alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FIRST DEPARTMENT.

GENERAL TERM, JANUARY, 1875.

#### Hemenway v. Wilson.

*Partnership—lease by*firm— *death ofpa/rtnm'*— *death, of all pa/rtners—continuance, of business under old firm name—when personal representatives not liable.*

The firm of T., I. & Co., composed of T. & I., leased a store. Afterward T. died, and about a year after him I. died. *Held,*that upon the death of T„ the interest in the lease vested in the surviving partner, and the continued occupancy by I. of the store under the old firm name, imposed no liability upon the personal representatives of T., and that upon the death of I. the firm ceased to exist, and the continued occupancy of the premises under the firm name could only create a presumption that a new firm had been formed under the old name, and would not be enough to charge the representatives of T. and I. with any joint liability for the rent.

Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment in favor of defendant, upon the report of a referee. The action was brought by Augustus Hemenway against William S. Wilson and another, executor, etc., of Frederick Tracy, deceased, and Sarah J. Irwin, executrix of James Irwin, deceased, to recover for the use and occupation of a store.

*F. B.*Candler, for appellant.

*Charles*Tracy, for respondents.

Davis, P. J.

The head-note contains a full statement of all that is of importance in the opinion.

*Judgment affirmed,.*
MEMORANDUM 

From: The United States Environmental Protection Agency 

To: EGU NSPS Docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0602) 

Date: September 16, 2014 

Subject: Clarification to GHG Abatement Measures Technical Support Document 

Introduction

The purpose of this memorandum is to make two clarifying edits to page 2-32 of the GHG Abatement 

Measures technical support document (EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0602-0437). First, the EPA has added a 

footnote to the third sentence of the first paragraph of section 2.5.9. This footnote contains a docket 

reference to the materials that allowed the EPA to identify the equipment upgrades referenced in that 

sentence. Second, the EPA has revised the second and fourth sentences of the second paragraph of 

section 2.5.9. This revision clarifies that not all of the heat rate improvement projects referenced in that 

paragraph have already occurred, but rather that the data describe a combination of actual and potential 

heat rate improvement projects. 

Clarification to Section 2.5.9 

2.5.9 Assessment of potential heat rate improvement via equipment upgrades 

The EPA inspected the study population to find examples of EGUs that made significant year-toyear improvements in heat rate. After filtering out those cases that may have been the result of changes 

in capacity factor, reporting method, or other events, we identified 16 EGUs that reported a single yearto-year heat rate improvement of 3-8%. In two of these cases we were able to identify equipment 

upgrades responsible for 2-3% heat rate improvement using the applicable estimates from the Sargent & 

Lundy 2009 study (see “Allen S. King materials” and “Gorgas materials” available in the rulemaking docket. 

Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0602). Similarly, in the other cases, while our research was unable to 

confirm specific equipment upgrades, based on the elimination of other possible explanations we believe 

that equipment upgrades were the most likely cause of some of the observed heat rate improvements. 

Two other sources provide information about heat rate improvements after equipment upgrades 

at existing plants. EPA Region 7 provided data for seven coal-fired units at three anonymous plants with 

details on specific actual and potential equipment modifications. These included turbine efficiency and 

condenser performance upgrades, installation of variable frequency drive fans, reducing boiler air inleakage and others. Together, these actual and potential measures were projected to achieve from 0.25% 

to 3.5% heat rate improvement at the seven EGUs
§ 144.320 Watertight or weathertight integrity. ( a ) Each vessel fitted with installed bulwarks around the exterior of the main deck must have sufficient freeing ports or scuppers or a combination of freeing ports and scuppers to allow water to run off the deck quickly without adversely affecting the stability of the vessel.
( b ) Closure devices must be provided for deckhouse or hull penetrations, which open to the exterior of the vessel and which may allow water to enter the vessel. These devices must be suitable for the expected route.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of San West, Inc. for the fiscal quarter ending June 30, 2010, I, Frank J. Drechsler, Chief Executive Officer of San West, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

1.

Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ending June 30, 2010, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ending June 30, 2010, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of San West, Inc.

