alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Buchholz-Hill Transportation Company, Respondent, *v.*John F. Baxter, Appellant.

Reported below, 142 App. Div. 25.

(Submitted April 24, 1911;

decided May 2, 1911.)

Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Courb in the second judicial department, entered January 12, 1911, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict in an action to recover damages alleged to have been occasioned plaintiff through the neglect of defendant to promptly perform his contract with the said plaintiff to buoy a certain wreck.

The motion was made upon the ground that the appeal was taken for purpose of delay and was frivolous.

*Pierre M. Brown*for motion.

*Norman B. Beecher*opposed.

Motion denied, with ten dollars costs.
Tina G. Blair, FRP 

Tina@cjhenrylaw.com 

October 19, 2017 

Office of Regulations and Interpretations, 

Employee Benefits Security Administration 

Room M-5655 

U.S. Dept. of Labor 

200 Constitution Avenue NW 

Washington D.C. 20210 

Re: Claims Procedure Regulations for Plans Providing Disability Benefits Examination 

RIN No.: 1210-AB39 

Regulation: 29 C.F.R. §2560.503-1 

Dear Mr. Hauser, 

As an attorney who represents individuals in claim for Employee Benefits wrongfully 

denied, my clients and I have a keen interest in the Claims Procedure Regulations for Plans 

Providing Disability Benefits. I am requesting that the Secretary of Labor not delay the 

effective date of the Final ERISA claims regulations adopted on December 19, 2016. 

I understand that The Department proposed a delay of implementing the final regulations. 

It appears that the late objectors (ERISA plans, their advocates and insurance companies 

and their advocates) are seeking to undo the regulations after the fact without going 

through the rule making process. Those parties were given extensive notice and comment 

period to provide data supporting their allegations on cost and other challenges by the new 

regulations. Additionally, the Department honored the various industry requests for more 

time to adjust to the new rules, by significantly delaying the effective date. 

The Secretary weighed the comments from the various stakeholders before constructing 

the final rules. Now, the ERISA plan organizations, insurance companies and those aligned 

with those groups are seeking to undo the regulations without following the Administrative 

Procedure Act (APA) of 1946 (5 U.S.C. §551 et seq., other statutes and court decisions 

which together guide regulation making and undoing. 

Limited information from the Secretary's office suggests that the final rules are under 

reconsideration, but there is a lack of transparency from the Secretary. The public is not 
CJH/tgb
#### The People of the State of New York *ex rel.*Markert, *v.*James Jourdan, *Police Commissioner.*

Papers not submitted.
COMMENT LETTERS

TO 

FINAL REPORT 

of 

INDEPENDENT COUNSEL DAVID M. BARRETT 

IN RE: HENRY G. CISNEROS 

COMMENT LETTERS 

1.	 Sylvia Arce-Garcia (by attorney Abbe David Lowell) (pp. 1-2) 

2.	 Art Brender (pp. 3-4) 

3.	 Williams & Conolly LLP (attorneys for Henry G. Cisneros) (pp. 5-9) 

4.	 Jo Ann Farrington (comments filed June 29, 2005) (pp. 11-25) 

5.	 Jo Ann Farrington (comments filed August 31, 2005) (pp. 27-28) 

6.	 Barry Finkelstein (pp. 29-35) 

7.	 Martin Klotz (by attorney James H. Rodio) (pp. 36-43) 

8.	 Stanley F. Krysa (pp. 44-46) 

9.	 Robert S. Litt (comments filed June 30, 2005) (pp. 47-57) 

10.	 Robert S. Litt (comments filed August 15, 2005) (pp. 58-59) 

11. 	 Mark E. Matthews (comments filed August 31, 2005) (pp. 60-71) 

12.	 Susan J. Park (comments filed June 30, 2005) (pp. 72-78) 

13. 	 Susan J. Park (comments filed August 31, 2005) (pp. 79-80) 

14. 	 Lee J. Radek (pp. 81-87) 

15.	 Janet Reno (pp. 88-89) 

16.	 Senator Donald W. Riegle, Jr. (pp. 90-91) 

17.	 Jerry Rubino, Charles Alliman, and Carol Snyder (by attorney Stuart Frisch) 

(pp. 92-93) 

