alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Callaway & Truitt *v.*Southern Railway Company.

Submitted March 3,

Decided August 9, 1906.

Appeal. Before Judge Pendleton. Fulton superior court. .May 4, 1905.

*Etheridge, Boykin & Etheridge,*for plaintifEs.

*Lamar Rucker, for*defendant.

Evans, J.

1. Neither the evidence admitted nor that offered by the plaintiffs but rejected by the court was such as to fix the identity of the goods for the value of which they sought to hold the defendant company accountable, or to show what was the market price of the same.

2. On appeal from a justice’s court to a jury in the superior court, where the plaintiff fails to make out a prima facie ease, it is not error for the court to direct a verdict in favor of the defendant. *Callaway & Truitt*v. *Southern Railway*Co., this day decided, ante, 192.

*■Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Fish, O. J., absent.*
Case 1:10-cv-01766-RMU -BMK -RMC Document 21 Filed 01/20/11 Page 1 of 1
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health 

      ( print page 10233)    
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting. 

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. 

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel, P01 JE REVIEW—Reproductive Genomics: Mutant Models for Infertility.                     

*Date:*                         March 26, 2007.                     

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 5 p.m.                     

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                     

*Place:*                         Residence Inn by Marriott at Pentagon City, 550 Army Navy Drive, Arlington, VA 22202.                     

*Contact Person:*                         Dennis E. Leszczynski, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Division of Scientific Review, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Blvd., Rm. 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-6884,                         *leszczyd@mail.nih.gov*.                     

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS) 

Dated: February 28, 2007. 

Anna Snouffer, 

Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. 

[FR Doc. 07-1028 Filed 3-6-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
1

15A NCAC 02D .1004 has been amended as published in 21:16 NCR-1498: 

15A NCAC 02D .1004 TAILPIPE EMISSION STANDARDS FOR CO AND HC (REPEALED)

(a) This Rule applies according to Rule .1002 of this Section to all 1995 and earlier gasoline-powered 

motor vehicles, except motorcycles, that are fewer than 25 model years old in the following counties:

(1) Mecklenburg

(2) Wake

(3) Forsyth

(4) Guilford

(5) Durham

(6) Gaston

(7) Cabarrus

(8) Orange

(9) Union

(b) The following standards specify the maximum carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbon (HC) 

concentrations permitted to be exhausted from motor vehicles subject to Rules in this Section:

Vehicle Class Model Year CO Standard 

At Idle(%)

HC Standard

At Idle(PPM)

Light-duty Vehicle 1978-1979 3.5 350

1980 2.0 250

 1981-1995 1.2 220

Heavy-duty Vehicle 1978 5.0 500

 1979-1995 4.0 400

(c) Exceptions or variances to the standards in this Rule are permitted only according to G.S. 20-183.5. 

(d) Compliance with the emission standards in this Rule shall be determined using:

(1) the test procedures and standards described in 40 CFR 51.357,

(2) test equipment described in 40 CFR 51.358, and

(3) quality control described in 40 CFR 51.359.
2

(e) The requirements of this Rule expire on January 1, 2006.

History Note: Authority G.S. 20-128.2(a); 20-183.5;143-215.3(a)(1); 143-215.107(a)(3); 143-

215.107(a)(6); 143-215.107(a)(7); 

Eff. December 1, 1982; 

Amended Eff. August 1, 2002; July 1, 1993; April 1, 1991; November 1, 1986; July 1, 

1984. 1984;

Repealed Eff. July 1, 2007;
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 56 (Friday, March 23, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 13827]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-1458]


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

MORRIS K. UDALL SCHOLARSHIP AND EXCELLENCE IN NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL 
POLICY FOUNDATION


Sunshine Act Meetings

Time and Date: 9 a.m. to 12 p.m., Friday, April 13, 2007.

Place: The offices of the Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in 
National Environmental Policy Foundation, 130 South Scott Avenue, 
Tucson, AZ 85701.

Status: This meeting will be open to the public, unless it is necessary 
for the Board to consider items in executive session.