Dated: August 16, 2010

/s/ Frank J. Drechsler

Frank J. Drechsler, Chief Executive Officer of  San West, Inc.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6820

JOHN ALLEN COSNER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus THOMAS R. CORCORAN; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-97- 4265-L) Submitted: October 20, 1998 Decided: November 4, 1998 Before WILKINS and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Allen Cosner, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Regina Hollins Lewis, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: John Allen Cosner seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we denya certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Cosner v. Corcoran , No. CA-97-4265-L (D. Md. May 21, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
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.                  

###### Tennessee Valley Authority

          - [Meeting No. 07-02] 

# Time and Date:

 9:30 a.m. (EDT), March 30, 2007, TVA West Tower Auditorium, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902. 

# Status:

 Open. 

## Agenda 

### Old Business 

Approval of minutes of January 25, 2007, Board Meeting. 

### New Business 

1. Chairman's Report. 

2. President's Report. 

3. Report of the Finance, Strategy, and Rates Committee. 

A. Strategic Plan Discussion. 

B. Customer service issues. 

i. Agreements to serve two directly-served customers. 

ii. Pricing during startup and testing. 

iii. Future year price offer to a directly-served customer. 

iv. Pilot time of use pricing. 

4. Report of the Operations, Environment, and Safety Committee. 

A. Authorization for the CEO to negotiate and approve a lease of a combined cycle electric generating facility. 

B. Authorization for acquisition of combustion turbine and other equipment, real property, and initial engineering services for a potential generation facility. 

5. Report of the Audit and Ethics Committee. 

A. Selection of an external auditor. 

6. Report of the Human Resources Committee. 

7. Report of the Community Relations Committee. 

8. Information Items. 

A. Executive Selections. 

B. Filing of condemnation cases in Bowling Green, Kentucky. 

*For more information:*                     Please call TVA Media Relations at (865) 632-6000, Knoxville, Tennessee. Information is also available at TVA's Washington Office (202) 898-2999. People who plan to attend the meeting and have special needs should call (865) 632-6000. Anyone who wishes to comment on any of the agenda in writing may send their comments to: TVA Board of Directors, Board Agenda Comments, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902.                 

Dated: March 23, 2007. 

Maureen H. Dunn, 

General Counsel and Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 07-1569 Filed 3-27-07; 11:22 am] 

BILLING CODE 8120-08-P
Exhibit 32.1

Certificate pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Capitol City Bancshares, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31,
2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, George G. Andrews, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ George G. AndrewsGeorge G. Andrews, Chief Executive Officer and Director


May 24, 2010
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-30743

Summary Calendar

ALISHA SMITH, ET AL.,

Plaintiffs,

ALISHA SMITH,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

SEARS ROEBUCK & CO., ET AL,

Defendants,

AMERICAN & FOREIGN INSURANCE 

COMPANY; R A S BUILDERS, INC.; ROYAL

INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

96-CV-2815

July 28, 2000

Before POLITZ, WIENER, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published

and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

2

PER CURIAM:*

Alisha Smith appeals an adverse judgment as a matter of law rendered at the

conclusion of her case in chief during trial. For the reasons assigned, we affirm.

BACKGROUND

Smith was employed as an auditor with R.G.I.S., an inventory company hired

by Sears Roebuck & Co. On February 24, 1996, Smith reported to work at the

Sears store in Acadiana Mall in Lafayette, Louisiana. Upon her arrival, she was

assigned first to the clothing department and then to the hardware stock room.

While working in the hardware stock room she was struck in the head by a board.

Smith instituted a state court action against Sears and RAS Builders, Inc., a

contractor remodeling certain areas of the Sears store during the time period in

question. Smith alleged that both Sears and RAS were negligent in placement of

the board and in causing it to fall. Sears removed the action to federal court based

on diversity jurisdiction.

At the conclusion of Smith’s case in chief during the course of a jury trial,

RAS and American Foreign Insurance Company moved for judgment as a matter

of law. The trial court granted that motion, concluding that Smith failed to offer
2Texas Beef Group v. Winfrey, 201 F.3d 680, 687 (5th Cir. 2000). 

3

Id.

4

Id. at 687-88; Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(a).