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

11
658

12
659

13
14
661

15
662

16
663

17
18
19
666 

20
667 

21
22
23
24
671

25

27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
#### In the Matter of Charles R. Purdy v. Orlando L. Stewart.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
§ 71.1 Limits defined; exceptions authorized for certain rail operating purposes only. ( a ) This part prescribes the geographic limits of each of the nine standard time zones established by section 1 of the Standard Time Act, as amended by section 4 of the Uniform Time Act of 1966 (15 U.S.C. 261). The Uniform Time Act also contains lists of operating exceptions granted for specified rail carriers, whose operations cross the time zone boundaries prescribed by this part. (15 U.S.C. 265).
( b ) Any rail carrier whose operations cross a time zone boundary prescribed by this part may apply for an operating exception to the General Counsel, Department of Transportation, Washington, DC 20590. However, each rail carrier for which an operating exception is granted shall, in its advertisements, time cards, station bulletin boards, and other publications, show arrival and departure times in terms of the standard time for the place concerned.
( c ) The time zones established by the Standard Time Zone Act, as amended by the Uniform Time Act of 1966, are Atlantic, eastern, central, mountain, Pacific, Alaska, Hawaii-Aleutian, Samoa, and Chamorro.
[Amdt. 71-11, 35 FR 12318, Aug. 1, 1970, as amended by Amdt. 71-21, 52 FR 41631, Nov. 18, 1986; 78 FR 15884, Mar. 13, 2013]
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

23–760 PDF 2005

[E R R A T A] S. HRG. 108–103

PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 2005 BUDGET FOR

THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON

BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

ON

THE DETAILS OF THE ADMINISTRATION’S FISCAL YEAR 2005 BUDGET

PROPOSAL FOR THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

MARCH 25, 2004

Printed for the use of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

(

Available at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate/senate05sh.html

[E R R A T A]

S. HRG. 108–103

The above referenced publication was inadvertently printed with the incorrect

designation of Democratic Legislative Assistant. The correct designation

is Legislative Assistant.

COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS

RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama, Chairman

ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah

WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming

CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska

RICK SANTORUM, Pennsylvania

JIM BUNNING, Kentucky

MIKE CRAPO, Idaho

JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire

ELIZABETH DOLE, North Carolina

LINCOLN D. CHAFEE, Rhode Island

PAUL S. SARBANES, Maryland

CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota

JACK REED, Rhode Island

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York

EVAN BAYH, Indiana

ZELL MILLER, Georgia

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan

JON S. CORZINE, New Jersey

KATHLEEN L. CASEY, Staff Director and Counsel

STEVEN B. HARRIS, Democratic Staff Director and Chief Counsel

PEGGY R. KUHN, Senior Financial Economist

SHERRY E. LITTLE, Legislative Assistant

SARAH A. KLINE, Democratic Counsel

AARON D. KLEIN, Democratic Economist

JOSEPH R. KOLINSKI, Chief Clerk and Computer Systems Administrator

GEORGE E. WHITTLE, Editor

(II)
EXHIBIT 10.23



 Exhibit 10.23  
 ITC^DeltaCom, Inc. 
 Description of Non-Employee Director Compensation 
 Non-employee directors of ITC^DeltaCom, Inc. (the “Company”) who are not members of or affiliated with the Welsh, Carson, Anderson &
Stowe group of the Company’s stockholders (“WCAS”) or with Tennenbaum Capital Partners, LLC (“TCP”) receive cash fees for their service on the board of directors of the Company and on committees of the board, and all
non-employee directors are eligible to receive equity-based fees pursuant to the ITC^DeltaCom, Inc. Amended and Restated Stock Incentive Plan for their board and committee service. 
 Eligible directors who are not employees of the Company receive annual fees of $30,000, fees of $1,000 for each board or committee meeting attended in
person and fees of $500 for each board or committee meeting attended by conference telephone. The chairman of the audit committee receives an additional annual fee of $5,000. All such fees are paid in cash. All directors are entitled to
reimbursement for their reasonable out-of-pocket travel expenditures. 
 Non-employee directors also are eligible to receive awards of
restricted stock units and other awards pursuant to the Stock Incentive Plan upon their initial appointment to the board of directors and from time to time thereafter. Such awards, if any, are made at the discretion of the board.
PUBLIC SUBMISSION

Received: January 02, 2016

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1k0-8n5v-96ap

Comments Due: January 19, 2016

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2015-0017

Claims Procedure for Plans Providing Disability Benefits

Comment On: EBSA-2015-0017-0001

Claims Procedure for Plans Providing Disability Benefits

Document: EBSA-2015-0017-DRAFT-0013

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-29295

Submitter Information

Name: 

Address: 

Email:

General Comment

There are millions of people who are too sick to be employed. My daughter is one. The new 

amendments to the ERISA RIN-1210-AB30, will help to make claims and appeals easier for the 

patients who need more financial support and who shouldn't be given a choice of living with a 

roof over their heads or becoming a homeless individual. The insurance companies are "for 

profit" and they are so happy to deny bona fide claims.

