alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Ex Parte George *W.*Campbell.

*No. 2880.*

*Decided February 19.*

Habeas Corpus—Bail—Evidence.—In fixing the amount of bail in a given case the judge or magistrate, amongst other things, must be governed by the nature of the offense and the circumstances under which it was committed. In this proceeding for bail the State admitted the offense charged to be bailable, whereupon the relator proposed to adduce evidence as to the nature of the offense and the circumstances under which it was committed, which evidence was rejected by the judge below. *Held,*error.

• Habeas Corpus on appeal from an order in chambers issued by Hon. A. W. Moursund, judge of the Thirty-third Judicial District.

The opinion discloses the case.

*Finlay &*Finlay, and *Triplett & Lewis,*for relator.

*W. L. Davidson,*Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.

Willson, Judge.

Applicant being charged by indictment with murder, applied to and obtained from the district judge of the district in which the indictment is pending a writ of *habeas corpus.*Upon the hearing of the writ the State, by her attorney, admitted that applicant was entitled to bail. Applicant thereupon offered'evidence to show the nature of the offense and the circumstances under which it was committed. The judge refused to hear such evidence, and applicant excepted and reserved a bill of exception. After hearing evidence as to the pecuniary circumstances of the applicant, the judge fixed the amount of bail at $7500, and applicant has appealed to this court, claiming that the judge erred in refusing to hear evidence as to the nature and circumstances of the homicide, and that the amount of bail required is excessive.

We think the judge erred in refusing to hear the evidence offered by applicant. It was only after hearing such evidence, and evidence as to *377the pecuniary circumstances of applicant, that the proper amount of bail to require could be determined. It is a requirement of the law in such cases that such evidence should he heard. Code Crim. Proc., arts. 171, 174, 296. In the absence of such evidence on appeal, it, can not be determined by this court whether or not the bail required is excessive.

The judgment requiring bail in the sum of $7500 is reversed, and the cause is remanded, with instructions that, the judge hear evidence as to the nature and circumstances of the offense of which applicant stands charged, and fix the amount of bail in accordance with such evidence, considering the pecuniary circumstances of the applicant.

*Ordered accordingly.*

Hurt, J., absent.
#### § 31.10-40 Inspection during trial trip—T/ALL.

On the trial trip of each new or converted tankship, an inspector shall be present to observe from the standpoint of safety in the carriage of flammable and/or combustible liquids in bulk, the operation of boilers, engines, steering gear, and auxiliaries; and if not satisfied with the performance of such boilers and machinery, appliances, and apparatus for stowage, he shall make such requirements as in his judgment will overcome any deficiencies which may have come under his observation.
§ 5.107 Service of complaints. ( a ) When the investigating officer determines that an S&R proceeding is appropriate, he or she shall prepare and serve a complaint in accordance with 33 CFR part 20.
( b ) When the investigating officer serves the complaint, he or she shall also advise the respondent— ( 1 ) Of the nature of S&R proceedings and their possible results;
( 2 ) Of the right to be represented at the hearing by another person, who may, but need not, be a lawyer;
( 3 ) Of the right to obtain witnesses, records, and other evidence by subpoena; and
( 4 ) That failure or refusal to answer the complaint or to appear at the time, date, and place specified for the hearing may result in a finding of default, which will constitute an admission of the facts alleged in the complaint and the waiver of his or her right to a hearing.
[USCG-1998-3472, 64 FR 28075, May 24, 1999]
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 8
Federal Reserve Bank of: St. Louis

## Filings received during the week ending June 7, 2008

|Filer                         | Filing Type | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                 | End of Comment Period                          
|----------------------------- | ----------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -----------------------------------------------
|CLARK COUNTY BANCSHARES, INC. | CIC         | Notice by David F. Alderton, Jr., Gorin, Missouri, and Brian W. Alderton, Kahoka, Missouri, to individually and collectively gain control of Clark County Bancshares, Inc., Wyaconda, Missouri. | Newspaper:06/16/2008Federal Register:06/24/2008
|Newspaper:                    | 06/16/2008 
|Federal Register:             | 06/24/2008 
|MEMPHIS BANCSHARES, INC.      | CIC         | Notice by Carol S. Alderton, Kahoka, Missouri, to gain control of Memphis Bancshares, Inc., Memphis, Missouri.                                                                                  | Newspaper:06/18/2008Federal Register:06/24/2008
|Newspaper:                    | 06/18/2008 
|Federal Register:             | 06/24/2008 

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

* Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 11
Federal Reserve Bank of: Dallas