3

any evidence that RAS was legally liable for her injuries.

ANALYSIS

We review the challenged decision de novo, applying the same legalstandard

as the district court.2 All evidence is considered in the light most favorable to the

nonmovant, and all inferences are drawn in the nonmovant’sfavor.3 If “there is no

legally sufficient evidentiary basisfor a reasonable jury” to find for the nonmovant,

judgment as a matter of law is appropriate.4 

A close review of the record on appeal and briefs persuades that the district

court did not err in its conclusion that Smith failed to submit any evidence in

support of her claim that RAS is liable for her injuries. Accordingly, there being

no legally sufficient evidentiary basis upon which a reasonable jury could find for

Smith, judgment as a matter of law herein was appropriate.

The judgment appealed is AFFIRMED.
#### § 81.102 Decisions following hearing.

When the time for submission of posthearing briefs has expired, the presiding officer shall certify the entire record, including his recommended findings and proposed decision, to the responsible Department official; or if so authorized he shall make an initial decision. A copy of the recommended findings and proposed decision, or of the initial decision, shall be served upon all parties, and amici, if any.
## In t he

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 24

- 00031

- CV

SHANNON BROOKS , Appellant

V.

CENTRE STATION APARTMENTS, LLC , Appellee

On Appeal from the 17th District Court

Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 017

- 332082

- 22

Before Stevens , C.J., van Cleef and Rambin , JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Stevens2 

### ME MORANDUM OPINION

The parties ha ve filed a n agreed motion with this Court stating that they have settled their

disputes and seeking a voluntary dismiss al of t h is appeal. 1 Pursuant to Rule 42.1(a)(1) of the

Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, we grant the motion. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a)(1).

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal

.

Scott E. Stevens

Chief Justice

Date Submitted: August 6, 2024

Date Decided: August 7, 2024

1 Originally appealed to the Second Court of Appeals, this case was transferred to this Court by the Texas Supreme

Court pursuant to its docket equalization efforts. See T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN

. § 73.001 (Supp.).
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT

TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Achillion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the
Company) for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Michael D. Kishbauch, President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                    |  |  |  |                                      
|------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|Dated: May 15, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/ Michael D. Kishbauch             
|                    |  |  |  | Michael D. Kishbauch                 
|                    |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer

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.
# C_2008186EN.01004101.xml

| 23.7.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 186/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 186/41

---

Corrigendum to notice for the attention of the persons, groups and entities on the list provided for in Article 2(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 179 of 16 July 2008
  )

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 179 of 16 July 2008

(2008/C 186/16)

On page 1, in the first paragraph:

for:

‘Council Decision 2008/584/EC’,

read:

‘Council Decision 2008/583/EC’.

---
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, 

 Defendant, 

and 

CENTER FOR INDIVIDUAL 

FREEDOM, 

 Defendant, 

and 

HISPANIC LEADERSHIP FUND, 

 Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civ. A. No. 1:11-cv-00766 (ABJ) 

STATUS REPORT OF DEFENDANT 

CENTER FOR INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM 

With reference to the Court’s Order of September 20, 2012 (Dkt. No. 66), defendant 

Center for Individual Freedom (“CFIF”) informs the Court as follows: 

a. Defendant today has filed with the Federal Election Commission (“Commission”) 

a Petition for Rulemaking (copy attached) that seeks a narrow rulemaking to address the specific 

issues noted by the Court of Appeals during the appeal in this case. 

b. As reflected in the audio record of the Commission’s October 4, 2012, open 

meeting, available at http://www.fec.gov/audio/2012/2012100407.mp3, the Commission 

Case 1:11-cv-00766-ABJ Document 68 Filed 10/05/12 Page 1 of 2
2 

yesterday deadlocked 3 – 3 on an oral motion to initiate a broad “rulemaking to address the rules 

governing disclosure of electioneering communications by corporations and labor unions.” 

Defendant CFIF will report promptly when the Commission acts on its petition. 