Matters to be Considered: (1) A report on the U.S. Institute for 
Environmental Conflict Resolution; (2) A report from the Udall Center 
for Studies in Public Policy; (3) A report on the Native Nations 
Institute; (4) Program Reports; (5) Personnel matters; and (6) A Report 
from the Management Committee.

Portions Open to the Public: All sessions with the exception of the 
session listed below.

Portions Closed to the Public: Executive session.

Contact Person for More Information: Christopher L. Helms, Executive 
Director, 130 South Scott Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85701, (520) 901-8500.

    Dated: March 20, 2007.
Christopher L. Helms,
Executive Director, Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in 
National Environmental Policy Foundation, and Federal Register Liaison 
Officer.
[FR Doc. 07-1458 Filed 3-21-07; 11:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-FN-M
Press Office
1325 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20463
Phone: Local 523-4065. Toll Free 800-424-9530

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: FRED EILAND
JULY 28, 1983 SHARON SNYDER

PAC GROWIH RATE SLOWS;
COUNT STANDS AT 3,461
WASHINGTON -- The Federal Election Commission today announced that as of
July 1, there were 3,461 PAC's in existence, indicating an increase of only
3% over the 3,371 registered as of January 1 of this year. Although the
number of PAC's continued to increase, the rate of increase has slowed.
The current number of PAC's represents just a 10% increase over the
3,149 registered as of July 1982. Until recently, yearly increases (since 1976)
had averaged 20%, with the exception of 1979-80, when the growth actually

increased by 28%. ‘The most dramatic increase was between 1974 and 1976, when

PAC ranks swelled by 88%.

Official counts of registered PAC's are compiled yearly by the FEC
in July and December.

PaC's are viewed by many campaign finance experts as a dominant force
in politics. Their numbers and the amount of money they spend in Federal

campaigns have continued to inerease with each election cycle.

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

PRESS OFFICE suey 18
(202) 523-4065

(800) 424.9530

“PAC” GROWTH—FROM 1974

i247"

COMMITTEE TYPE
CORPORATE
LABOR

‘TRADE/MEMBERSHIP
HEALTH

NON-CONNECTED
COOPERATIVE
CORPORATION W/O STOCK

TOTAL 1,146

B18
2|8 FS 12/31/82

Et

‘on November 24, 1975, the Commission istued Advisory Opinion 1976-23 “SUNPAC.”
209 May 11, 1976, the Presider signed the Federal Election Campslgn Act Amendments of 1976, P.L. 94-283.
__*Far the yore 1974-1978, thse aubart aoroant al ther paca! commits... m0 frtereaepornation faa
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from financial
statements for the year ended December 31, 1998 and is qualified in its entirety
as reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000

       
<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                           DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                       2,418
<SECURITIES>                                   321
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,582
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (521)
<INVENTORY>                                  1,932
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,577
<PP&E>                                       8,346
<DEPRECIATION>                              (5,034)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,889
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,745
<BONDS>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                         8
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,830
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,889
<SALES>                                     30,761
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            30,761
<CGS>                                       15,712
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               15,712
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            13,728
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             179
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,241
<INCOME-TAX>                                    22
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,219
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,219
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 0.16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 0.15
                               


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report ofMaximus Exploration Corporation(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year endedFebruary 28, 2007as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Randy Doherty, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   
|(2) | The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|   

Dated this 29thday of May, 2007.

RANDY DOHERTYRandy DohertyChief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer






































---
# Presidential Determination Under Section 490(b)(1)(A) of the Foreign Assistance Act Relating to the Largest Exporting and Importing Countries of Certain Precursor Chemicals

# Memorandum for the Secretary of State

Pursuant to section 490(b)(1)(A) of the Foreign Assistance Act, I hereby determine that the top five exporting and importing countries of pseudoephedrine and ephedrine in 2005 (Belgium, China, Germany, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Switzerland, Taiwan, and the United Kingdom) have cooperated fully with the United States or have taken adequate steps on their own to achieve full compliance with the goals and objectives established by the United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. 

                    You are directed to publish this determination in the                     **Federal Register**                    , and are authorized and directed to transmit to the Congress the report under section 722 of the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act.                 

