinance. Plaintiff-respondent, as owner of the Tyrolean Lodge Motel, maintains an off-site sign in the public right-of-way on Main Street in Ketchum. The sign does not conform to the standards of the Ketchum ordinance because, among other things, it is an off-site sign maintained in the public right-of-way without required permits from the City. When the City refused to grant plaintiff a variance permitting the retention of the sign, plaintiff filed suit seeking to declare the ordinance unconstitutional. The district court held that the ordinance, as applied to the Tyrolean off-site sign, constitutes a taking of private property without just compensation.

Before claiming that the Ketchum City Ordinance is a taking of private property without just compensation, Tyrolean Associates must first establish a vested property right in the sign. *Kohlasch*v. *New York State Thruway Authority,*460 F.Supp. 956 (S.D.N.Y.1978); *see Snyder v. State,*92 Idaho 175, 438 P.2d 920 (1968); *Bare v. Department of Highways,*88 Idaho 467, 401 P.2d 552 (1965); U.S.Const.amends. V, XIV; Idaho Const, art. 1, § 14. It is well established in Idaho that a city has exclusive control over its streets, highways and sidewalks within its municipal boundaries. *City of Nampa v. Swayne,*97 Idaho 530, 547 P.2d 1135 (1976); *Snyder v. State, supra; Yellow Cab Taxi Service v. City of Twin Falls,*68 Idaho 145, 190 P.2d 681 (1948). A city has no right to grant to an individual the permanent use of a public street. *Boise v. Sinsel,*72 Idaho 329, 241 P.2d 173 (1952). Furthermore, no one has a vested right to use the streets and public rights-of-way for private gain. *Yellow Cab Taxi Service v. City of Twin Falls, supra. A fortiori*no right to use public property for private purposes can be acquired by prescription or acquiescence against a mu*705nicipality. *Pullin v. City of Kimberly,*100 Idaho 34, 592 P.2d 849 (1979); *West v. Smith,*95 Idaho 550, 511 P.2d 1326 (1973); *Bare v. Department of Highways, supra; Yellow Cab Taxi Service v. City of Twin Falls, supra; cf. Snyder v. State, supra*(inverse condemnation).

In the instant case, as the Tyrolean sign is located on the public right-of-way, Tyrolean Associates have no vested property interest in maintaining the sign in its present location. Without establishing this threshold requirement, Tyrolean Associates cannot complain of an unconstitutional taking. As this issue is dispositive of the case, we need not address the other issues raised by appellants. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is reversed.

DONALDSON, C. J., and BAKES, McFADDEN and BISTLINE, JJ., concur.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

ALEJANDRO ESPINOZA CASE NO. 1:22-cv-23107-DPG

 Plaintiff,

vs.

PVH CORP., DELAWARE

a Foreign limited liability company,

Defendant.

____________________________________/

NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

 Plaintiff, ALEJANDRO ESPINOZA, through undersigned attorney Diego G. Mendez, 

pursuant to the Federal Rules Civil Procedure files this Notice of Voluntary Dismissal with

Prejudice against PVH CORP., DELAWARE

Submitted by:

Mendez Law Offices, PLLC

Attorneys for Plaintiff

P.O. BOX 228630 

Miami, Florida 33172 

Telephone: 305.264.9090 

Facsimile: 305.809.8474

Email:info@mendezlawoffices.com 

By: /s/

DIEGO GERMAN MENDEZ, ESQ. 

FL BAR NO.: 52748

###

Case 1:22-cv-23107-DPG Document 15 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/08/2023 Page 1 of 1
#### § 302-4.101 Must my immediate family member(s) and I begin PCS travel at the old official station and end at the new official station?

No, if an alternate location is used, reimbursement is limited to the allowable cost by the usually traveled route between your old and new official stations.
#### § 105-8.170-5 Notification to the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board.

The agency shall prepare and forward comprehensive quarterly reports to the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board containing information regarding complaints received alleging that a building or facility that is subject to the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4151-4157), is not readily accessible to and usable by individuals with handicaps. The agency shall not include in the report the identity of any complainant.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 698 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 698

To repeal the requirement relating to specific statutory authorization 
  for increases in judicial salaries, to provide for automatic annual 
        increases for judicial salaries, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 10, 1999

  Mr. Wicker introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To repeal the requirement relating to specific statutory authorization 
  for increases in judicial salaries, to provide for automatic annual 
        increases for judicial salaries, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. JUDICIAL COST-OF-LIVING INCREASES.

