alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 105-72.502 Codes of conduct.

The recipient shall maintain written standards of conduct governing the performance of its employees engaged in the award and administration of contracts. No employee, officer, or agent shall participate in the selection, award, or administration of a contract supported by Federal funds if a real or apparent conflict of interest would be involved. Such a conflict would arise when the employee, officer, or agent, any member of his or her immediate family, his or her partner, or an organization which employs or is about to employ any of the parties indicated herein, has a financial or other interest in the firm selected for an award. The officers, employees, and agents of the recipient shall neither solicit nor accept gratuities, favors, or anything of monetary value from contractors, or parties to subagreements. However, recipients may set standards for situations in which the financial interest is not substantial or the gift is an unsolicited item of nominal value. The standards of conduct shall provide for disciplinary actions to be applied for violations of such standards by officers, employees, or agents of the recipient.
# THE STATE OF TEXAS

M A N D A T E

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

TO THE 296TH DISTRIC T COURT OF COLLIN CO UNTY, GREETING:

Before our Court of Appeals for the 12th Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 17th
day of June, 2015 , the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

KAZIM OLADOTUN OYENU GA , Appellant

NO. 12

- 14

- 00187

- CV; Trial Court No. 296

- 54330

- 2013

By per curiam opinion.

ADEDOYIN ANNE OYENUG A , Appellee

was determined; and therein our said Court made its ord er in these words:

“THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the motion of the Appellant to dismiss the appeal herein, and the same being considered, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by

this Court that the motion to dismiss be granted and the appeal be dismissed, and that the

decision be certified to the court below for observance.”

WHEREAS, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District of Texas in this behalf, and in all things have it duly

re cognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, THE HONORABLE JAMES T. WORTHEN , Chief Justice of our Court of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District, with the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of Tyler, this the 13 th day of August , 2015.

CATHY S. LUSK, CLERK

By:

_______________________________ Chief Deputy Clerk
Class Number NAICS

Dummy 0 483111/483113

Cruise Ships 0 11411

Commercial Fishing2326 11411

Freight Barges 0 11411

Freight Ships 0 11411

Passenger Vessels 0 11411

Recreational Ships 0 11411

Tank Barges 0 11411

Tank Ships 0 11411

Utility Vessels 0 11411

Cruise Ships 0 483111/483113

Commercial Fishing 0 483111/483113

Freight Barges 7307 483111/483113

Freight Ships 633 483111/483113

Passenger Vessels 0 483111/483113

Recreational Ships 0 483111/483113

Tank Barges 1469 483111/483113

Tank Ships 311 483111/483113

Utility Vessels 3 483111/483113

Cruise Ships 175 483112/483114

Commercial Fishing 0 483112/483114

Freight Barges 0 483112/483114

Freight Ships 0 483112/483114

Passenger Vessels1611 483112/483114

Recreational Ships 0 483112/483114

Tank Barges 0 483112/483114

Tank Ships 0 483112/483114

Utility Vessels 2 483112/483114

Cruise Ships 0 483211

Commercial Fishing 0 483211

Freight Barges 32362 483211

Freight Ships 36 483211

Passenger Vessels 0 483211

Recreational Ships 0 483211

Tank Barges 5370 483211

Tank Ships 21 483211

Utility Vessels 128 483211

Cruise Ships 0 483212

Commercial Fishing 0 483212

Freight Barges 0 483212

Freight Ships 0 483212

Passenger Vessels 267 483212

Recreational Ships 0 483212

Tank Barges 0 483212

Tank Ships 0 483212

Utility Vessels 5 483212
Cruise Ships 0 487210

Commercial Fishing 0 487210

Freight Barges 43 487210

Freight Ships 3 487210

Passenger Vessels 80 487210

Recreational Ships 0 487210

Tank Barges 0 487210

Tank Ships 0 487210

Utility Vessels 5 487210

Cruise Ships 0 488310

Commercial Fishing 0 488310

Freight Barges 0 488310

Freight Ships 0 488310

Passenger Vessels 0 488310

Recreational Ships 0 488310

Tank Barges 0 488310

Tank Ships 0 488310

Utility Vessels 1955 488310

Cruise Ships 0 488320

Commercial Fishing 0 488320

Freight Barges 46 488320

Freight Ships 1 488320

Passenger Vessels 0 488320

Recreational Ships 0 488320

Tank Barges 100 488320

Tank Ships 0 488320

Utility Vessels 42 488320

Cruise Ships 0 488330

Commercial Fishing 0 488330

Freight Barges 0 488330

Freight Ships 138 488330

Passenger Vessels 1 488330

Recreational Ships 0 488330

Tank Barges 203 488330

Tank Ships 0 488330

Utility Vessels 4041 488330

Cruise Ships 0 488390

Commercial Fishing 0 488390

Freight Barges 1 488390

Freight Ships 0 488390

Passenger Vessels 11 488390

Recreational Ships 0 488390

Tank Barges 1 488390

Tank Ships 0 488390

Utility Vessels 2 488390

Cruise Ships 0 213111

Commercial Fishing 0 213111
Freight Barges 0 213111

Freight Ships 0 213111

Passenger Vessels 0 213111

Recreational Ships 0 213111

Tank Barges 0 213111

Tank Ships 0 213111

Utility Vessels 75 213111
§ 301-11.5 How will my per diem expenses be reimbursed? Per diem expenses will be reimbursed by the: ( a ) Lodgings-plus per diem method;
( b ) Reduced per diem method; or
( c ) Actual expense method.
[FTR Amdt. 89, 65 FR 1327, Jan. 10, 2000, as amended by FTR Amdt. 2013-01, 78 FR 65211, Oct. 31, 2013]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

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

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          34,980
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   97,973
<ALLOWANCES>                                       925
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               136,091
<PP&E>                                          44,204
<DEPRECIATION>                                  15,459
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 181,773
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           54,549
<BONDS>                                         27,650
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,256
<OTHER-SE>                                      97,318
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   181,773
<SALES>                                        149,045
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               149,045
<CGS>                                          118,688
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  118,688
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                24,561
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    96
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 350
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,190
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,414
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,776
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,776
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .17


</TABLE>
#### § 302-10.1 May I be reimbursed for transporting my mobile home instead of an HHG shipment?

Yes, if you are eligible for the transportation of HHG, you will be reimbursed for transporting a mobile home instead of an HHG shipment, not to exceed what the Government would incur for the transportation of your HHG and 90-days temporary storage.
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

#### § 1.911 Station files.

Applications, notifications, correspondence, electronic filings and other material, and copies of authorizations, comprising technical, legal, and administrative data relating to each station in the Wireless Radio Services are maintained by the Commission in ULS. These files constitute the official records for these stations and supersede any other records, database or lists from the Commission or other sources.

[63 FR 68922, Dec. 14, 1998]
#### § 302-5.11 Is there a time limit on the duration of a househunting trip?

A househunting trip should be for a reasonable period, not to exceed 10 calendar days, as authorized by your agency under § 302-5.101(d).
Administrative Order No. 20-02 

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit 

O R D E R

Conducting Oral Arguments

On March 16, 2020, the court restricted public access 

to the Howard T. Markey National Courts Building 

following declared public health emergencies impacting 

Washington, D.C. and the National Capital Region. In the 

intervening months, assigned panels of judges have both 

conducted court sessions telephonically and, in some cases, 

dispensed with oral argument pursuant to Federal Rule of 

Appellate Procedure 34(a)(2)(C) after determining 

argument would be unnecessary. 

Counsel appearing in cases before this court are 

currently subject to various approaches to, and timeframes 

for, community recovery and reopening, which may impact 

their ability to travel for argument. Upon consideration of 

the Federal Judiciary COVID-19 Recovery Guidelines 

(April 24, 2020), in the interest of providing greater 

predictability to counsel appearing before this court, and 

due to the court’s national jurisdiction, I find, on behalf of 

the court, that the following modifications to court 

procedures are necessary to continue effective operations. 

IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

(1) The Administrative Orders entered on March 16, 

2020, and March 20, 2020, remain in effect except 

as modified by this Order. 