## Filings received during the week ending May 26, 2007

|Filer                             | Filing Type   | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                          | End of Comment Period                             
|--------------------------------- | ------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------
|PROVIDENCE BANCSHARES CORPORATION | * 3A1         | Providence Bancshares Corporation, Southlake, Texas, to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of Providence Bank of Texas, Southlake, Texas (in organization).                          | Newspaper:06/22/2007Federal Register:Not available
|Newspaper:                        | 06/22/2007   
|Federal Register:                 | Not available
|RICE BANCSHARES, INC.             | * 3A1         | Rice Bancshares, Inc., Ennis, Texas, to become a bank holding company through the acquisition of First State Bank, Rice, Texas.                                                                          | Newspaper:06/14/2007Federal Register:06/15/2007   
|Newspaper:                        | 06/14/2007   
|Federal Register:                 | 06/15/2007   
|TRUSTTEXAS MUTUAL HOLDING COMPANY | * 3A1         | TrustTexas Mutual Holding Company, Cuero, Texas, and TrustTexas Financial Group, Inc., Cureo, Texas, to become bank holding companies by acquiring 100 percent of TrustTexas Bank, S.S.B., Cuero, Texas. | Newspaper:Not availableFederal Register:06/26/2007
|Newspaper:                        | Not available
|Federal Register:                 | 06/26/2007   

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for Third Quarter of 2007 (July 1, 2007 - September 30, 2007)

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
#### The State of Ohio, Appellant, *v.*Booher, Appellee.

[Cite as *State v. Booher*(1999), 84 Ohio St.3d 329.]

(No. 98-1960

Submitted November 10, 1998

Decided January 20, 1999.)

*Russell V. Leffler,*Huron County Prosecuting Attorney, for appellant.

*330The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed on the authority of *State v. Cook*(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 404, 700 N.E.2d 570. The trial court’s finding that defendant is a sexual predator is reinstated.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.

Resnick, J., not participating.
GAO-01-141R Naval Sea Cadet Corps

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, DC 20548

October 27, 2000

The Honorable Henry J. Hyde

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary

House of Representatives

Subject: Federally Chartered Corporation: Review of the Financial Statement Audit

Report for the Naval Sea Cadet Corps for 1998 and 1997

Dear Mr. Chairman:

As requested, we reviewed the audit report covering the financial statements of the

Naval Sea Cadet Corps, a federally chartered corporation, for the years ended

December 31, 1998 and 1997. The corporation’s purpose, in cooperation with the

Department of the Navy, is to encourage and aid American young people to develop

an interest and skill in basic seamanship and its naval adaptations, and to train them

in seagoing skills.

Federally chartered corporations are required under 36 U.S.C. 10101 to

• present the corporation’s assets and liabilities and reasonable detail on the

corporation’s income and expenses in annual financial statements,

• obtain an annual financial audit by an independent public accountant, and

• submit the auditors’ report and the corporation’s financial statements to the

Congress.

The objective of our review was to determine whether the audit report complied with

the financial reporting requirements of the law. In carrying out our work, we

reviewed the corporation’s financial statements and the accompanying notes,

performed certain analytical procedures related to information presented in the

financial statements, reviewed the auditors’ report, and made inquiries to corporation

officials or the auditor as we deemed necessary. We did not review the auditors’

working papers. Our review disclosed no reportable instances of noncompliance.
Page 2 GAO-01-141R Naval Sea Cadet Corps

The audit report included the auditors’ opinion that the financial statements of the

corporation were presented fairly in accordance with generally accepted accounting

principles. We are returning the audit report you sent with your letter.

Sincerely yours,

Jeffrey C. Steinhoff

Managing Director

Financial Management and Assurance

w/o Enclosure

(912012)
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

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 General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis Panel; IAR Review of Loan Repayment Applications.                    

*Date:*                         May 24, 2007.                    

*Time:*                         9 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, 45 Center Drive, Room 3AN-18, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Margaret Weidman, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Office of Scientific Review, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National Institutes of Health, 45 Center Drive, Room 3AN18B, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-3663.                    

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.375, Minority Biomedical Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Research; 93.862, Genetics and Developmental Biology Research; 93.88, Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, Special Minority Initiatives, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: April 25, 2007.

Jennifer Spaeth, 

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 07-2147  Filed 5-1-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
#### Cleveland Bar Association *v.*Droe.

[Cite as *Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Droe*(1998), 84 Ohio St.3d 143.]

(No. 98-1231

Submitted August 19, 1998

Decided December 2, 1998.)

*145
      *Brian P. Downey*and *Timothy J. Fitzgerald,*for relator.

*William G. Droe, pro se.*

*Per Curiam.*

After review, we concur with the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. Earlier in *Droe I,*we noted that “if an attorney expects to remain on the rolls of those permitted to practice law in this state, he must demonstrate respect for his clients.” *Droe I,*77 Ohio St.3d at 90, 671 N.E.2d at 231. As the stipulations show, respondent demonstrated repeated misconduct and neglect as well as failure to respect his clients.