    (a) Repeal of Statutory Requirement Relating to Judicial 
Salaries.--Section 140 of the resolution entitled ``A Joint Resolution 
making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 1982, and 
for other purposes.'', approved December 15, 1981 (Public Law 97-92; 95 
Stat. 1200; 28 U.S.C. 461 note) is repealed.
    (b) Automatic Annual Increases.--Section 461(a) of title 28, United 
States Code, is amended to read as follows:
    ``(a)(1) Subject to paragraph (2), effective on the first day of 
the first applicable pay period beginning on or after January 1 of each 
calendar year, each salary rate which is subject to adjustment under 
this section shall be adjusted by an amount, rounded to the nearest 
multiple of $100 (or if midway between multiples of $100, to the next 
higher multiple of $100) equal to the percentage of such salary rate 
which corresponds to the most recent percentage change in the 
Employment Cost Index (relative to the date described in the next 
sentence), as determined under section 704(a)(1) of the Ethics Reform 
Act of 1989. The appropriate date under this sentence is the first day 
of the fiscal year that begins in the preceding calendar year.
    ``(2) In no event shall the percentage adjustment taking effect 
under paragraph (1) in any calendar year (before rounding), in any 
salary rate, exceed the percentage adjustment taking effect in such 
calendar year under section 5303 of title 5 in the rates of pay under 
the General Schedule.''.
                                 <all>
```
PMN FORM – PART II SECTION B Attachment

INDUSTRIAL SITE CONTROLLED BY OTHERS

Worker Exposure/Environmental Release Information
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Adam M. Moskowitz

Joseph M. Kaye

THE MOSKOWITZ LAW FIRM, PLLC

2 Alhambra Plaza, Suite 601

Coral Gables, FL 33134 

Telephone: (305) 740-1423

Service@moskowitz-law.com

David Boies

(Pro Hac Vice Application Forthcoming)

Stephen Neal Zack

Hon. Ursula Ungaro (Ret.)

BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP

333 Main Street, Armonk, NY 10504

100 SE 2nd St., Suite 2800, Miami, FL 33131

 Southern District of Florida

EDWIN GARRISON, et al., on behalf of themselves 

and all others similarly situated

22-CV-23753-KMM

SAM BANKMAN-FRIED, et al.,

Sam Bankman-Fried 

212 Warren Street, Apartment 27C, New York, NY 10282-0029 

Alternative addresses: 

259 Saint Paul Street, Brookline, Massachusetts 02446-7104 

127 South Ocean Road, New Providence, The Bahamas 

Dec 9, 2022 s/ Lisa I. Streets

Case 1:22-cv-23753-KMM Document 15 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/09/2022 Page 1 of 2
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

’ I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

’ I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

’ I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

’ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

’ Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

22-CV-23753-KMM 0.00 Print Save As... Reset

Case 1:22-cv-23753-KMM Document 15 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/09/2022 Page 2 of 2
```

[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 118 (Monday, June 19, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37966-37967]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-15354]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EC00-83-001]

Potomac Edison Company, Allegheny Energy Supply Company, L.L.C., 
PE Transferring Agent, L.L.C., [To be Named], L.L.C., and Green Valley 
Hydro, LLC; Notice of Filing

June 13, 2000.
    Take notice that on June 8, 2000, Potomac Edison Company (Potomac),

[[Page 37967]]

Allegheny Energy Supply Company, L.L.C. (AE Supply), PE Transferring 
Agent, L.L.C., [To be named], L.L.C., and Green Valley Hydro, LLC 
(Green Valley), (collectively, Applicants) tendered for filing an 
amendment to their April 26, 2000, application in this proceeding. In 
the amendment, Applicants request Commission authorization to permit 
Potomac to transfer the following assets to AE Supply: (1) The shares 
of jurisdictional step-up transformers allocable to Potomac's Maryland, 
West Virginia and Virginia service areas (excluding Potomac's Virginia 
hydroelectric assets); (2) securities evidencing Potomac's ownership 
share of Allegheny Generating Company; (3) certain wholesale power 
purchase and supply agreements, including those jurisdictional 
agreements Potomac may enter into between the date of the Application 
and the date of the proposed corporate reorganization; and (4) 
Potomac's pollution control and solid waste bonds associated with the 
transferred generating assets. The amendment requests authorization to 
transfer jurisdictional transmission facilities associated with 
Potomac's Virginia hydro electric facilities to Green Valley.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions 
and protests should be filed on or before June 23, 2000. Protests will 
be considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on 
the Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-
2222 for assistance).

