alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The State of Ohio, Appellee, *v.*Spivey, Appellant.

[Cite as *State v. Spivey*(1998), 84 Ohio St.3d 24.]

(No. 98-620

Submitted September 15, 1998

Decided November 25, 1998.)

*25
      *Paul J. Gains,*Mahoning County Prosecuting Attorney, and *Janice T. O’Hallo-ran,*Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

*Patricia A. Milhoff,*for appellant.

*Per Curiam.*

Spivey presents two propositions of law for our review. First, Spivey argues that his appellate attorneys were ineffective in the court of appeals because they failed to raise the ineffective assistance of trial counsel in his direct appeal to that court. Second, Spivey argues that the trial court erred in failing to specifically find that he was competent before it accepted his no contest plea and that his appellate attorneys were ineffective for failing to raise this issue on appeal.

In *State v. Reed*(1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 534, 535, 660 N.E.2d 456, 458, we held that the two-prong analysis found in *Strickland v. Washington*(1984), 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674, is the appropriate standard to assess a defense request for reopening under App.R. 26(B)(5). Spivey must prove that his counsel were deficient for failing to raise the issues he now presents, as well as showing that had he presented those claims on appeal, there was a “reasonable probability” that he would have been successful. Thus Spivey bears the burden of establishing that there was a “genuine issue” as to whether he has a “colorable claim” of ineffective assistance of counsel on appeal. We find he has failed to do so.

Spivey raised both of these issues before this court in his direct appeal, and we addressed these issues in our decision, and found they lacked merit. See *Spivey,*81 Ohio St.3d at 417-419, 409-411, 692 N.E.2d at 162-163, 157-158. Therefore, these issues cannot now provide a basis for finding that appellate counsel was ineffective for not raising them in the court of appeals. Spivey has failed to show that had the issues been presented in the court of appeals, there was a reasonable probability that he would have been successful.

For these reasons, we affirm the court of appeals’ denial of Spivey’s application for reopening.

*Judgment affirmed.*

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

Douglas, J., concurs in judgment only.
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 October 10, 2009

|Filer                            | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                          | End of Comment Period                              
|-------------------------------- | -------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------
|COMMUNITY FIRST BANCSHARES, INC. | 4c8            | White River Bancshares Company, Fayetteville, Arkansas, to engage in lending activities. | Newspaper:Not applicableFederal Register:10/27/2009
|Newspaper:                       | Not applicable
|Federal Register:                | 10/27/2009    
|COMMUNITY FIRST BANCSHARES, INC. | 4c8            | Community First Bancshares, Inc., Harrison, Arkansas, to engage in lending activities.   | Newspaper:Not applicableFederal Register:10/27/2009
|Newspaper:                       | Not applicable
|Federal Register:                | 10/27/2009    

## 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
#### Abraham Hewlett and others, *Appellants, v.*William Elmer, *Respondent.*

Decree affirmed, costs, to respondent out of the funds. Opinion by

Davis, P. J.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000701288
<NAME> ALATENN RESOURCES, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           2,555
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,166
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      1,710
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                14,752
<PP&E>                                          33,615
<DEPRECIATION>                                  15,476
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  43,465
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,989
<BONDS>                                          2,270
<COMMON>                                           228
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      29,069
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    43,465
<SALES>                                         18,283
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                18,283
<CGS>                                           14,146
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   14,146
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,245
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  37
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,967
<INCOME-TAX>                                       713
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,254
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,254
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .59
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .59
        

</TABLE>
#### Johnson v. Johnson.

(Decided May 2, 1919.)

Appeal from Pike Circuit Court.

Appeal and Error — Finding of Chancellor. — Evidence upon the issue whether contract sued on was contract of the alleged maker, examined and held to sustain decision of the chancellor dismissing the petition.

CLINE & STEELE for appellant.

WILLIS STATON for appellee.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Clarke

Affirming.

The appellant brought this action against Victoria M. Johnson, the only heir of Callie Williamson, deceased, seeking to enforce specific performance of a contract in writing alleged to have been executed and delivered to him by Callie Williamson, for the sale and conveyance of an interest in real estate.

The defenses interposed are: (1) That Callie Williamson did not own any interest in the tract of land de*132scribed in the petition; (2) that the written contract did-not sufficiently describe the land to take it out of the Statute of Frauds; (3) that Callie Williamson at the, time the contract was alleged to have been executed, was a married woman, and as "her husband did not’join with her, the contract was void, and (4) that Oallie Williamson did not execute the contract sued on. Upon trial the chancellor dismissed the petition and plaintiff appeals.

It will not be necessary for us to decide or consider any of these issues raised by the answer, except the last one, since we are of the opinion the judgment must be affirmed upon the evidence as to whether or not the instrument sued upon was the act of Callie Williamson.

