alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### LLOYD GLASSMEYER, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. THE PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Submitted January 27, 1933

Decided July 29, 1933.

Before Justices Bodine and Donges.

For the plaintiff-appellant, *Paul Koch.*

For the defendant-respondent, *Wall, Haight, Carey é Hartpence.*

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff appeals from a verdict directed by the court in favor of the defendant. The complaint shows that the plaintiff, a commuter on the defendant’s road while waiting to board a train at the defendant’s station, was negligently injured by reason of the improper operation of the defendant’s train known as the “preference freight,” or because of the improper maintenance of the tracks and roadbed on which the freight train was running.

The plaintiff proved that his injuries were occasioned by the derailment of part of the “preference freight” and by the demolishment of the railroad station. The court, in denying a motion for a nonsuit, treated such proofs as constituting a *prima facie*case of negligence. 10 *Corp. Jur.*1036.

*676The defendant’s proof, however, indicated that the occurrence was due to a defect in a refrigerator car owned by a connecting carrier. One of the brake heads and shoe of the car fell into a frog at a switch along defendant’s tracks derailing ten cars. These derailed cars damaged the station. The brake gear and journals were tested before the train started, and the proofs indicated that the falling of the mechanism was due to a latent defect which could not have been revealed save by dismantling in the shop. The carrier, therefore, demonstrated by uneontradicted proofs that the injury occurred without negligence on its part. *Anderson*v. *Erie Railroad Co.,*68 *N. J. L.*647; 54 *Atl. Rep.*830; 10 *Corp. Jur.*1036. A carrier is not liable for an injury due to a latent defect not discoverable by the exercise of reasonable care. *Dougherty*v. *Pittsburgh,*213 *Pa.*346; 62 *Atl. Rep.*926; *Western Maryland Railroad Co.*v. *State,*95 *Md.*639; 53 *Atl. Rep.*969. It is manifest that a railroad company accepting a car from a connecting carrier cannot separate every part of its mechanism and subject the same to a shop test designed to reveal the integrity of the metal parts. The defendant, by uncontradicted proofs, having rebutted the presumption of negligence, the direction of a verdict in its favor was proper.

The hypothetical question propounded to an expert witness called by the defendant possibly offended the rule laid down in *Shoemaker*v. *Elmer,*70 *N. J. L.*710; 58 *Atl. Rep.*940. Even so, the judgment should not be reversed since evidence properly admitted and uncontradicted demonstrated that the accident was due to a latent defect not discoverable by the exercise of reasonable care under the circumstances.

The judgment is affirmed.
**EXHIBIT      32.1**

|   | (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                and |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | To                my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents,                in                all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations                of the Company as of and for the period covered by the                Report. |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                |                                                                                                                         |                             |
|-------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------|
| Date:              January 31, 2007 | By:                                                                                                                | /s/              Phillip W. Ware |
|                                | Phillip              W. WarePresident,                Chief Executive Officerand                Principal Accounting Officer |

----
# Úradný vestník C 152/9. j

| | ISSN 1725-5236 |
| --- | --- |
| Úradný vestník
  Európskej únie | C 152 |
| | |
| Slovenské vydanie | Informácie a oznámenia | Zväzok 479. júna 2004 |

ISSN 1725-5236

Úradný vestník

Európskej únie

C 152

Slovenské vydanie

Informácie a oznámenia

Zväzok 479. júna 2004

---

| Číslo oznamu | Obsah | Strana |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Informácie |
| | Komisia |
| 2004/C 152/1 | Výmenný kurz eura | 1 |

Číslo oznamu

Obsah

Strana

I   Informácie

Komisia

2004/C 152/1

Výmenný kurz eura

1

| SK | |
| --- | --- |

SK

---

I Informácie

Komisia

| 9.6.2004 | SK | Úradný vestník Európskej únie | C 152/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.6.2004

SK

Úradný vestník Európskej únie

C 152/1

---

Výmenný kurz eura (1)

8. júna 2004

(2004/C 152/01)