(2) All in-person arguments are suspended. The 

Clerk’s Office is directed to continue scheduling 

cases on the court’s calendar in accordance with

existing procedures. Cases set for oral argument 

after the date of this Order will be argued 

telephonically unless counsel is notified by 

separate order that oral argument is unnecessary 

and that a case will be submitted on the briefs ub tted o t e b e s

%\-3HUORZ'HSXW\ &OHUN 8:20 am, May 18 2020
2 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER

without argument. These modifications shall 

remain in effect until this Order is rescinded. 

(3) The Circuit Executive and Clerk of Court is 

directed to provide public notice of this Order and 

to take any necessary and proper actions to 

implement the provisions of this Order. 

 FOR THE COURT

 May 18, 2020 /s/ Sharon Prost 

 Date Sharon Prost 

Chief Judge

FOR THE COU

/s/ Sharon Pr

Sharon Prost

Chief Judge
#### § 102-38.130 Must we publicly advertise sales of Federal personal property?

Yes, you must provide public notice of your sale of personal property to permit full and open competition.
```

[House Report 106-640]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

106th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     106-640

======================================================================

 
WAIVING POINTS OF ORDER AGAINST THE CONFERENCE REPORT TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 
           2559, THE AGRICULTURE RISK PROTECTION ACT OF 1999

                                _______
                                

May 25 (legislative day, May 24), 2000.--Referred to the House Calendar 
                       and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

   Mr. Reynolds, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 512]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 512, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                summary of provisions of the resolution

    The resolution waives all points of order against the 
conference report to accompany H.R. 2559, the Agriculture Risk 
Protection Act of 1999, and against its consideration. The rule 
provides that the conference report shall be considered as 
read.

                                  

```
Exhibit 32.2



Section 1350

CERTIFICATION



The undersigned officer hereby certifies that,
to his knowledge, (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of COMFORCE Corporation for the quarter ended March 28, 2004 as to which this Certification is an exhibit fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and (2) the information contained in such Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of COMFORCE Corporation.



Signed May 11, 2004.



|                                                    
|----------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Harry V. Maccarrone                             
|Harry V. Maccarrone,                                
|Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                               2
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     1512
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (88)
<INVENTORY>                                       3742
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  5206
<PP&E>                                             870
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (170)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    5906
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             3190
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               51
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                        2665
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      5906
<SALES>                                           9786
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  9786
<CGS>                                             7366
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     7366
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  2016
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 176
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    228
<INCOME-TAX>                                        11
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                217
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       217
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        



</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh

Elizabeth M. Welch,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

May 26, 2021

b0519 

# Order

Clerk May 26, 2021

162767 & (35)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v SC: 162767

COA: 354524

Ingham CC: 18

- 001048

- FC

RICKY DALE JACK,

Defendant

- Appellee.

_____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for immediate consideration of the motion to stay

is GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal the March 11, 2021 judgment of the

Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the

question presented should be reviewed by this Court. The motion to stay the precedential

effect of the published Court of Appeals opinion is DENIED as moot.

Z AHRA , J., would direct oral argument on the application.
#### § 302-9.142 What will I be reimbursed if I transport a POV from a point of origin that is different from the authorized point of origin?

If you transport a POV from a point of origin that is different from the authorized point of origin, you will be reimbursed the transportation costs you incur, not to exceed the cost of transporting your POV from your authorized point of origin to your post of duty.
**Part II, Section B, 1(a) Operation Description**
Exhibit 32.2


                                  CERTIFICATION
                          REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14(b) or
                    RULE 15d-14(b) AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
          (AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

     I, Richard W. Lucas, as Chief Financial Officer of KSW, Inc., (the
"Company"), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted by Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

     (1) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ending
December 31, 2005 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (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.

Dated:  March 15, 2006

                                                  /s/ Richard W. Lucas
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                  Richard W. Lucas
                                                  Chief Financial Officer
#### Butler, Receiver, *v.*Reynolds (et al., Appellants).

Argued September 30, 1949.

Before Maxey, C. J., Drew, Linn, Stern, Patterson, Stearns and Jones, JJ.

*84
      *Reuben Fingolcl,*for appellants.

*Samuel G-oldstoch,*with him *Milton Safier*and *David*Roth, for appellee.

November 14, 1949:

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Aleen M. Stearne,

This is an appeal from the order of the court below dismissing the exceptions filed by appellants to the first and final account of a receiver.

