alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Rockingham,

No. 5528.

#### Portsmouth Savings Bank *v.*Greenland.

Argued September 7, 1966.

Decided September 30, 1966.

*391
      *David Sanderson*(by brief and orally), for the plaintiff.

*Boynton, Waldron & Dill*(*Mr. Wyman P. Boynton*orally), for the defendant.

Duncan, J.

RSA 80:28 requires the purchaser of real estate sold by the tax collector to notify all persons holding mortgages of record, within thirty days from the date of such sale. It further provides that in the absence of such notice “[a]ny tax sale of such encumbered real estate shall be void as against any mortgagee and no tax collector’s deed based on said sale shall be valid. ...” The tax sale was clearly invalid as to the plaintiff bank. *Salem*v. Sperber, 88 N. H. 374; *Rivard*v. *Ross,*99 N. H. 299, 302.

RSA 80:28, *supra,*further provides “the tax and any subsequent tax payments made ... by the purchaser . . . shall be collectible and payment may be enforced by suit under the provisions of [RSA ch. 80] section 50.” The defendant town claims a right to collect the 1962 taxes from the bank under this provision. RSA 80:50 provides in part as follows: “ Collection by suit. The selectmen of any town, or the tax collector, by action brought in the name of the collector, may cause any tax to be collected by suit at law or bill in equity. ...”

The premises in question were taxed in 1962 to the plaintiff’s mortgagors. The remedy provided by RSA 80:50 is a remedy against them, and an action to collect the tax does not lie against the bank.

The town relies upon the provisions of RSA 498:5 in support of its claim of a right to reimbursement. See *Rivard*v. *Ross,*99 N. H. 299, *supra.*This statute requires reimbursement of a purchaser at a tax sale “[w]hen the validity of a tax sale is contested . . . [i]n any case in which a tax sale is adjudged invalid. ...” RSA 498:5, *supra.*

In this case, the invalidity of the tax sale as against the bank is conceded, and no decree setting the sale aside is sought. The *392interest acquired by the town as purchaser at the tax sale was at most only an interest in the mortgagors’ equity of redemption. When the town paid the tax by purchasing at the tax sale, the tax hen was discharged. *Winchester*v. *Stockwell,*76 N. H. 193, 195. While the town might have protected its interest by notifying the mortgagee of the tax sale, or by bidding at the foreclosure sale, it did neither. The equity of redemption was extinguished by foreclosure, and with it any interest of the town therein. Any different conclusion would rob the provisions of RSA 80:28 of significance, by imposing obligations upon the mortgagee by reason of a tax sale which the statute directs shall be void as against it. We hold that neither the mortgagee bank nor the foreclosed property is under any liability for the 1962 tax, and that no remedy by suit under RSA 80:50, is available to the town against the bank. However the remedy under RSA 80:50, is available to the town against the mortgagors who owned the property in 1962.

*Judgment for the plaintiff.*

All concurred.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S.J. Res. 64 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. J. RES. 64

  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Communications 
 Commission relating to ``The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act: 
        Prevention and Elimination of Digital Discrimination''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 14, 2024