1 euro=

| | Mena | Výmenný kurz |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | Americký dolár | 1,2294 |
| JPY | Japonský jen | 135,08 |
| DKK | Dánska koruna | 7,4349 |
| GBP | Britská libra | 0,66840 |
| SEK | Švédska koruna | 9,1040 |
| CHF | Švajčiarsky frank | 1,5229 |
| ISK | Islandská koruna | 87,36 |
| NOK | Nórska koruna | 8,1885 |
| BGN | Bulharský lev | 1,9558 |
| CYP | Cyperská libra | 0,58300 |
| CZK | Česká koruna | 31,243 |
| EEK | Estónska koruna | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Maďarský forint | 251,15 |
| LTL | Litovský litas | 3,4527 |
| LVL | Lotyšský lats | 0,6623 |
| MTL | Maltská líra | 0,4263 |
| PLN | Poľský zlotý | 4,5957 |
| ROL | Rumunský lei | 40 758 |
| SIT | Slovinský toliar | 239,1500 |
| SKK | Slovenská koruna | 39,870 |
| TRL | Turecká líra | 1 811 841 |
| AUD | Austrálsky dolár | 1,7507 |
| CAD | Kanadský dolár | 1,6520 |
| HKD | Hongkongský dolár | 9,5838 |
| NZD | Novozélandský dolár | 1,9568 |
| SGD | Singapurský dolár | 2,0990 |
| KRW | Juhokórejský won | 1 423,46 |
| ZAR | Juhoafrický rand | 8,0262 |

Mena

Výmenný kurz

USD

Americký dolár

1,2294

JPY

Japonský jen

135,08

DKK

Dánska koruna

7,4349

GBP

Britská libra

0,66840

SEK

Švédska koruna

9,1040

CHF

Švajčiarsky frank

1,5229

ISK

Islandská koruna

87,36

NOK

Nórska koruna

8,1885

BGN

Bulharský lev

1,9558

CYP

Cyperská libra

0,58300

CZK

Česká koruna

31,243

EEK

Estónska koruna

15,6466

HUF

Maďarský forint

251,15

LTL

Litovský litas

3,4527

LVL

Lotyšský lats

0,6623

MTL

Maltská líra

0,4263

PLN

Poľský zlotý

4,5957

ROL

Rumunský lei

40 758

SIT

Slovinský toliar

239,1500

SKK

Slovenská koruna

39,870

TRL

Turecká líra

1 811 841

AUD

Austrálsky dolár

1,7507

CAD

Kanadský dolár

1,6520

HKD

Hongkongský dolár

9,5838

NZD

Novozélandský dolár

1,9568

SGD

Singapurský dolár

2,0990

KRW

Juhokórejský won

1 423,46

ZAR

Juhoafrický rand

8,0262

---

(1)

Zdroj: referenčný výmenný kurz publikovaný ECB.

---
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,
  J. Bruce Robinson, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
  to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Amendment No. 3 of
  the Annual Report of Zygo Corporation on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended
  June 30, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
  of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such
  Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
  condition and results of operations of Zygo Corporation.

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Zygo Corporation and will be retained by Zygo Corporation and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

| |        |                                                    
| | ------ | ---------------------------------------------------
| | By:    | /s/ J. Bruce
  Robinson                            
| | Name:  | J. Bruce
  Robinson                                
| | Title: | Chairman,
  President and Chief
  Executive Officer

Date: July 20, 2006

I,
  Walter A. Shephard, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
  pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Amendment
  No. 3 of the Annual Report of Zygo Corporation on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal
  year ended June 30, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
  or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained
  in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects,
  the financial condition and results of operations of Zygo Corporation.

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Zygo Corporation and will be retained by Zygo Corporation and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

| |        |                                                        
| | ------ | -------------------------------------------------------
| | By:    | /s/ Walter
  A. Shephard                               
| | Name:  | Walter A.
  Shephard                                   
| | Title: | Vice
  President, Finance and Chief
  Financial Officer

Date: July 20, 2006

---
| POWER OF ATTORNEY                                    |
|------------------------------------------------------|
| Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Fiscal Year Ended |
| December 31, 2010                                    |

| Company                                                                                 | State of Incorporation |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------|
| Appalachian Power Company                                                               | Virginia               |
| Columbus Southern Power Company                                                         | Ohio                   |
| Ohio Power CompanyPublic Service Company of OklahomaSouthwestern Electric Power Company | OhioOklahomaDelaware   |