The majority of people who are disabled and who truly need the help of ERISA amendments 

must be considered on a fair basis in order to receive the financial aid they are desperate for. The 

current ERISA rules must be changed, or else I can see more homeless people on the streets.

Is this the way the United States takes care of its citizens? Most have been paying into private 

long term disability insurance, and it is a crime to find that the insurance companies are only too 

glad to deny the applications

This must be stopped.

Sincerely yours,
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1995 AND THE BALANCE
SHEET AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1995 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   83,410
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,178
<INVENTORY>                                      2,693
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               115,675
<PP&E>                                       1,625,779
<DEPRECIATION>                                 849,205
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 903,373
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          132,285
<BONDS>                                        263,750
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       264,065
<OTHER-SE>                                      24,957
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   903,373
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               585,185
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  433,309
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              17,573
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                134,221
<INCOME-TAX>                                    52,974
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             81,247
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    81,247
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
§ 800.25 Delegation to the Directors of Office of Aviation Safety, Office of Railroad Safety, Office of Highway Safety, Office of Marine Safety, and Office of Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety. The Board delegates to the Directors of the Offices of Aviation, Railroad, Highway, Marine, and Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety, the authority to: ( a ) Order an investigation into the facts, conditions, and circumstances of accidents that the Board has authority to investigate.
( b ) Disclose factual information pertinent to all accidents or incidents as provided for in Part 801 of this chapter.
( c ) Determine the probable cause(s) of accidents in which the determination is issued in the “Brief of Accident” format, except that the Office Director will submit the findings of the accident investigation to the Board for determination of the probable cause(s) when ( 1 ) any Board Member so requests,
( 2 ) it appears to the Office Director that, because of significant public interest, a policy issue, or a safety issue of other matter, the determination of the probable cause(s) should be made by the Board, or
( 3 ) the accident investigation will be used to support findings in a special investigation or study. Provided, that a petition for reconsideration or modification of a determination of the probable cause(s) made under § 845.31 of this chapter shall be acted on by the Board.
( d ) Consistent with Board resources, investigate accidents as provided under 49 U.S.C. 1131 and the appendix to this part.
[60 FR 61489, Nov. 30, 1995, as amended at 63 FR 71606, Dec. 29, 1998; 81 FR 75731, Nov. 1, 2016]
# July 27: Military Airstrikes Continue Against ISIL Terrorists in Syria and Iraq

/ Published July 27, 2015

July 27, 2015

Release # 20150727

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

**SOUTHWEST ASIA –** On July 26, coalition military forces continued to attack ISIL terrorists in Syria and Iraq. In Syria, coalition military forces conducted 13 airstrikes using fighter, bomber and remotely piloted aircraft. Separately in Iraq, coalition military forces conducted 13 airstrikes coordinated with the Government of Iraq using attack, fighter-attack, bomber and remotely piloted aircraft against ISIL targets.

“Coalition forces continue to support ISF operations to isolate and degrade ISIL and set conditions for the liberation of Anbar Province,” said Col. Michael Indovina, CJTF-OIR Spokesman. “Coalition airstrikes will likely increase to a posture that adequately supports ISF strike requirements in and around the Anbar capital. Yesterday was the largest amount of airstrike support we have provided since the operation began. We will continue to support our Iraqi partners as they work to push ISIL out of Anbar Province and the rest of their country.”

The following is a summary of the strikes conducted against ISIL since the last press release:

**Syria**

-- Near Al Hasakah, 10 airstrikes struck four ISIL large tactical units and five ISIL small tactical units and destroyed 15 ISIL fighting positions.

-- Near Aleppo, one airstrike struck an ISIL mortar system and destroyed an ISIL vehicle.

-- Near Kobani, two airstrikes struck two ISIL tactical units and destroyed an ISIL fighting position, an ISIL motorcycle and an ISIL vehicle.

**Iraq**

-- Near Al Huwayjah, one airstrike destroyed an ISIL bunker.

-- Near Ar Rutbah, one airstrike destroyed an ISIL checkpoint.

-- Near Habbaniyah, one airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL structure.

-- Near Makhmur, two airstrikes struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed two ISIL fighting positions.

-- Near Mosul, one airstrike destroyed an ISIL tank.

-- Near Ramadi, four airstrikes struck an ISIL large tactical unit and three ISIL small tactical units and destroyed an ISIL excavator, 13 ISIL fighting positions, an ISIL rocket propelled grenade and an ISIL structure.