 Mr. Cruz (for himself, Mr. Lee, Mr. Schmitt, Mr. Budd, Mr. Marshall, 
  Mr. Cornyn, Mrs. Hyde-Smith, Mr. Thune, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Cramer, Mr. 
 Scott of South Carolina, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Lankford, Mr. Risch, Mrs. 
    Blackburn, Mrs. Fischer, Mrs. Britt, Mr. Moran, and Ms. Lummis) 
  introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice and 
   referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Communications 
 Commission relating to ``The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act: 
        Prevention and Elimination of Digital Discrimination''.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the 
rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission relating to 
``The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act: Prevention and 
Elimination of Digital Discrimination'' (89 Fed. Reg. 4128 (January 22, 
2024)), and such rule shall have no force or effect.
                                 <all>
```
2/27/2023

Case 1:22-cv-01542-RCL Document 15 Filed 02/27/23 Page 1 of 3

RECEIVED

Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy 

Court for the District of Columbia 
Case 1:22-cv-01542-RCL Document 15 Filed 02/27/23 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:22-cv-01542-RCL Document 15 Filed 02/27/23 Page 3 of 3
##### 



Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

Michael V. Shustek, as Chief Executive Officer of Vestin Group, Inc. (the
Company), and John Alderfer, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, that

(1)  the Companys Quarterly Report of Form 10-Q for the quarterly period
ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report) fully complies with the applicable requirements of
Section 13(a) or Section 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.

|                       |  |  |  |                                                                 
|---------------------- |  |  |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: August 14, 2003 |  |  |  | /s/ Michael V. Shustek                                          
|                       |  |  |  |                                                                 
|                       |  |  |  | Michael V. Shustek
Chief Executive Officer of
Vestin Group, Inc.

|                       |  |  |  |                                                            
|---------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: August 14, 2003 |  |  |  | /s/ John Alderfer                                          
|                       |  |  |  |                                                            
|                       |  |  |  | John Alderfer
Chief Financial Officer of
Vestin Group, Inc.

30
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 04 -1112 

________________________________________________________________________ 

CULTURAL PROPERTY 

 Agreement Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and LATVIA 

Signed at Riga October 7, 2002 

 
 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.” 
LATVIA 

Cultural Property 

Agreement signed at Riga October 7, 2002; 

 Entered into force November 12, 2004.
§ 1324.407 APS program performance. The State entity shall develop policies and procedures for the collection and maintenance of data on APS system response. The State entity shall: ( a ) Collect and report annually to ACL such APS system-wide data as required by the Assistant Secretary for Aging; and
( b ) Develop policies and procedures to ensure that the APS system retains individual case data obtained from APS investigations for a minimum of 5 years.
14910-13-PI DEPARTMENT OFTRAl'iSPORTATION

14CFRP.rt39 

# J-DIO-

# \'174 (DocketNo. FAA-IO··-**"'-; Direttorate Ide.atiner 201o-NM-090-ADI RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310 Series Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice ofproposed rulemaking (NPRM). 16 J 10 SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the product listed above. This proposed AD results 

### from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MeAl) originaled byan aviation authority of another country to identify andcorrect an unsafe condition on anaviation product. The MeAl describes the unsafi condition as: DGAC {Direction Generale de \'AviatieJnCivile] France AD 1992-106-132(8)'" '" '"was issued to fcXJ.uire a set of inspection and modification tasks which addressed JARJF;AR[Joint Aviation Regulation,' Federal Aviation Regulation] 25.571 requirements relaled to damagelolerance and fatigue evaluation ofslructure. '"'" "'. The unsafe condition isreduced structural integrity ofthe wings. The proposed AD would require actions that arcintended loaddress the unsafe condition described inthe MeAL DATES: We must receive oommentson this proposed AD by [INSERT DATE 45 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION INTHE FEDERAL REGISTER). 

## •



# -'-

~ 

# ..

FAA Form 1360-14.1 {6-89} OFFICIAl FILECOPY
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASIDNGTON, D.C. 

IN THE MATTER OF 

EMPIRE FLIGHT ACADEMY 

Docket No. FAA-2011-0290 (CP10EA0004) 

Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) J.E. Sullivan 

AGENCY'S WITNESS/EXHffiiT LIST 

7'T1 ,., 1,1 ~I, ' JH! ~· " ! I 0 "i /"\ " ,U• I'"~• l• f 8 

COMES NOW Complainant (the Agency), by and through its designated 

representative, the Regional Counsel for the Eastern Region and his duly designated 

agents, and submits that its Witness/Exhibit List that was filed on March 1, 2012 or 

thereabouts, in accordance with the Order of the ALJ in this proceeding, remains 

unchanged. 

Sincerely, 

ALFRED R. JOHNSON, JR. 

REGIONAL COUNSEL 

·. By: ·· ... sa~ w -< <•.~ --· •• ~~om~ .. -~ - -

Zachary M. erman 

Attorney 

Office of the Eastern Regional Counsel (FAA) 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434 

Phone: (718)553-3258 

Telefax: (718)995-5699 

Date: June 29, 2012 

RECEIVED 

JUL -9,2012 

HEARING DOCKET 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that the foregoing Agency's Witness and Exhibit List has been sent via ftrst 