| /s/ Nicholas K. Akins | /s/ Barbara D. Radous |
|-----------------------|-----------------------|
| Nicholas K. Akins     | Barbara D. Radous     |
|                  |                  |
| /s/ Carl L. English   | /s/ Brian X. Tierney  |
| Carl L. English       | Brian X. Tierney      |
|                  |                  |
| /s/ D. Michael Miller | /s/ Susan Tomasky     |
| D. Michael Miller     | Susan Tomasky         |
|                  |                  |
| /s/ Michael G. Morris | /s/ Dennis E. Welch   |
| Michael G. Morris     | Dennis E. Welch       |
|                  |                  |
| /s/ Robert P. Powers  |                  |
| Robert P. Powers      |                  |
119 STAT. 2526 PUBLIC LAW 109–117—DEC. 1, 2005

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 126:

SENATE REPORTS: No. 109–154 (Comm. on Energy and Natural Resources).

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 151 (2005):

Mar. 14, considered and passed House.

Nov. 16, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

Public Law 109–117

109th Congress

An Act

To amend Public Law 89–366 to allow for an adjustment in the number of free

roaming horses permitted in Cape Lookout National Seashore.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. ADJUSTMENT IN NUMBER OF FREE ROAMING HORSES

PERMITTED IN CAPE LOOKOUT NATIONAL SEASHORE,

NORTH CAROLINA.

(a) IN GENERAL.—The first subsection (b) of section 5 of Public

Law 89–366 (16 U.S.C. 459g–4) is amended—

(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘100 free roaming horses’’

and inserting ‘‘not less than 110 free roaming horses, with

a target population of between 120 and 130 free roaming

horses,’’;

(2) in paragraph (3), by striking subparagraph (B) and

inserting the following new subparagraph:

‘‘(B) unless removal is carried out as part of a plan to

maintain the viability of the herd; or’’; and

(3) in paragraph (5), by striking ‘‘100’’ and inserting ‘‘110’’.

(b) REPEAL OF DUPLICATE SUBSECTION.—Section 5 of Public

Law 89–366 is further amended—

(1) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘(a)’’ after ‘‘(a)’’; and

(2) by striking the second subsection (b).

Approved December 1, 2005.

Dec. 1, 2005

[H.R. 126]
#### Philip Corell, Respondent, *v.*Allie L. Sylvester et al., as Executors of Lewis Sylvester, Deceased, Appellants.

*Corell*v. *Sylvester,*137 App. Div. 888, affirmed.

(Argued April 7, 1911;

decided May 16, 1911.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered March 12, 1910, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict in an action to recover moneys alleged to have been paid by mistake.

*Louis Zinke*for appellants.

*Emanuel S. Cahn*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Werner, Willard Bartlett, Hiscock, Chase and Collin, JJ.
# Official Journal C 139/19 M

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 139 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 4719 May 2004 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 139

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 4719 May 2004

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Information |
| | Commission |
| 2004/C 139/1 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |
| 2004/C 139/2 | Communication from the Commission — Communication pursuant to Article 23(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 802/2004 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings | 2 |
| 2004/C 139/3 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case No. COMP/M.3401 – Danish Crown/Flagship Foods) | 3 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Information

Commission

2004/C 139/1

Euro exchange rates

1

2004/C 139/2

Communication from the Commission — Communication pursuant to Article 23(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 802/2004 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings

2

2004/C 139/3

Prior notification of a concentration (Case No. COMP/M.3401 – Danish Crown/Flagship Foods)

3

---

| | Corrigenda |
| --- | --- |
| 2004/C 139/4 | Media Plus (2001-2005) — Implementation of the programme to encourage the development, distribution and promotion of European audiovisual works — Corrigendum to the call for proposals EAC/03/86 — Support for the development of production projects | 4 |

Corrigenda

2004/C 139/4

Media Plus (2001-2005) — Implementation of the programme to encourage the development, distribution and promotion of European audiovisual works — Corrigendum to the call for proposals EAC/03/86 — Support for the development of production projects

4

---

| | III   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | European Parliament |
| 2004/C 139/5 | Notice of selection procedure | 5 |

III   Notices

European Parliament

2004/C 139/5

Notice of selection procedure

5

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Exhibit 11
<TABLE>
                         ALPHARMA INC.
<CAPTION>
        Computation of Earnings (Loss) per Common Share
                   Primary and Fully Diluted
       (Dollars in thousands, except for per share data)

