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

June, 1900.

#### Brooks *& a. v.*Goodwin.

A bill in equity sotting forth an agreement between heirs-at-law to join in the contest of a will, share the expenses incident thereto, and divide the proceeds thereof, and alleging the receipt by the defendant of an unknown amount through compromiso, states facts sufficient to entitle the plaintiff to a discovery and an accounting.

Bilk in Equity, for discovery and accounting. The defendant’s demurrer to the bill was overruled, subject to exception.

*Samuel W. Emery*and *Simon P. Emery,*for the plaintiffs.

*Burnham, Brown & Warren,*for the defendant.

Wallace, J.

The allegations of the bill sliow that the plaintiffs and defendant, as heirs, each had an interest in the estate of Benjamin Kennard, unless that interest was taken away by an alleged will which they claimed was invalid, both on account of undue influence and by reason of the insanity of the testator; that they agreed to join in contesting the validity of the will, sharing the labor and expenses necessarily incident thereto, and, in case of a compromise, each to share equally the amount so received. It also appears from the hill that in pursuance of this agreement a contest was inaugurated and carried on against the will by the parties; that the defendant, by compromising this suit, received a considerable sum of money, which she refuses to share with the plaintiffs; and that the amount which slic lias received and the amount which she has expended in the legal proceedings are not knowm. to the plaintiffs.

I’lie parties could properly make the alleged agreement to protect their interests as heirs in the estate of Benjamin Kennard. Under the agreement, the plaintiffs are each entitled to one quarter part of the amount received by the defendant. They are also entitled to the aid of equity in discovering the amount received by the defendant, and in adjusting and settling the amounts properly paid by each of the parties in prosecuting the lawsuit. The bill can he- maintained. Equity will take jurisdiction to adjust the mutual accounts arising out of the contract of the parties, and to grant the discovery required in aid of the account. *Walker*v. *Cheever,*35 N. H. 339, 347; *Berry*v. *Whidden,*62 N. H. 473, 476.

*Exception overruled.*

Young, J., did not- sit: the others concurred.
Editorial Note on Part 386
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 386 appear at 65 FR 7755, Feb. 16, 2000, and 88 FR 80182, Nov. 17, 2023.

§ 386.53 Subpoenas, witness fees. ( a ) Applications for the issuance of subpoenas must be submitted to the Agency Decisionmaker, or in cases that have been called for a hearing, to the administrative law judge. The application must show the general relevance and reasonable scope of the evidence sought. Any person served with a subpoena may, within 7 days after service, file a motion to quash or modify. The motion must be filed with the official who approved the subpoena. The filing of a motion shall stay the effect of the subpoena until a decision is reached.
( b ) Witnesses shall be entitled to the same fees and mileage as are paid witnesses in the courts of the United States. The fees shall be paid by the party at whose instance the witness is subpoenaed or appears.
( c ) Paragraph (a) of this section shall not apply to the Administrator or employees of the FMCSA or to the production of documents in their custody. Applications for the attendance of such persons or the production of such documents at a hearing shall be made to the Agency Decisionmaker or administrative law judge, if one is appointed, and shall set forth the need for such evidence and its relevancy.
PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: 8/31/15 

Received: August 26, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8kry-lk15

Comments Due: September 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; 

Notice of proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0204

Definition of the Term Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule- Retirement Investment Advice

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-4963

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-08831

Submitter Information

Name: Anonymous Anonymous

General Comment

As a constituent and a consumer, I write to express my opposition to the Department of Labor's 

proposed fiduciary regulation

My family is working hard to save for retirement. Along the way, I need to be able to access 

advice and information about my 401(k), IRA, and how to guarantee my savings will last. Yet 

the DOL proposal makes it harder and more costly for me to get guidance about my retirement 

options.

In addition, the regulations unfairly make it difficult for small businesses to offer retirement 

plans to their employees. As the fastest growing segment of our economy, these businesses 

should be encouraged to provide retirement savings plans for their workers, not discouraged by 

unnecessary barriers.

At a time when so many Americans are worried about their financial futures, government should 

be looking for ways to make it easier for people to build a financial safety net, not make it harder 

and more expensive for them to plan ahead and save. 

We do not need a major new regulation from Washington that hurts Americans trying to save for 
retirement and small businesses trying to set up plans for their workers.