Respondent’s earlier actions occurred in 1984 and 1990 and resulted in *Droe I.*His misconduct here began in 1990 and extended through 1996. We are satisfied that respondent’s continued misconduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, and misrepresentation, as well as his neglect of his clients’ legal matters, warrants an indefinite suspension from the practice of law. See *Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Rea*(1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 71, 676 N.E.2d 514; *Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Kaigler*(1991), *14657 Ohio St.3d 197, 566 N.E.2d 673. Accordingly, respondent is hereby indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs taxed to respondent.

*Judgment accordingly.*

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.

Cook, J., dissents.

Cook, J.,

dissenting. Respondent’s neglect and deceit has spanned more than ten years. Though this court sanctioned him before for this same sort of misconduct, respondent was undeterred! I therefore believe that the sanction imposed by the majority (allowing respondent to apply to be readmitted after two years) fails to adequately protect the public. Respondent has demonstrated that he is unworthy of clients’ trust and thus should be permanently disbarred.
#### David Craig *v.*Town of Andes.

Motion to be allowed to intervene, etc., denied, with ten dollars costs.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 106 (Monday, June 4, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 30809]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-2753]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of a meeting of 
the Board of Scientific Counselors for Basic Sciences National Cancer 
Institute. The meeting will be closed to the public as indicated below 
in accordance with the provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(6), 
Title 5 U.S.C., as amended for the review, discussion, and evaluation 
of individual intramural programs and projects conducted by the 
National Cancer Institute, including consideration of personnel 
qualifications and performance, and the competence of individual 
investigators, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly 
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Board of Scientific Counselors for Basic 
Sciences National Cancer Institute.
    Date: July 9, 2007.
    Time: 9 a.m. to 3 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate personal qualifications and 
performance, and competence of individual investigators.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, 
9000 Rockville Pike, Building 31, Conference Room 6, Bethesda, MD 
20892.
    Contact Person: Florence E. Farber, PhD, Executive Secretary, 
Office of the Director, National Cancer Institute, National 
Institutes of Health, 6116 Executive Boulevard, Room 2115, Bethesda, 
MD 20892, 301-496-7628, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cea8a8f8be8ea0a7a6e0a9a1b8"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e18787d791a18f8889cf868e97">[email protected]</span></a>.

    In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent 
procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, 
including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles will be inspected 
before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one 
form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, 
driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their 
visit.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, 
Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 
93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer 
Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer 
Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer 
Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: May 25, 2007.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-2753 Filed 6-1-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
## National Transportation Safety Board \

) J 

# .-

Office of the Chairman

Federal Aviation Administration Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114 1601 LindAvenue, SW Renton, Washington 98055-4056 Attention: Rules DocketNo. 2002-NM-12-AD Dear SirorMadam: Washington. D.C. 20594 

## JUN 20 2006

The National Transportation Safety Board has reviewed your supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), titled "Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-300, -400, -500, -600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900, and 747-400 Series Airplanes; and Model 757, 767, and 777 Airplanes," which was published in 71 Federal Register 30331-30335 on May 26, 2006. The notice revises anearlier proposed airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to certain Boeing Model 737-300, -400, -500, -600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900, and 747-400 series airplanes; and Model 757, 767, and 777 airplanes. The original NPRM would have required modifying the static inverter by relocating resistor R170 of the static inverter bridge assembly. The new proposed action revises the original NPRM by adding a requirement to replace resistor R170 with anew resistor and torelocate the new resistor. The proposed AD is intended to prevent a standby static inverter fromoverheating, which could result insmoke inthe flight deck and cabin andlossoftheelectrical standby power system. The original NPRM was prompted by reports that static inverters had overheated on several Boeing airplanes. Since the issuance ofthc original NPRM, the National Transportation Safety Board has investigated an event involving a foreign-operated Boeing 737-700 next-generation aircraft in which heavy smoke came out of the electronics compartment. The investigation revealed that simply relocating the carbon composition-style resistor (R170),which was installed in production until late 1999, did not prevent the overheat condition. Further evaluation of the carbon resistor has shown a failure mode that can still cause the resistor to ignite capacitors whether itisinitsoriginal location orrelocated. Areview ofincidents from 1998 through 2004 involving fire and smoke oncommercial transport-category airplanes containing the subject static inverters revealed 25 cases in which static inverters overheated, causing electrical burning odor and/or smoke inthe passenger cabin and resulting inflights being diverted. Passengers hadtobeevacuated fromthe aircraft intwo of these events; one ofthese evacuations caused injuries totwo passengers.

78052

The Safety Board is concerned that because ofthe static inverter's location (typically in the electronics compartment below the cabin floor), flight crews may beunable to determine the source ofany electrical burning odor and/or smoke in the event a static inverter overheats and would be unable to quickly gain access to extinguish it. Therefore, the Board fully supports the action proposed inthe supplemental NPRM and appreciates the opportunity to comment onthis proposed rule. Sincerely,

Acting Chairman