                                         Twelve Months Ended
                                                    December 31,
                                                 1996          1995       1994
Computation for Statement of Operations

Primary earnings (loss) per share:
  <S>                                       <C>            <C>          <C>
  Income (loss) before extraordinary item   $   (11,461)   $    18,817  $   (1,703)

  Extraordinary item, net of tax                                              (683)

  Net income (loss)                         $   (11,461)   $    18,817  $   (2,386)

  Average common shares outstanding          21,715,000     21,631,000   21,568,000

    Dilutive effect of outstanding options
    determined by treasury stock method                        122,753
                                             21,715,000     21,753,753   21,568,000

  Earnings per common share - Primary

  Income (loss) before extraordinary item   $      (.53)   $      0.86  $     (0.08)

   Extraordinary item, net of tax           $              $            $     (0.03)

  Net income (loss)                         $      (.53)   $      0.86  $     (0.11)

Fully diluted earnings (loss) per share:

  Income (loss) before extraordinary item   $   (11,461)   $    18,817  $     (1,703)

  Extraordinary item, net of tax                                                (683)

  Net income (loss)                         $   (11,461)   $    18,817  $     (2,386)

   Average common shares outstanding         21,715,000     21,631,000   21,568,000
  additions:
    Assumed conversion of warrants
      as of beginning of period                                576,000
    Dilutive effect of outstanding options
      determined by treasury stock method                      200,369
                                             21,715,000     22,407,369   21,568,000

Earnings (loss) per common share - Fully Diluted

    Income (loss) before extraordinary item  $      (.53)   $    0.84    $    (0.08)

     Extraordinary item, net of tax          $              $            $    (0.03)
    Net income (loss)                        $      (.53)   $      0.84  $    (0.11)


</TABLE>
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CIVILIAN CASUALTY REPORT

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (1.35 MB)
 
 spmagtf-cr-cc
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
PUBLIC SUBMISSION

Received: October 24, 2017

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1k1-8zel-89ya

Comments Due: December 11, 2017

Submission Type: API

Docket: EBSA-2015-0017

Claims Procedure for Plans Providing Disability Benefits; Extension of Applicability 

Date

Comment On: EBSA-2015-0017-0291

Claims Procedure: Plans Providing Disability Benefits

Document: EBSA-2015-0017-DRAFT-0379

Comment on FR Doc # 2017-22082

Submitter Information

Name: Brad Wojno

Address: 573 Hampton Ridge Dr

Akron, OH, 44313

Email: ileasem@yahoo.com

Phone: 9414889396

General Comment

Dear EBSA/DOL -

RE: Proposed Rule Changes Group LTD Benefits

I am shocked that the subject rule change has been proposed. First, the proposed rules 

changes don't do enough, but to discover this backtracking, baffles the mind.

I am a consumer and have repeatedly been attacked by my ERISA LTD carrier. My 

carrier has used all the tricks and schemes in the book, that these proposed rule 

changes are meant to help fix. My carrier has ignored SSDI determination of 

disability. The carrier has come up with new reasons to deny my claim, when it's too 

late in the appeals process for me to provide evidence to refute their new findings. 

Add to all the inequities in the claims handling process, the discretionary clause puts a 
claimant in an almost impossible position of proving their claim.

Having taken my carrier to Federal court, even when they lose (rarely), they never are 

the ones to end up paying. The carriers just increase the premiums when they 

improperly terminate a claim, and it's the plan participants that end up paying all the 

legal costs in higher premiums. The proposed rules would help reduce the number of 

improperly denied claims and court costs, when the insurance companies are on a 

more level playing field to the claimant. Insurance companies would have to think 

twice about improperly denying a claim, that will see it's day in court. This will lower 

litigation expenses, and subsequent premiums.

Without the proposed rules, it would be like buying auto insurance, and the insurance 

company having the option to pay the claim, or denying it improperly. Sure, you auto 

premiums would be a lot lower if the insurance company doesn't have to pay any 

legitimate claims they don't want to, but are you really protected by insurance this 

way? I am sure that anyone who buys group LTD insurance, wants it to be there if 

they ever need it and have a claim. Nobody would trade lower premiums in for 

insurance that doesn't pay out on legitimate claims.

Please reinstitute the proposed changes. They are a start, but still leaves employees at 

a big disadvantage to the billion dollar insurance carriers.