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

December, 1879.]

#### Davis *v.*Webster.

*Albin,*for tbe plaintiff.

*Barnard,*for tbe defendant.

*595Stanley, J.

No question of law is raised in this case. The plaintiff: was entitled to recover, if there was a special contract, the contract price, and, if there was no contract, the fair value of his services. The existence of the contract and the value of the services were questions of fact. Upon one or the. other of these grounds the referee has found for the plaintiff, and no ground appears for disturbing the finding.

*Exception overruled.*

Allen, J., did not sit: the others concurred.
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: 5
Federal Reserve Bank of: Richmond

## Filings received during the week ending September 5, 2009

|Filer                        | Filing Type   | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                | End of Comment Period                             
|---------------------------- | ------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | --------------------------------------------------
|CAPGEN CAPITAL GROUP III LLC | * 3A1         | CapGen Capital Group III LLC, New York, New York, and CapGen Capital Group III LP, New York, New York, to become bank holding companies through the acquisition of 10.2% of the voting securities of Seacoast Banking Corporation of Florida, Stuart, Florida, and indirectly acquire Seacoast National Bank, Stuart, Florida. | Newspaper:Not availableFederal Register:10/02/2009
|Newspaper:                   | Not available
|Federal Register:            | 10/02/2009   

## 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
#### § 504.91 OMB control numbers assigned pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act.

This section displays the control numbers assigned to information collection requirements of the Commission in this part by the Office of Management and Budget pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, Public Law 96-511. The Commission intends that this section comply with the requirements of section 3507(f) of the Paperwork Reduction Act, which requires that agencies display a current control number assigned by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each agency information collection requirement:

| Section | Current OMB Control No. |
| --- | --- |
| 504.4 through 504.7 | 3072-0035 |
| 504.9 | 3072-0035. |
§ 38.05-4 Design and construction of nonpressure vessel type cargo tanks—TB/ALL. ( a ) The requirements in this section anticipate a cargo containment system consisting of a primary tank which is structurally self-supporting and, where required, a secondary barrier. Other vessel or cargo tank configurations, such as membrane type liners externally supported, will be considered upon submission of substantiating data, and based upon such additional tests as the Commandant may direct.
( b ) A secondary barrier is an arrangement or structure designed to contain the cargo temporarily if leakage develops in the primary container. A secondary barrier shall be provided where leakage from the primary container may cause lowering of the temperature of the ship's structure to an unsafe level. The secondary barrier shall be constructed of material suitable to contain the cargo at the service temperature.
( c ) The design of the cargo containment systems shall be such that under normal service conditions, or upon failure of the primary tank, the hull structure shall not be cooled down to a temperature which is unsafe for the materials involved. Structural members not suitable for the service temperatures of the cargo shall be protected by a secondary barrier consisting of suitable structural containment together with necessary associated insulation. Heat transmission studies and tests may be required to demonstrate that the arrangement is feasible and that the final material temperatures are acceptable.
( d ) The design and construction of the cargo tanks shall be at least equivalent to the standards established by the American Bureau of Shipping or other recognized classification society. For special tanks, or designs not contemplated by standards of the classification society, a detailed analysis of the entire tank, or designated parts thereof, shall be made and submitted to the Commandant for approval.
( e ) The cargo tank shall be designed for a head of cargo at least equal to the highest level the liquid cargo may attain plus the maximum venting pressure. In no case shall a head of cargo less than 4 feet above the cargo hatch or expansion trunk be used.
( f ) The design shall investigate the thermal stresses induced in the cargo tank during loading. Where necessary, devices for spray loading or other methods of precooling or cooling during loading shall be included in the design.
( g ) All weld intersections or crossings in joints of primary tank shells shall be radiographed for a distance of 10 thicknesses from the intersection. All other welding in the primary tank and in the secondary barrier shall be spot radiographed in accordance with the requirements of part 54 of subchapter F (Marine Engineering) of this chapter.
[CGFR 66-33, 31 FR 15269, Dec. 6, 1966, as amended by CGFR 68-82, 33 FR 18807, Dec. 18, 1968]
#### The State ex rel. Baum, Appellant, *v.*Industrial Commission of Ohio et al., Appellees.

[Cite as *State ex rel. Baum v. Indus. Comm.*(1998), 84 Ohio St.3d 219.]