I urge you to work with regulators to help protect the people of our state from the harmful effects 

of this rule.
**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 Annual Report of Artesyn Technologies,Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the periodending December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Joseph M. O’Donnell, Chairman and Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, 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/ Joseph M.O’Donnell Joseph M. O’DonnellChairman and Chief Executive OfficerMarch 16, 2005A signed original of this written statement required bySection 906 has been provided to the Company and will beretained by the Company and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission, or its staff, upon request.
Editorial Note on Part 40
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 40 appear at 73 FR 33329, June 12, 2008.

§ 40.89 What are the adulterant cutoff concentrations for initial and confirmation urine tests? ( a ) As a laboratory, you must use the cutoff concentrations for the initial and confirmation adulterant testing as required by the HHS Mandatory Guidelines and you must use two separate aliquots—one for the initial test and another for the confirmation test.
( b ) As a laboratory, you must report results at or above the cutoffs (or for pH, at or above or below the values, as appropriate) as adulterated and provide the numerical value that supports the adulterated result.
[73 FR 35970, June 25, 2008. Redesignated at 88 FR 27643, May 2, 2023]
§ 557.3 General. Any interested person may file with the Administrator a petition requesting him to hold a hearing on— ( a ) Whether a manufacturer has reasonably met his obligation to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a safety-related defect in any motor vehicle or item of replacement equipment manufactured by him;
( b ) Whether a manufacturer has reasonably met his obligation to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a failure to comply with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard in any motor vehicle or item of replacement equipment manufactured by him;
( c ) Whether the manufacturer has reasonably met his obligation to remedy a safety-related defect in any motor vehicle or item of replacement equipment manufactured by him; or
( d ) Whether the manufacturer has reasonably met his obligation to remedy a failure to comply with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard in any motor vehicle or item of replacement equipment manufactured by him.
INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 04-0692 Focus Ready Draft 7/19/04

ENGINEER: Prothero \ KPR PV (kg/yr):

SUBMITTER:

USE:

OTHER USES:

MSDS: Label:

Gen Eqpt: Respirator: Health Effects: TLV/PEL:

CRSS (07/06/2004): Chemical Name:
S-H20:

VP: MW: %<500 %<1000 Physical State and Misc CRSS Info:

Consumer Use: No

SAT (concerns) (07/07/2004): Related Cases and Related Cases and Misc SAT Info:

Migration to groundwater: slow to moderate PBT rating: P2B1T1 - Health: 1-2 Dermal, Inhalation Eco: 2 Water (All releases to water with a CC = 40 ppb)

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: 1

NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS: Generated by the 05/27/2004 version of ChemSTEER

POLLUTION PREVENTION CONSIDERATIONS: None listed

EXPOSURE-BASED REVIEW: NoINITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT CBI: No PMN: 04-0692

USE:

Number of Sites/ Location:

Days/yr: Basis:

Process Description:

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES ESTIMATE SUMMARY IRER Note: The daily releases listed for any source below may coincide with daily releases from the other sources to the same medium.

Water or Incineration or Landfill High End: 7.2E+0 kg/site-day over 186 days/yr from 1 site or 1. 3E+3 kg/yr

to: from: basis:

Incineration Conservative: 8.9E+2 kg/yr

to: from:

RELEASE TOTAL 2.2E+3 kg/yr - all sites

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ESTIMATE SUMMARY Tot. # of workers: Days/yr:

Inhalation:

Dermal:

Exposure to Liquid at 100.00% concentration High End: 1.8E+3 mg/day over 186 days/yr Number of workers (all sites) with dermal exposure: 10 Basis: Unloading Liquid Raw Material from Containers; EPA/OPPT 2-Hand Dermal Contact with Liquids Model
§ 382.121 Employee admission of alcohol and controlled substances use. ( a ) Employees who admit to alcohol misuse or controlled substances use are not subject to the referral, evaluation and treatment requirements of this part and part 40 of this title, provided that: ( 1 ) The admission is in accordance with a written employer-established voluntary self-identification program or policy that meets the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section;
( 2 ) The driver does not self-identify in order to avoid testing under the requirements of this part;
( 3 ) The driver makes the admission of alcohol misuse or controlled substances use prior to performing a safety sensitive function (i.e., prior to reporting for duty); and
( 4 ) The driver does not perform a safety sensitive function until the employer is satisfied that the employee has been evaluated and has successfully completed education or treatment requirements in accordance with the self-identification program guidelines.
( b ) A qualified voluntary self-identification program or policy must contain the following elements: ( 1 ) It must prohibit the employer from taking adverse action against an employee making a voluntary admission of alcohol misuse or controlled substances use within the parameters of the program or policy and paragraph (a) of this section;
( 2 ) It must allow the employee sufficient opportunity to seek evaluation, education or treatment to establish control over the employee's drug or alcohol problem;
( 3 ) It must permit the employee to return to safety sensitive duties only upon successful completion of an educational or treatment program, as determined by a drug and alcohol abuse evaluation expert, i.e., employee assistance professional, substance abuse professional, or qualified drug and alcohol counselor;
( 4 ) It must ensure that: ( i ) Prior to the employee participating in a safety sensitive function, the employee shall undergo a non-DOT return to duty test with a result indicating an alcohol concentration of less than 0.02; and/or
( ii ) Prior to the employee participating in a safety sensitive function, the employee shall undergo a non-DOT return to duty controlled substance test with a verified negative test result for controlled substances use; and
( 5 ) It may incorporate employee monitoring and include non-DOT follow-up testing.
[66 FR 43103, Aug. 17, 2001, as amended at 86 FR 35639, July 7, 2021]
Nox 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Engine Run 0 Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Run 4 Run 5 Run 6 Run 7 Run 8 Run 9 Run 10

Engine 1 8.714 9.233 10.472

Engine 2 8.294 9.033 10.228

Engine 3 7.404 8.286 8.362

Engine 4 9.576 10.532 10.554

Engine 5 9.235 9.921 11.713 Confidence 68 95 99.7

Engine 6 8.578 9.96 11.106 Average Std Dev 1 2 3

Engine 7 8.189 8.184 8.417 8.50 0.690 9.19 9.88 10.57

Engine 8 8.009 9.376 10.518 9.74 1.083 10.83 11.91 21.19

Average 8.50 8.50 8.50 8.50 9.74 9.74 9.74 9.74 9.74 9.74 9.74

1 Std Dev 9.19 9.19 9.19 9.19 10.83 10.83 10.83 10.83 10.83 10.83 10.83

2 Std Dev 9.88 9.88 9.88 9.88 11.91 11.91 11.91 11.91 11.91 11.91 11.91

BACT 12.3 12.3 12.3 12.3 12.3 12.3 12.3 12.3 12.3 12.3 12.3

Permit 1 8.6 8.60 8.60 8.60 8.60 8.60 8.60 8.60 8.60 8.60 8.60

Ave+15% 9.77 9.77 9.77 9.77 11.20 11.20 11.20 11.20 11.20 11.20 11.20

8.50

9.74

9.19

10.83

9.88

11.91

12.3 12.3

8.6

9.77

11.20

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

g/kW-hr

NOx Scatter Plot - Stack Testing Results

Engine 1

Engine 2

Engine 3

Engine 4

Engine 5

Engine 6

Engine 7

Engine 8

Average

1 Std Dev

2 Std Dev

BACT

Permit 1

Ave+15%

Low (30%) Med (45%) High (60%)
AUTHORIZATIONPLAN
I. Legislative Needs A. Item - The following addition and modification to Washington's HazardousWasteDisposal Act Chapter 70.107 RCW

### will be developed and pursued: 1. Modification of rCW 70.105.090

- Violations to be consistent with the requirements of theResource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (Public Law94-580). B. Possible Problems - The department does not foresee any problems in amending the existing law under Item 1, however, there is always thepossibility that the legislaturewould not concur with the proposed legislation. C. Schedule

- We are currently drafting changes to RCW 70.105 and will submit them at the start of the 1983 session. II. Regulatory Needs A. Items

- The following additions and modifications to theDangerous WasteRegulations Chapter 173-303 WACwill be developed and pursued: 1. The state regulations will need to be amended to reflect final land disposal standards promulgated by EPA. 2. ·Modifications to the regulation may need to be made from time to time as the Federal programrequirements change.**~.** Possible Problems