class mail and e-mail to the following: 

John Zaremba 

Rte. 109, Hangar 3, Republic Airport 

Farmingdale, NY 11735 

Email: J.Zaremba@empireairways.com 

The Honorable J. E. Sullivan 

Administrative Law Judge ---- -------·- -~·· ~-U:S;--Depamnentof-llmls'"'POl"<''.Ir+.ta"timoon-n 

Offtce of Hearings, M-20 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room E12-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

Diane.Mays@DOT.GOV 

I hereby certify that the foregoing Agency's Witness and Exhibit List has been sent via ftrst 

class mail to the following: 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building, Suite 2Wl 000 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S. W. 

Room924A 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

-·. ---- --·- -·-- -·------~~· --- --· ,_ --·~--,-~-~---·-----

Date: JUN 2 9 2012 vu _df ,_-L. ------- ,.; .ti.sa Hooks 

Paralegal Specialist 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of Regional Counsel 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 96-3506

___________

Jerry X. Ellis, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. *

*

Larry B. Norris, Director, Arkansas *

Department of Correction, originally * Appeal from the United States

sued as L. Norris; M. D. Reed, * District Court for the

Warden, Cummins Unit, Arkansas * Eastern District of Arkansas.

Department of Correction; R. Toney, *

Assistant Warden, Cummins Unit, * [UNPUBLISHED]

Arkansas Department of Correction; *

D. Tate, Captain, Cummins Unit, *

Arkansas Department of Correction; *

Long, Captain, Cummins Unit, *

Arkansas Department of Correction; *

R. Scott, CO-1, Cummins Unit, *

Arkansas Department of Correction; *

Moncrief, Lt., Cummins Unit, Arkansas *

Department of Correction; Todd, Sgt., *

Cummins Unit, Arkansas Department *

of Correction; Everett, Sgt., Cummins *

Unit, Arkansas Department of *

Correction; Dean, Sgt., Cummins Unit, *

Arkansas Department of Correction; *

D. Guntharp, Deputy/Assistant Director, *

Cummins Unit, Arkansas Department *

of Correction, originally sued as D. *

Gunthary; Al-Mustafa Abdu Raheem, *

originally sued as Imam M. Raheem; *
The Honorable Henry L. Jones, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge for the

1

Eastern District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by

consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

-2-

K. D. Millerd, originally sued as Sgt. * 

Miller, * 

*

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: February 6, 1998 

 Filed: February 23, 1998

___________

Before FAGG, BEAM, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Jerry X. Ellis appeals the district court&s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1

1983 action. In his complaint, Ellis alleged defendants violated his constitutional rights

by failing to provide him with evening meals during the month of Ramadan in 1994.

After a bench trial, the court found that the evidence was in equipoise and that Ellis

thus had not met his burden of proof. Accepting the trial court&s factual findings and

evidentiary rulings as correct, see Fed. R. App. P. 10(b)(2); Van Treese v. Blome, 7

F.3d 729, 729 (8th Cir. 1993) (per curiam); Schmid v. United Brotherhood of

Carpenters & Joiners, 827 F.2d 384, 386 (8th Cir. 1987) (per curiam), cert. denied, 484

U.S. 1071 (1988), we conclude the district court&s judgment was correct. Accordingly,

we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
-3-

A true copy.

Attest:

 CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Exhibit 32.2
                                  CERTIFICATION

  I, Paritosh K. Choksi,  Executive Vice  President of ATEL Financial  Services,
  LLC, Managing Member of ATEL Capital Equipment Fund VIII, LLC (the "Company"),
  certify,  pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
  Section 1350, that:

   1.      The  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of the  Company  for the  quarter
           ended  March  31,  2005  (the  "Report")   fully  complies  with  the
           requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934
           (15 U.S.C. 78m); 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:      May 13, 2005




  /s/ Paritosh K. Choksi
  Paritosh K. Choksi
  Executive Vice President of Managing
  Member, Principal Financial Officer of Registrant



  A signed original of this written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
  provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and  furnished  to
  the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Watson v. Menard, No. 642-11-17 Wncv (Teachout, J., July 2, 2018).

[The text of this Vermont trial court opinion is unofficial. It has been reformatted from the original. The accuracy of the text and the 

accompanying data included in the Vermont trial court opinion database is not guaranteed.]

STATE OF VERMONT

SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL DIVISION

Washington Unit Docket No. 642-11-17 Wncv

JASON WATSON

Petitioner

v.

LISA MENARD &

SHANNON MARCOUX

Respondents

Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment

Jason Watson, an inmate in the custody of the Commissioner of the Department of 

Corrections, seeks Rule 75 review of a disciplinary conviction for the “introduction of any item 

that constitutes a danger to the order of the facility.” The items were 12 strips of buprenorphine 

intended to be brought into the facility by a visitor as arranged by Mr. Watson. After the 

disciplinary hearing, the hearing officer found him guilty. In Mr. Watson’s motion for summary 

judgment, he argues that the conviction should be expunged because the DOC should have 

charged him with possession of unprescribed drugs (Major A19) rather than the attempted 

introduction of a dangerous item (Major A07). The State argues in its cross-motion for summary 

judgment that (1) the conduct fits either violation and no rule required it to be charged under the 