(No. 97-1098

Submitted October 12, 1998

Decided December 30, 1998.)

*Brian & Brian*and *Richard F. Brian,*for appellant.

*Betty D. Montgomery,*Attorney General, and *Cordelia A. Glenn,*Assistant Attorney General, for appellee Industrial Commission.

*Black, McCuskey, Souers & Arbaugh*and *Mary E. Randall,*for appellee Republic Engineered Steels, Inc.

*220The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and the cause is returned to the Industrial Commission for further proceedings in compliance with *State ex rel. Noll v. Indus. Comm.*(1991), 57 Ohio St.3d 203, 567 N.E.2d 245.

Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.

Moyer, C.J., Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., dissent.

Lundberg Stratton, J.,

dissenting. I dissent and would affirm the court of appeals.

Moyer, C.J., and Cook, J., concur in the foregoing dissenting opinion.
MEMORANDUM 

DATE: July 29, 2015

TO: Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR–2013-0602

FROM: Lora Strine, EPA

SUBJECT: July 22, 2015 Phone Call Regarding Proposed Clean Power Plan for Existing 

Power Plants

SUMMARY

A phone call was held between EPA and Gabe Pacyniak, GCC on July 22, 2015 to discuss the 

proposed Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants. The Clean Power Plan for Existing Power 

Plants was proposed on June 2, 2014.

ATTENDEES

Georgetown Climate Center

Gabe Pacyniak

US EPA

Lora Strine

Jeremy Tarr
IIA

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1536

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 11 (legislative day, OCTOBER 10), 1995

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

AN ACT

To amend title 38, United States Code, to extend for two

years an expiring authority of the Secretary of Veterans

Affairs with respect to determination of locality salaries

for certain nurse anesthetist positions in the Department

of Veterans Affairs.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 1536 RFS

1 That section 7451(d)(3)(C)(iii) of title 38, United States

2 Code, is amended by striking out ‘‘April 1, 1995’’ and in3 serting in lieu thereof ‘‘December 31, 1997’’.

Passed the House of Representatives October 10,

1995.

Attest: ROBIN H. CARLE,

Clerk.
#### The State of Ohio, Appellee, *v.*Hoover, Appellant.

[Cite as *State v. Hoover*(1998), 84 Ohio St.3d 43.]

(Nos. 98-1432 and 98-1844

Submitted October 13, 1998

Decided December 2, 1998.)

*Ronald J. O’Brien,*Franklin County Prosecuting Attorney, and *Katherine J. Press,*Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

*Judith M. Stevenson,*Franklin County Public Defender, and *John W. Keeling,*Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed on the authority of *State v. Cook*(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 404, 700 N.E.2d 570.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg. Stratton, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

Interlink Electronics, Inc.

Camarillo, California

We hereby consent to incorporation by reference in
the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-112034) and Form S-8 (Nos. 033-93066, 333-39371, 333-53870, 333-107174, 333-39371, 333-117831 and 333-127763) of Interlink Electronics, Inc. of our report dated April 5, 2007 , relating to the
consolidated financial statements which appear in the Annual Report to Shareholders, which is incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We also consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated April 5, 2007
relating to the financial statement schedule, which appears in this Form 10-K.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ BDO SEIDMAN, LLP   
|Los Angeles, California
|April 5, 2007
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

DESIRAE ALLEN, 

Plaintiff, 

v. Case No. 15-12517 

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL HON. TERRENCE G. BERG 

SECURITY, HON. R. STEVEN WHALEN 

Defendant. 

 / 

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (DKT. 16) 

This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen’s 

October 21, 2015 Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 16), recommending that 

Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. 14) be granted, based on Plaintiff’s failure to 

commence this action within 60 days of the final decision of the Commissioner of 

Social Security denying her claim for benefits. 

The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. 

The law provides that either party may serve and file written objections “[w]ithin 

fourteen days after being served with a copy” of the report and recommendations. 

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The district court will make a “de novo determination of those 

portions of the report . . . to which objection is made.” Id. Where, as here, neither 

party objects to the report, the district court is not obligated to independently 

review the record. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-52 (1985). The Court will, 

4:15-cv-12517-TGB-RSW Doc # 17 Filed 11/17/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 81
2 

therefore, accept Magistrate Judge Whalen’s Report and Recommendation as this 

Court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law. 