[FR Doc. 07-1154

Billing code 4710-10-P
#### § 112.30-1 General.

This subpart contains requirements applicable to emergency power installations having an automatically connected storage battery as the sole emergency power source.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND THE CHIEF FINANCIAL

OFFICER
PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Remi Barbier, Chairman of the Board of Directors, President and Chief Executive Officer
and Peter S. Roddy, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Pain Therapeutics, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify that to the best of our knowledge:



| | 1. | The Companys Periodic Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011, and to which this certification is attached as Exhibit
32.1 (the Periodic Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: April 27, 2011/s/ REMI BARBIERRemi Barbier,Chairman of the Board of Directors,President and Chief Executive Officer/s/ PETER S. RODDYPeter S. Roddy,Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 9 (Tuesday, January 16, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1802-1803]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-117]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Fiscal Service


Surety Companies Acceptable on Federal Bonds: Name Change--
International Business & Mercantile REassurance Company

AGENCY: Financial Management Service, Fiscal Service, Department of the 
Treasury.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is Supplement No. 6 to the Treasury Department Circular 
570, 2006 Revision, published June 30, 2006, at 71 FR 37694.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Surety Bond Branch at (202) 874-6850.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: International Business & Mercantile 
REassurance Company (NAIC <greek-i>21439),

[[Page 1803]]

an Illinois corporation, has formally changed its name to Old Republic 
General Insurance Corporation, effective June 1, 2006. A Certificate of 
Authority as an acceptable surety on Federal bonds is hereby issued 
under 31 U.S.C. 9305 to Old Republic General Insurance Corporation, 
Chicago, Illinois. This new Certificate replaces the Certificate of 
Authority issued to this company under its former name. The 
underwriting limitation of $16,725,000 established for this company as 
of July 1, 2006, remains unchanged until June 30, 2007. Federal bond-
approving officers should annotate their reference copies of the 
Treasury Circular 570 (``Circular''), 2006 Revision, to reflect this 
change.
    Certificates of Authority expire on June 30, each year, unless 
revoked prior to that date. The Certificates are subject to subsequent 
annual renewal as long as the Company remains qualified (see 31 CFR 
part 223). A list of qualified companies is published annually as of 
July 1, in the Circular, which outlines details as to underwriting 
limitations, areas in which companies are licensed to transact surety 
business, and other information.
    The Circular may be viewed and downloaded through the Internet at 
http://www.fms.treas.gov/c570.
    Questions concerning this notice may be directed to the U.S. 
Department of the Treasury, Financial Management Service, Financial 
Accounting and Services Division, Surety Bond Branch, 3700 East-West 
Highway, Room 6F01, Hyattsville, MD 20782.

    Dated: December 22, 2006.
Teresa Casswell,
Acting Director, Financial Accounting and Services Division, Financial 
Management Service.
[FR Doc. 07-117 Filed 1-12-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-35-M
#### Lovelace, administratrix, *v.*Browne *et al.*

Beck, J.

1. The court below on March 18, 1905, by an order duly passed, having sustained a special demurrer to defendants’ plea, and having in the same order allowed'defendants additional time within which to file an amendment to the plea, which time for amendment was by verbal orders still further extended, it was. not error for the court at a subse- ■ quent term, on September 23, 1905, to allow an order to be taken nunc pro tune, giving the additional time as provided in the verbal orders theretofore granted, over the objection of the plaintiff that the “defendants had had sufficient time for amendment, and that the time should not be extended.

2. The court having rendered a judgment sustaining a special demurrer to the plea, and having embraced in the judgment the order allowing time for filing the amendment referred to in the preceding headnote, the subsequent order extending the time had the effect of preventing said judg-. ment from becoming conclusive as against the defendants until after the expiration of the period of the time within which they were to amend, under the terms, of the order.