- The department does not foresee any major obstacles inmodifying or amending theDangerousWasteRegulation as long as the changes are consistent with state law Chapter 70.105 RCW, the HazardousWasteDisposal Act. Item 2will be more difficult to estimate depending upon the specific language and interpretation that theUSEPAuses. If any problems do occur the department will contact EPARegion Ximmediately. C. Schedule

- Wewill be drafting amendments as soon as EPA regulations are adopted. Adoption proceeding will begin as soon as possible. III. Administrative Needs A. Item

- Possible difference on howEPAand the State ofWashington would regulate the handling of radioactive waste. B. Possible Problems and Alternatives

- EPA currently regulates all other radioactive waste not excluded under 40 CPR 261.4(a)(4).StateLawChapter 70.105 RCW, the HazardousWasteDisposal Act, specifically states the limits of the Act to non-radioactive wastes. Therefore, the Department of Ecology has no authority over radioactive materials. However, the Washington StateDepartment of Social and Health Services does regulate radioactive waste under state lawChapter 70.98 RCW. Under Title 402, Chapters 19, 21, and 22WAC, DSHS also sets forth the licensing procedures for generators of radioactive waste. These regulations set forth the requirements for waste disposal. In conversation with DSHS coordinators, there are no differences inhowEPA and DSHS regulate radioactive waste. However, as changes to EPA regulations and DSHS regulations occur, any differences will need to be resolved. C. Schedule

- ongoing.
#### § 374.1 Applicability.

This part applies to motor carriers subject to 49 U.S.C. subtitle IV, part B (secs. 13101-14916).

[81 FR 68345, Oct. 4, 2016]
#### § 599.501 Generally.

The provisions of 5 U.S.C. 554, 556 and 557 do not apply to any proceedings conducted pursuant to this subpart.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THE  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION   EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS,  CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS,  AND THE NOTES THERETO,  WHICH MAY BE FOUND ON PAGES 3
THROUGH 6 OF THE COMPANY'S  FORM 10-QSB FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1997, AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         104,890
<SECURITIES>                                   88,162
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,851
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               197,732
<PP&E>                                         95,143
<DEPRECIATION>                                 37,231
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 289,562
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          141,032
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    50,000
<COMMON>                                       3,138,102
<OTHER-SE>                                     (3,039,572)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   289,562
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               97,589
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               124,776
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (27,187)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (27,187)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (27,187)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.05)
        


</TABLE>
§ 7.45 When are pre-payments required for records requested under subpart C of this part, and how are they handled? ( a ) When DOT estimates that the search charges, review charges, duplication fees, or any combination of fees that could be charged to the requester will likely exceed US $25, DOT notifies the requester of the estimated amount of the fees, unless the requester has previously indicated a willingness to pay fees as high as those anticipated. In cases where DOT notifies the requester that actual or estimated fees may amount to more than US $25, the time limit for responding to the request is tolled until the requester has agreed to pay the anticipated total fee (see § 7.35). The notice also informs the requester how to consult with the appropriate DOT officials with the object of reformulating the request to meet his or her needs at a lower cost.
( b ) DOT may require payment of fees prior to actual duplication or delivery of any releasable records to a requester. However, advance payment, i.e., before work is commenced or continued on a request, is not required unless: ( 1 ) Allowable charges that a requester may be required to pay are likely to exceed US $250; or
( 2 ) The requester has failed to pay within 30 days of the billing date fees charged for a previous request to any part of the U.S. Government.
( c ) When paragraph (b)(1) of this section applies, DOT notifies the requester of the estimated cost. If the requester has a history of prompt payment of FOIA fees, the requester must furnish satisfactory assurance of full payment of the estimated charges. Otherwise, the requester may be required to make advance payment of any amount up to the full estimated charges.
( d ) When paragraph (b)(2) of this section applies, DOT requires the requester to either demonstrate that the fee has been paid or pay the full amount owed, including any applicable interest, late handling charges, and penalty charges as discussed in § 7.46. DOT also requires such a requester to make an advance payment of the full amount of the estimated fee before DOT begins processing a new request or continues processing a pending request.
( e ) In the event that a DOT component is required to refund a prepayment, the processing of the refund may necessitate collection of the requester's Taxpayer Identification Number or Social Security Number and direct deposit information (bank routing number and bank account number) under 31 U.S.C. 3325, 31 U.S.C. 3332, and 31 CFR Part 208.