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Whalen’s Report 

and Recommendation of October 21, 2015 (Dkt. 16) is ACCEPTED and 

ADOPTED. It is FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s motion to dismiss 

(Dkt. 14) is GRANTED and, consequently, that this matter is DISMISSED WITH 

PREJUDICE. 

SO ORDERED. 

Dated: November 17, 2015 s/Terrence G. Berg 

TERRENCE G. BERG 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Certificate of Service 

I hereby certify that this Order was electronically submitted on November 17, 

2015, using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification to all parties. 

 s/A. Chubb 

Case Manager 

4:15-cv-12517-TGB-RSW Doc # 17 Filed 11/17/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 82
Submitted on record and briefs September 1,

reversed and remanded with instructions September 27, 1995

#### COREY WEIDNER, *Appellant, v.*Carlton ZENON, Superintendent, Oregon State Correctional Institution, *Respondent.*

(94C11623; CA A84511)

902 P2d 138

David W. Knofler, Multnomah Defenders, Inc., filed the brief for appellant.

Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, and Liana Gioia Ramfjord, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Riggs, Presiding Judge, and Landau and Leeson, Judges.

PER CURIAM

Reversed and remanded for entry of judgment stating reasons for denying petition for writ of habeas corpus. ORS 34.370(3); *Gomez v. Maass,*120 Or App 577, 853 P2d 846 (1993); *Troxel v. Maass,*120 Or App 397, 853 P2d 294 (1993).
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You havereached the Federal Depository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC)Archive. This archive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC.Access to publications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of catalogingand locator services, including the Catalog of U.S. GovernmentPublications.  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the eventthat publications are no longer available from the original publishing agencysite. (Historical purposes)

**Title:**  The facts about�Business InformationCenters (BICs)

1998,1999,2000,2001

 
SuDoc:SBA 1.49/2:���������� ����������� 
�Item Number:0720-B-01 (online)
CGP system Number:000491380
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
ACCOMPANYING BALANCE SHEET OF MGI PHARMA, INC. AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1999, AND THE
RELATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                       5,568,341
<SECURITIES>                                13,641,456
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,036,953
<ALLOWANCES>                                   119,037
<INVENTORY>                                  1,041,948
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            23,502,008
<PP&E>                                         984,819
<DEPRECIATION>                                 782,134
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              24,922,034
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,451,361
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    21,470,673
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                24,922,034
<SALES>                                     13,528,969
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            18,028,490
<CGS>                                          821,441
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,078,917
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,461,046
<INCOME-TAX>                                   214,221
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,246,825
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,246,825
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .14


</TABLE>
#### § 5.29 Negligence.

*Negligence* is the commission of an act which a reasonable and prudent person of the same station, under the same circumstances, would not commit, or the failure to perform an act which a reasonable and prudent person of the same station, under the same circumstances, would not fail to perform.
#### Andrew Love v. The State.

*No. 143.*

*Decided, April 22.*

Carrying a Pistol—Deputy Postmaster.—Article 319, Penal Code, only exempts a civil officer when engaged in the discharge of his official duty from the inhibitions against carrying weapons; and a deputy postmaster whose duties are confined to the postoffice building violates the law when on his private business or pleasure he is found carrying a pistol on the public streets.

Appeal from the County Court of Robertson. Tried below before Hon. O. D. Cannon, County Judge.

This appeal is from a judgment of conviction under an indictment for unlawfully carrying a pistol, the punishment having been assessed by the court, without a jury, at a fine of $25.

Defendant was deputy postmaster for C. M. Norton, who was postmaster and justice of the peace at Calvert, and he testified, that Norton had advised him to carry a pistol, which he had always done since he had been deputy postmaster. On the occasion in question, which was Christmas Eve, he had discharged his pistol at a tamale stand on the public street in Calvert. His account of himself on that evening, as found in his testimony, is: “When I left the postoffice that evening, about 6 o’clock, I went to the drug store, thence to the tamale stand, thence to Mrs. Suman’s, thence back down town to the Grand Central Hotel, thence to the town of Hearne, a distance of about nine miles from Calvert. From thence I returned to Calvert. The train going north was late. I reached •Calvert about 5 in the morning. I had the pistol with me on my person all this time; nor did I have any official business at any of said places.”