October 5, 2012 Respectfully submitted, 

 /s/ Thomas W. Kirby 

Jan Witold Baran (D.C. Bar No. 233486) 

 E-mail: jbaran@wileyrein.com

Thomas W. Kirby (D.C. Bar No. 915231) 

 E-mail: tkirby@wileyrein.com

Caleb P. Burns (D.C. Bar No. 474923) 

 E-mail: cburns@wileyrein.com

Andrew G. Woodson (D.C. Bar No. 494062) 

 E-mail: awoodson@wileyrein.com

WILEY REIN LLP 

1776 K St., NW 

Washington, D.C. 20006 

Tel.: (202) 719-7000 

Fax: (202) 719-7049 

Counsel for Center for Individual Freedom 

 

Case 1:11-cv-00766-ABJ Document 68 Filed 10/05/12 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:11-cv-00766-ABJ Document 68-1 Filed 10/05/12 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:11-cv-00766-ABJ Document 68-1 Filed 10/05/12 Page 2 of 5
Case 1:11-cv-00766-ABJ Document 68-1 Filed 10/05/12 Page 3 of 5
Case 1:11-cv-00766-ABJ Document 68-1 Filed 10/05/12 Page 4 of 5
Case 1:11-cv-00766-ABJ Document 68-1 Filed 10/05/12 Page 5 of 5
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 56 (Friday, March 23, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 13822]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-1288]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[NV-912-07-1220PA-006F]


Cancellation of the BLM Nevada Resource Advisory Council 
Recreation Subcommittee Meeting

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Cancellation of the BLM Nevada Resource Advisory Council 
Recreation Subcommittee Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The March 29, 2007, meeting of the Bureau of Land Management's 
(BLM) Resource Advisory Councils Recreation Subcommittee has been 
cancelled.

DATE AND TIME: The Recreation Subcommittee was scheduled to meet 
Thursday, March 29, 2007, from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. at the Bureau of 
Land Management, Nevada State Office, located at 1340 Financial 
Boulevard in Reno, Nevada.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doran Sanchez, Chief, Office of 
Communications (775) 861-6586, or Barbara Keleher, Outdoor Recreation 
Planner (775) 861-6628, at the BLM Nevada State Office, 1340 Financial 
Blvd., Reno, Nevada.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting announced by a notice at 72 FR 
9580 Mar. 2, 2007 is cancelled. The public will be notified via Federal 
Register Notice and news release when the meeting is rescheduled.

    Dated: March 12, 2007.
Ron Wenker,
Bureau of Land Management, Nevada State Director.
[FR Doc. 07-1288 Filed 3-22-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-HC-M
# C_2008180EN.01000801.xml

| 17.7.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 180/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/8

---

Summary information communicated by Member States on State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1/2004 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production, processing and marketing of agricultural products

(2008/C 180/05)

Aid No: XA 116/06

Member State: The Netherlands

Region: Provincie Noord-Brabant

Title of aid scheme/name of company receiving an individual aid: Maatschap van Zeeland, De Kampen 12 te Gemert

Legal basis: Volgens AWB (art. 4:23 lid 3 sub d) en provinciale ASV (art. 33) aangemerkt als incidentele subsidie

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company: EUR 34 000 in 2006

Maximum aid intensity: 40 %

Date of implementation:

Duration of scheme or individual aid award: December 2006

Objective of aid: Implementation and demonstration of non-statutory environmental measures for the improvement of air quality

Articles used (from Articles 4 to 12) and eligible costs under the scheme or individual aid: Article 4(2)(b), (3)(d) and (4)(a)

Economic sector(s): Animal husbandry, in particular primary poultry farming

Name and address of the granting authority:

| Provincie Noord-Brabant |
| --- |
| Brabantlaan 1 |
| Postbus 90151 |
| 5200 MC 's-Hertogenbosch |
| Nederland |

Provincie Noord-Brabant

Brabantlaan 1

Postbus 90151

5200 MC 's-Hertogenbosch

Nederland

Website: http://wettenbank.sdu.nl/wettenbank.sdu.nl/demo/awb_main.html

http://www.brabant.nl/Beleid/Regels%20en%20kaders/Algemene%20subsidieverordening.aspx?docindexid={6E5EE4A7-1D3F-480A-900D-975DD48879C6}

Other information: —

---