3. The suit having been brought against Browne, and Browne & Simpson and the insurance company, as principals, upon amendment to the petition showing' that Browne and Browne & Simpson, who signed the contract sued on, were agents of said company, and that the company had ratified the execution of the contract, it was proper for the court to dismiss the action as to Browne and Browne & Simpson, upon motion *803made by them at the -term when the amendment was allowed, or at a subsequent term. *Lippincott*v. *Behre,*122 *Ga.*543; Huffcut on Agency (2d ed.), 61. *Judgment affirmed.*

Argued May 29,

Decided November 16, 1906.

Complaint. Before Judge Beicl. City court of Atlanta. December 8, 1905.

The action was against the Missouri State Life Insurance Company, Browne, and Browne & Simpson, for breach of contract. The contract recites that it is “between N. B. Browne, of Atlanta, Ga., General Agent of the Missouri State Life Insurance Company, of St. Louis, . . and Edwin Lovelace;” and it is signed by

“Browne & Simpson, successors to N. B. Browne, General Agent.” The plaintiff, by amendment to the petition, alleges that the contract was ratified by the insurance company, and treats it as the contract of the company. Browne and Browne & Simpson demurred to the petition, on the ground that the cause of action was not against them, but was against the insurance' company. The court sustained the demurrer and dismissed the case as to Browne and Browne & Simpson. To this, and to the nunc pro tunc order dealt with in the first division of the foregoing decision, the plaintiff excepted.

*W. H. Terrell*and *Edgar Latham,*for plaintiff.

*Kirsch &*Haas, for defendant.

*All the Justices concur.*
§ 96.52 Appeals. ( a ) Decisions resulting from repayment hearings held pursuant to § 96.51(a) of this part may be appealed by either the State or the Department to the Grant Appeals Board.
( b ) Decisions resulting from offset hearings held pursuant to § 96.51(b) of this part may not be appealed.
( c ) Decisions resulting from withholding hearings held pursuant to § 96.51(c) of this part may be appealed to the Secretary by the State or the Department as follows: ( 1 ) An application for appeal must be received by the Secretary no later than 60 days after the appealing party receives a copy of the presiding officer's decision. The application shall clearly identify the questions for which review is sought and shall explain fully the party's position with respect to those questions. A copy shall be furnished to the other party.
( 2 ) The Secretary may permit the filing of opposing briefs, hold informal conferences, or take whatever other steps the Secretary finds appropriate to decide the appeal.
( 3 ) The Secretary may refer an application for appeal to the Grant Appeals Board. Notwithstanding part 16 of this title, in the event of such a referral, the Board shall issue a recommended decision that will not become final until affirmed, reversed, or modified by the Secretary.
( d ) Any appeal to the Grant Appeals Board under this section shall be governed by part 16 of this title except that the Board shall not hold a hearing. The Board shall accept any findings with respect to credibility of witnesses made by the presiding officer. The Board may otherwise review and supplement the record as provided for in part 16 of this title and decide the issues raised.
#### OTTAVIO De BELLIS ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. FRANK BACE ET UX., DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

Submitted October term, 1929

Decided December 13, 1929.

Before Justices Parker, Black and Bodine.

Eor the plaintiff s-respondents, *Isador Haber.*

Eor the defendants-appellants, *Platojf, Saperstein & Platoff.*

Per Curiam.

This suit was brought in the First Judicial District Court of Hudson county to recover the sum of $400, commissions by duly licensed reah estate brokers, for procuring buyers for property No. 29 Twenty-second street, West New York, New Jersey, under a written contract dated October 11th, 1928, in whieh'it is provided for the payment “of $400 as commissions, upon the day set for the closing of title,” &c. The case was tried by the court without a jury resulting in a judgment for the plaintiffs, $200 to De Beilis and $200 to Pisani and Conrad, as provided for in the written contract. At the close of plaintiffs’ testimony,' the defendants moved for a nonsuit, which was denied by the court, and then the defendants moved for the direction of a verdict, which was also denied by the court, exceptions were taken to these rulings, which are the grounds of appeal. No evidence being offered by the defendants. There is no legal merit on the appeal in this case. The plaintiffs, as we read the state of the case agreed upon, sent up in the printed book shows, that the plaintiffs had earned the commissions for which the court gave judgment.

The judgment of the First Judicial District Court of Hudson county is therefore affirmed, with costs.