-- Near Sinjar, two airstrikes struck an ISIL staging area and an ISIL fighting position.

-- Near Tal Afar, one airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL vehicle.

Airstrike assessments are based on initial reports. All aircraft returned to base safely. 

The strikes were conducted as part of Operation Inherent Resolve, the operation to eliminate the ISIL terrorist group and the threat they pose to Iraq, Syria and the wider international community.

The destruction of ISIL targets in Syria and Iraq further limits the group's ability to project terror and conduct operations. Coalition nations which have conducted airstrikes in Iraq include Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, Jordan, Netherlands, United Kingdom and United States. Coalition nations which have conducted airstrikes in Syria include Bahrain, Canada, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and the U.S.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 435 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                 House Calendar No. 168
107th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 435

                          [Report No. 107-494]

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2143) to make the repeal 
                      of the estate tax permanent.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 5, 2002

 Mr. Hastings of Washington, from the Committee on Rules, reported the 
  following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and 
                         ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2143) to make the repeal 
                      of the estate tax permanent.

    Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2143) to make the repeal 
of the estate tax permanent. The bill shall be considered as read for 
amendment. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
bill and on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening 
motion except: (1) one hour of debate on the bill equally divided and 
controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee 
on Ways and Means; (2) the amendment in the nature of a substitute 
printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
resolution, if offered by Representative Rangel of New York or his 
designee, which shall be in order without intervention of any point of 
order, shall be considered as read, and shall be separately debatable 
for one hour equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
opponent; and (3) one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

                                                 House Calendar No. 168

107th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                              H. RES. 435

                          [Report No. 107-494]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2143) to make the repeal 
                      of the estate tax permanent.

_______________________________________________________________________

                              June 5, 2002

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed
```
-----Original Message----- 

From: Robert Underhill [mailto:bunderhill@comcast.net] 

Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 9:21 PM 

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA 

Subject: RIN 1210-AB33 

If you want to offer people the option of putting their 401K's into 

govt. sponsored annuities, go to it. There are plenty of foolish 

people out there. However, do not even begin to think of making it 

mandatory in any way shape or form. My Social Security taxes are being 

funneled to support Wall Street's gambling and the big IOU that says 

I'll still collect when I retire is looking a bit shaky. I will not 

allow my 401K to be siphoned off to fund an out of control deficit. 

That's all that this is about. It is not about retirement security. 

I'll drain the account and spend the money before I let the govt. take 

what I have carefully saved all these years.
<Page>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 21

The Company's only active subsidiaries are each wholly owned and are included in
the consolidated financial statements of the Company, and their jurisdictions of
incorporation are as follows:

Name of Subsidiary                                 Jurisdiction of Incorporation

CHC Consulting Services Limited                    England and Wales
CHC International                                  England and Wales
Computer Horizons (Canada) Corp.                   Toronto, Canada
Horizons Technologies, Inc.                        Delaware
Strategic Outsourcing Systems, Inc.                Delaware
Princeton Softech, Inc.                            New Jersey
G. Triad Development Corp.                         New Jersey
Integrated Computer Management                     New Jersey
CHIMES, Inc.                                       Delaware
eB Networks, Inc.                                  Delaware
CG Computer Services Corp.                         California
Horizon Enterprises, Inc.                          Delaware
Spargo Holdings, Inc.                              Delaware
Spargo Holdings II, Inc.                           Delaware
#### § 585.121 Scope.

This part establishes requirements for manufacturers of passenger cars, of trucks, buses, multipurpose passenger vehicles and low-speed vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 4,536 kilograms (kg) (10,000 pounds (lb)) or less, to submit a report, and maintain records related to the report, concerning the number of such vehicles that meet the rear visibility requirements in paragraphs S5.5 and S6.2 of Standard No. 111, Rear visibility (49 CFR 571.111).
1210-AB32-2-1127.html[7/24/2015 6:15:54 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 09, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvq-c4v9

Comments Due: July 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-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1621

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: janna goodfellow

General Comment

I am vehemently against the government interfering with how I use my 401K. It is my life, and how I choose to

 spend the money I have saved for retirement should be solely at my discretion. The government has no reason or

 right to be mandating how or when I withdraw, spend or invest my money. I am smart enough to save and invest

 my money, why would I need a government bureaucrat telling me anything about how or when I can use it? I

 strongly suggest this rule be rejected and allow those who have 401Ks the benefit of choosing for themselves

 how to spend, invest or use them.

Thank you for your consideration in this matter,