Because of certain questionable dealings on the part of the Reynolds Construction Company, Inc., resulting in losses to veterans who signed contracts with that company for the purchase of lots and construction of homes in and around Allegheny County, the court appointed a receiver to handle the affairs of that company. On August 2, 1948, the receiver filed a bill in equity praying, *inter*alia, that a temporary receiver be appointed to manage the affairs of a restaurant and liquor business conducted by two of the stockholders of the Construction Company under the name and style of Club Society in order to preserve the assets for the benefit of the Reynolds Construction Company, Inc. The receiver, in seeking relief, alleged that the operators of the Reynolds Construction Company, Inc., had fraudulently converted funds of that corporation for the pur*85pose of purchasing the restaurant and liquor business. The court entered an order appointing a receiver for the Club Society.

The receiver filed his account. Appellants (creditors of the Reynolds Construction Company, Inc., but *not*creditors of the Club Society) filed exceptions to the allowance of a claim of a general creditor of the Club Society. The court below dismissed the exceptions and the appeal followed.

Appellants did not petition to intervene nor were they made parties to these receivership proceedings. The single question, therefore, is: do appellants, who are *not*creditors of the Club Society, have the status in the present circumstances to file exceptions to this receiver’s account?

The answer is in the negative. It is true that a creditor of a corporation in receivership has a right to file exceptions to the receiver’s account, but in this case appellants are *not*creditors of the *Chib Society.*Whatever rights appellants may have in any money that may ultimately be awarded to the Construction Company out of the fund now before the court must be protected and enforced by the receiver of the Reynolds Construction Company, Inc., their debtor.

The order of the court below is affirmed.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

JASON SCOTT LITTON,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee

.

No. 4D2023

- 0978

[ February 1, 2024 ]

Appeal from the C ircuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit , Palm

Beach County ; Caroline C. Shepherd , Judge; L.T. Case No.

502021CF000237AMB.

Antony P. Ryan, Regional Counsel, and Richard G. Bartmon, Assistant

Regional Counsel, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Jeanine

Germanowi cz, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed

.

W ARNER

, D AMOORGIAN and F ORST

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 16

- 00207

- CV

Antonio JIMENEZ and Mary Louise Jimenez,

Appellants

v.

Carlos GONGORA

, Appellee

From the 45th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015

- CI

- 02692

Honorable Stephani A. Walsh, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION

, JUSTICE CHAPA , AND JUSTICE PULLIAM

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED. We order

appellee recover his costs of this appeal from appellan ts.

SIGNED December 7, 2016.

_____________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
No. 10-11253.

#### Cooper *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### IN THE MATTER OF STANLEY B. PALMER.

(Supreme Court Disciplinary No. 657)

(384 SE2d 671)

Per curiam.

The State Bar filed a formal complaint against the respondent, Stanley B. Palmer, alleging that he took a fee to represent a client in a court in which Palmer was not admitted to practice; that he ne*502glected the matter entrusted to him; and that this conduct violated Standards 4, 21, 22, and 44 of Bar Rule 4-102. The State Bar also alleged that Palmer had failed to cooperate in its investigation of the complaint made against him, and that Palmer had thus violated Standard 68 of Bar Rule 4-102. Palmer failed to answer the formal complaint, and the special master appointed to hear the formal complaint found Palmer in default under Bar Rule 4-212. The special master concluded that Palmer had violated Standards 4, 21, 22, 44, and 68 of Bar Rule 4-102.

Decided October 26, 1989.

*William P. Smith III, General Counsel State Bar, Joe David Jackson, Assistant General Counsel State Bar,*for State Bar of Georgia.

The Review Panel of the State Disciplinary Board approved the special master’s finding of default, and recommended to this court that Palmer be suspended from the practice of law for a minimum two-year period, and that he not be allowed to resume the practice of law until he takes and passes all portions of the State Bar examination and until he refunds the full fee paid to him by the complainants.

Having reviewed the record, we adopt the recommendation of the Review Panel. We therefore suspend Palmer from the practice of law for two years, with the suspension to continue thereafter until Palmer passes all portions of the State Bar examination and until he refunds the full fee paid to him by the complainants.

*Two-year suspension.*

*All the Justices concur, except Smith, J., not participating.*