more specific one; (2) Mr. Watson neither exhausted his administrative remedies nor preserved 

the issue he is raising now; and (3) he could not be entitled to a remedy of expungement under 

any circumstances.

The attempted smuggling of unprescribed narcotics into a DOC facility reasonably 

presents “a danger to the order of the facility.” The presence of contraband in the form of 

unauthorized drugs is highly likely to interfere with the orderly administration of a prison 

population. Even if DOC could have charged him with a different disciplinary violation, no rule 

required it to do so. On that basis, the State is entitled to summary judgment, and Mr. Watson’s 

motion must be denied. It is unnecessary to address the other issues raised by the State.

Accordingly,

1. The Petitioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment is denied, and

2. The Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment is granted.

Dated at Montpelier, Vermont this ____ day of June 2018.

_____________________________

Mary Miles Teachout

Superior Judge
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 03587

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2

File Name Description

03587\03587_ Certification Statement.pdf Plant certification statement

03587\03587_ Completeness Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

03587\03587_ HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 03587\03587_Checklist_102910_version34.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

x 03587\03587_Part A.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 03587\03587_Part E.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 03587\03587_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file

03587\Supporting Documentation\3587_ Aerial Maps, Diagrams, Certification Statement.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket.
§ 2506.5 If a debt is not excluded from these regulations, may it be compromised, suspended, terminated, or waived? Nothing in this part precludes: ( a ) The compromise, suspension, or termination of collection actions, where appropriate under the FCCS, or the use of alternative dispute resolution methods if they are consistent with applicable law and regulations.
( b ) An employee from requesting waiver of an erroneous payment under 5 U.S.C. 5584, 10 U.S.C. 2774, or 32 U.S.C. 716; or any debtor from questioning the amount or validity of a debt, in the manner set forth in this part.
#### §§ 1706.112-1706.129 [Reserved]
BILLING CODE: 6715-01-M

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

Sunshine Act Meetings

FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION NOTICE OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT:

88 FR 62358

PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF THE MEETING:

Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 10:30 A.M.

CHANGE IN THE MEETING:

The September 14, 2023 Open Meeting has been canceled.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Judith Ingram, Press Officer

Telephone: (202) 694-1220

(Authority: Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b)

Vicktoria J. Allen

Deputy Secretary of the Commission

Submitted: September 14, 2023
#### § 2544.145 What will be done with property that is not accepted?

In general, property offered to the Corporation but not accepted will be returned to the offeror. If the offeror is unknown or the donation would spoil if returned, the property will either be disposed of in accordance with Federal Property Management regulations (41 CFR chapter 101) or given to local charities determined by the Corporation.
Exhibit 10.3 Waiver of Conditions & Closing Agreement by and among Palayan Resources, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), Scythian Mining Group Limited, and SMG-Gold B.V. dated June 2, 2020.
#### § 212.6 Duty to report.

The eligible person who receives temporary assistance, or the person who is caring for or otherwise acting on behalf of such eligible person, shall report promptly to the Administration or agency any event or circumstance which would cause such assistance to be changed in amount or terminated.

[39 FR 26548, July 19, 1974, as amended at 53 FR 36580, Sept. 21, 1988]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary information extracted from SEC From 10Q and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                     9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                OCT-31-1999
<CASH>                                       19,949,100
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 5,979,500
<ALLOWANCES>                                          0
<INVENTORY>                                   3,961,700
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             30,279,700
<PP&E>                                        1,264,300
<DEPRECIATION>                                        0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               32,069,600
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        10,289,500
<BONDS>                                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                        135,400
<OTHER-SE>                                   21,505,900
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 32,069,600
<SALES>                                      23,478,400
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             23,478,400
<CGS>                                        11,385,500
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                11,385,500
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             10,383,500
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              481,100
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               1,228,300
<INCOME-TAX>                                          0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           1,228,300
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                  1,228,300
<EPS-BASIC>                                      0.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      0.11




</TABLE>