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-15354 Filed 6-16-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-1801

KINGSLEY AZUBUIKE ONONUJU,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

VIRGINIA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY; TODD OLIFF,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Norfolk. Roderick Charles Young, District Judge. (2:20-cv-00205-RCY-RJK)

Submitted: June 25, 2024 Decided: June 27, 2024

Before RICHARDSON and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kingsley Azubuike Ononuju, Appellant Pro Se. Edwin Ford Stephens, CHRISTIAN & 

BARTON, LLP, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1801 Doc: 18 Filed: 06/27/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Kingsley Azubuike Ononuju appeals the district court’s order denying his Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 60(b) motion. We have reviewed the record and conclude that the district court did 

not abuse its discretion in denying relief. See Aikens v. Ingram, 652 F.3d 496, 501 

(4th Cir. 2011) (en banc) (stating standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm the district 

court’s order. Ononuju v. Va. Hous. Dev. Auth., No. 2:20-cv-00205-RCY-RJK (E.D. Va. 

July 19, 2023). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions 

are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1801 Doc: 18 Filed: 06/27/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF AMERICAN CONSUMERS, INC. FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD
ENDED AUGUST 29, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-29-1998
<CASH>                                       1,233,305
<SECURITIES>                                    97,520
<RECEIVABLES>                                  182,608
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,789,361
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,344,026
<PP&E>                                       2,942,742
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,113,412
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,177,356
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,255,132
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        89,060
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,513,135
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,177,356
<SALES>                                      6,639,544
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,639,544
<CGS>                                        5,250,300
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,250,300
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,455,250
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,759
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (57,157)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (24,506)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (32,651)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (32,651)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.037)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.037)
        


</TABLE>
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15A1860. COLEMAN v. THE STATE.

The above appeal was docketed on May 28, 2015. Appellant’s brief and

enumeration of errors were due within 20 days of docketing. See Court of Appeals

Rule 23 (a).

As of the date of this order, appellant has neither filed a brief and enumeration

of errors nor requested an extension of time in which to do so. Accordingly, pursuant

to Court of Appeals Rules 7 and 23 (a), it is hereby ordered that this appeal is

DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

09/02/2015

September 02, 2015
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 04-430 

________________________________________________________________________ 

ENVIRONMENTAL COOPERATION

 Agreement Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and CHILE 

Signed at Santiago June 17, 2003 

 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
CHILE 

Environmental Cooperation 

 Agreement signed at Santiago June 17, 2003; 

 Entered into force April 30, 2004. 
1
2
3
4

NOTE: The number of the first paragraph of Article IV should read (1).
5
6
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 123 (Monday, June 26, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 39446]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16086]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION


Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, Subcommittee Meeting on 
Planning and Procedures; Notice of Meeting

    The ACRS Subcommittee on Planning and Procedures will hold a 
meeting on July 11, 2000, Room T-2B1, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland.
    The entire meeting will be open to public attendance, with the 
exception of a portion that may be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c) 
(2) and (6) to discuss organizational and personnel matters that relate 
solely to internal personnel rules and practices of ACRS, and 
information the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal privacy.
    The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows:
    Tuesday, July 11, 2000--1:00 p.m. until the conclusion of business.
    The Subcommittee will discuss proposed ACRS activities and related 
matters. The purpose of this meeting is to gather information, analyze 
relevant issues and facts, and to formulate proposed positions and 
actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee.
    Oral statements may be presented by members of the public with the 
concurrence of the Subcommittee Chairman; written statements will be 
accepted and made available to the Committee. Electronic recordings 
will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are 
open to the public, and questions may be asked only by members of the 
Subcommittee, its consultants, and staff. Persons desiring to make oral 
statements should notify the cognizant ACRS staff person named below 
five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate 
arrangements can be made.
    Further information regarding topics to be discussed, the 
scheduling of sessions open to the public, whether the meeting has been 
canceled or rescheduled, the Chairman's ruling on requests for the 
opportunity to present oral statements, and the time allotted therefor 
can be obtained by contacting the cognizant ACRS staff person, Dr. John 
T. Larkins (telephone: 301/415-7360) between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. 
(EDT). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the 
above named individual one or two working days prior to the meeting to 
be advised of any changes in schedule, etc., that may have occurred.

    Dated: June 20, 2000.
Sam Duraiswamy,
Acting Associate Director for Technical Support, ACRS/ACNW.
[FR Doc. 00-16086 Filed 6-23-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b)/RULE 15d-14(b)

OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Analogic Corporation (the
Company) for the quarter ended October 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, John J. Millerick, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to the best of his knowledge:

(1) the Report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2) the information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: December 10, 2008



/s/    John J. MillerickJohn J. MillerickChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)