*Cohron & Kinard,*for appellant.

*B. L. Henry,*Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.

SIMKINS, Judge.

Appellant was indicted for unlawfully carrying a pistol, and convicted and fined in the sum of $25, from which judgment he appeals. It was admitted that appellant, on Christmas Eve, in the city of Calvert, was carrying and discharged a pistol on the public street. The defense is, that he was deputy postmaster at Calvert, and as such it was his duty to receive the mails; that witness receives all mails at the postoffice, where they are delivered to him; that on the day in question he had been to various places in the town, and into the country, and had carried this pistol, though he had no postal duties to do at any of these places, but that he had been told he had a right as an officer to carry a pistol, by the justice of the peace. The statute of this State (Penal Code, article 319) declares, that the prohibition against carrying arms does not *86extend to a revenue or other civil officer engaged in the discharge of official duty. Evidently the duties of this deputy postmaster were confined entirely to the postoffice building. When, therefore, he went forth upon the public street upon his private business or pleasure, carrying his pistol, he was bound to take notice he was violating the statute, and can not plead the opinion of a justice of the peace as a defense. Lann’s case, 25 Texas Cr. App., 496. The judgment is affirmed.

*Affirmed.*

Judges all present and concurring.
#### § 502.601 Purpose and scope.

The purpose of this subpart is to implement the statutory provisions of section 19 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920 (46 U.S.C. 42101-42109), section 13 of the Shipping Act of 1984 as amended (46 U.S.C. 41107-41109), and sections 2(c) and 3(c) of Public Law 89-777 (46 U.S.C. 44104) by establishing rules and regulations governing the compromise, assessment, settlement and collection of civil penalties arising under certain designated provisions of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920, the Shipping Act of 1984, Public Law 89-777, and/or any order, rule, or regulation (except for procedural rules and regulations contained in this part) issued or made by the Commission in the exercise of its powers, duties and functions under those statutes.

[88 FR 16574, Mar. 20, 2023]
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 302 OF**

**THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, J. Bryan Baker, certify that:

 

(1)           I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of FirstCity Financial Corporation; and

 

(2)                                 Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.

 

 
| Date:   April 30, 2012 |                                              |
|-----------------------------|---------------------------------------------------|
|                        |                                              |
|                        | /s/   J. BRYAN BAKER                              |
|                        | J.   Bryan Baker                                  |
|                        | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
|                        | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)      |

 

----
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, Case No: 15-20382 

 Honorable Victoria A. Roberts 

v. 

 

PAUL NICOLETTI, 

 Defendant. 

_____________________________/ 

ORDER: (1) DEEMING MOOT THE GOVERNMENT’S 

MOTION TO DISMISS OR DEFER DEFENDANT’S 

MOTION TO VACATE [ECF No. 200]; AND (2) GRANTING 

THE GOVERNMENT’S MOTION TO REVISE THE BRIEFING 

SCHEDULE ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO VACATE [ECF No. 202] 

On February 1, 2021 – while his case was on direct appeal before the 

Sixth Circuit – Defendant Paul Nicoletti filed a motion to vacate under 28 

U.S.C. § 2255. The Court ordered the government to file a response by 

March 19, 2021. 

On March 12, 2021, the government filed a motion to dismiss or defer 

Nicoletti’s motion to vacate. On March 18, 2021, the Sixth Circuit issued an 

opinion affirming Nicoletti’s conviction. 

On March 19, 2021, the government filed a motion to revise the 

briefing schedule on Nicoletti’s motion to vacate. 

Case 2:15-cr-20382-VAR-MKM ECF No. 203, PageID.3393 Filed 03/19/21 Page 1 of 2
2 

Because the Sixth Circuit ruled on Nicoletti’s direct appeal, the 

government’s motion to dismiss or defer Nicoletti’s motion to vacate is 

MOOT. 

The Court GRANTS the government’s motion to revise the briefing 

schedule on Nicoletti’s motion to vacate. The government’s response is 

due May 18, 2021. Nicoletti’s reply is due June 1, 2021. 

IT IS ORDERED. 

 S/ Victoria A. Roberts 

 Victoria A. Roberts 

 United States District Judge 

Dated: March 19, 2021 

Case 2:15-cr-20382-VAR-MKM ECF No. 203, PageID.3394 Filed 03/19/21 Page 2 of 2