Only the appellant testified in his behalf on this issue, and while his evidenbe upon this question, a transaction between himself and a deceased person, was clearly incompetent, and the defendant at the time he gave his deposition objected thereto and had an exception noted, still the trial court did not act upon the question of its competency, and the objection must upon appeal be considered as having been waived. Hancock v. Chapman, 170 Ky. 99, 185 S. W. 813; Skidmore v. Harris, 157 Ky. 756, 164 S. W. 98; Keeton, &c., v. Mahan, &c., 177 Ky. 85, 197 S. W. 519; Goodan v. Goodan, decided April 25th, 1919. So considering this evidence for appellant, appellee introduced in contradiction thereof, the testimony of two sisters of Callie Williamson, each of whom testified that neither the written contract sued on nor the signature of Callie Williamson thereto was in her handwriting, and that she had told them before her death and after the contract was alleged by appellant to have been executed by her, that she had never executed any such contract. Although appellant testified that the contract was executed by the decedent in the presence of two other persons, he did not introduce either of these parties as witnesses. Upon the evidence upon this issue alone, the chancellor was warranted in concluding that the contract sued on was not the act of Callie Williamson.

Wherefore, the judgment must be and is affirmed.
§ 72.15-15 Ventilation for closed spaces. ( a ) All enclosed spaces within the vessel shall be properly vented or ventilated. Means shall be provided to close off all vents and ventilators.
( b ) Means shall be provided for stopping all fans in ventilation systems serving machinery and cargo spaces and for closing all doorways, ventilators and annular spaces around funnels and other openings to such spaces, from outside these spaces, in case of fire.
( c ) The ventilation of spaces which are “specially suitable for vehicles” shall be in accordance with the provisions of this paragraph. In addition, if vehicles are operated inside of enclosed spaces, the ventilation shall be in accordance with subpart 78.83 of this subchapter. ( 1 ) Areas below the weather deck shall be provided with continuous pressure-positive ventilation at each level on which vehicles are transported.
( 2 ) The quantity of ventilating air shall be not less than 1 cubic foot per minute per square foot of deck area.
( 3 ) The ventilation shall be such as to prevent air stratification as well as to prevent accumulation of air pockets.
( 4 ) An alarm system shall be provided which will indicate the loss of required ventilation. The alarm location shall be in a normally manned space acceptable to the Commandant.
[CGFR 66-50, 30 FR 16903, Dec. 30, 1965, as amended by CGFR 66-33, 31 FR 15281, Dec. 6, 1966]
Exhibit 32.1



Section 1350 Certifications

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of
the undersigned officers of Aviall, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:



The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 (the Form 10-Q) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for,
the periods presented in the Form 10-Q.



|                     |  |  |  |                                                  
|-------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------------------
|                     |  | 
|Date: April 28, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/    PAUL E. FULCHINO                          
|                     |  |  |  | Paul E. Fulchino                                 
|                     |  |  |  | Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer  
|                     |  | 
|Date: April 28, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/    COLIN M. COHEN                            
|                     |  |  |  | Colin M. Cohen                                   
|                     |  |  |  | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer



The foregoing
certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-Q pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)
and, accordingly, is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date
hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         926,680
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   50,138
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               977,489
<PP&E>                                       3,570,371
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,876,693
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,735,142
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          220,879
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,514,263
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,735,142
<SALES>                                        865,525
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               884,505
<CGS>                                          421,702
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  421,702
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               274,112
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                188,691
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            188,691
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   188,691
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    18.68
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    18.68
        


</TABLE>
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: 3
Federal Reserve Bank of: Philadelphia

## Filings received during the week ending October 3, 2009

|Filer | Filing Type | Filing Proposal | End of Comment Period
|----- | ----------- | --------------- | ---------------------
|NONE 

## 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from the
Company's  financial  statements  for the year  ended  December  31,  1996,  and
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         91
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               93
<PP&E>                                         235
<DEPRECIATION>                                 65
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 904
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          693
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (1,392)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   904
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               917
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             134
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,051)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,051)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,051)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (.35)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.35)



</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF WORLD ACCESS, INC. FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER
30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.

</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         324,600
<SECURITIES>                                    82,249
<RECEIVABLES>                                  273,270
<ALLOWANCES>                                    46,859
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               716,768
<PP&E>                                         180,701
<DEPRECIATION>                                  50,083
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,137,955
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          488,314
<BONDS>                                        401,450
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          6
<COMMON>                                           732
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,237,963
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,137,955
<SALES>                                        826,660
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               826,660
<CGS>                                          725,060
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  725,060
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               230,750
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              42,471
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (150,096)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (19,265)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (130,831)
<DISCONTINUED>                                  17,376
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (113,455)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (1.95)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.95)


</TABLE>
#### § 69.173 Register Tonnage assignments for vessels with only one deck.

A vessel without a second deck is assigned only one gross and one net register tonnage. In calculating the gross register tonnage, only the exemptions in § 69.169 (a) through (d) are allowed. Markings under § 69.177 are not permitted on these vessels.

[CGD 87-015b, 54 FR 37657, Sept. 12, 1989, as amended by USCG-2011-0522, 81 FR 18731, Mar. 31, 2016]
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: 1
Federal Reserve Bank of: Boston

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

|Filer | Filing Type | Filing Proposal | End of Comment Period
|----- | ----------- | --------------- | ---------------------
|NONE 

## 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