alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 (3.34 MB)
 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
#### Mathews *et al. v.*Taylor County *et al.*

Argued November 4,

Decided November 18, 1907.

Petition for injunction. Before Judge Little. Taylor superior court. September 14, 1907.

*Hardeman & J ones*and *C. B. Marshall,*for plaintiffs.

*W. E. Steed*and *0. M. Colbert,*for defendants.

Eish, C. J.

It not appearing that any question of law was passed on by the trial judge in rendering the judgment complained of, but it appearing that the case as presented turned on issues of fact and that the evidence was conflicting, there was no abuse of discretion in refusing an interlocutory injunction.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**
MEMORANDUM OPINION
N o. 04

- 16

- 00654

- CR
Smelin V. ROQUE , Appellant

v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee
From the 227th Judicial District Court , Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2008CR8480 Honorable Philip A. Kazen Jr. , Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Jason Pulliam, Justice
Delivered and Filed: November 16, 2016
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION In the matter underlying this appeal, the trial court revoked Appellant’s community supervisi on and imposed sentence on August 25, 2014; Appellant had thirty days to file a motion
for new trial. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 21.4(a); Rodarte v. State , 860 S.W.2d 108, 109 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993). Because Appellant did not timely file a m otion for new trial , the notice of appeal was due on September 24, 2014. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 26.2(a)(1). Two years later, on September 28, 2016, Appellant filed a request for a copy of the appellate record and the name of his appellate counsel. We construe his request as a late

- filed notice of appeal.04

- 16

- 00654

- CR

- 2

- A timely notice of appeal is necessary to invoke a court of appeals’ jurisdiction. Olivo v.
State , 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). Absent a timely motion for new trial, a defendant’s notice of appeal is timely filed if it is filed within thirty days after (1) the day sentence is imposed or suspended in open court, or (2) the day the trial court enters an appealable order.
See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 26.2; Olivo , 918 S.W.2d at 522. In this case, the appellate record d oes not show that Appellant’s notice of appeal was timely filed. On October 12, 2016, we ordered Appellant to show cause in writing by November 1 , 2016, why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See Olivo , 918 S.W.2d at 522 ; Ater , 802 S.W.2d at 243. To date, Appellant has not filed any response.
We conclude Appellant’s September 28, 2016 notice of appeal was not timely filed and did not invoke this court’s appellate jurisdiction. W e dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.
PE R CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Wednesday, July 12, 1995 (93), Para 93.41 Private Bills and Resolutions]
[Page 1123]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.93.41  private bills and resolutions

  Under clause 1 of rule XXII.

       Mr. CREMEANS introduced a bill (H.R. 2023) to provide for a 
     land exchange between the Ironton Country Club of Ironton, 
     OH, and the Secretary of Agriculture involving Wayne National 
     Forest; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture.
```
iN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA-21-0059 

# FILED

w000 ) 

### SEP 21 2021 C lerk of SuPreMe cour STATE , OF MONTANA, ) Bowen Green Stato NA„,,,tarim ) Plaintiff and Appellee, ORDER

THOMAS RICHARD FERRIS ) ) Defendant andAppellant. ) ) Upon consideration ofthe motion by Defendant and Appellant Thomas Richaxd Ferris for an extension oftime until December 13, 2021 in which to file and serve his opening brief in this matter because his counsel
was involved in an accident and is now in a 12 week post-concussion protocol and is unable to attend to his legal practice at this time. There hehig no objection from the State ofMontana; It is hereby ORDERED that Defendant and Appellant's opening brief shall be filed and served by December 13, 2021. The Clerk is directed to mail true copies of this order to all parties of record. DATED this Z- 1 day of September, 2021. B ChiefJustice 09/21/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0059
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 165 (Monday, August 28, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 58600]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-18479]



[[Page 58600]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

[FWS-R8-ES-2023-N072; FXES11130800000-234-FF08E00000]


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Initiation of 5-
Year Status Reviews of 47 Species in California, Nevada, and Oregon; 
Correction

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of initiation of reviews; correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, published a notice in 
the Federal Register of August 17, 2023, initiating 5-year status 
reviews of 47 species in California, Nevada, and Oregon under the 
Endangered Species Act. We inadvertently included one species in error. 
We are correcting the notice to remove that species.

DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before 
October 16, 2023.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 17, 2023, we, the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, published a notice initiating 5-year status reviews 
of 47 species in California, Nevada, and Oregon under the Endangered 
Species Act. We inadvertently included one species, the southern sea 
otter (Enhydra lutris nereis), in error. We are correcting the notice 
to remove that species. For how to comment, see our August 17, 2023, 
notice (88 FR 56042).

Correction

    In the Federal Register of August 17, 2023, in FR Doc. 2023-17728, 
please make the following correction:
    On page 56043, remove the ``Otter, southern sea'' entry from the 
table.

Jill Russi,
Acting Regional Director, California Great Basin Region, U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-18479 Filed 8-25-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7509

LARRY K. GREEN, a/k/a Said Abdullah Hakim,

 Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

MICHAEL T. BELL; SANDRA F. THOMAS; PAUL TAYLOR; C/O O’NEAL; 

GEORGE KENWORTHY, Superintendent,

 Defendants – Appellees,

and

THEODIS BECK,

 Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III, 

Chief District Judge. (5:10-ct-03003-D)

Submitted: April 26, 2012 Decided: April 30, 2012

Before GREGORY, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Larry Keith Green, Appellant Pro Se. Oliver Gray Wheeler, OFFICE

OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North 

Carolina, for Appellees.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Larry Keith Green seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order dismissing certain claims and defendants in Green’s 42 

U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) suit. This court may exercise jurisdiction 

only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain 

interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 

337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The order Green seeks to appeal is 

neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or 

collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack 

of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before the court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2011-0725 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2011-NM-065-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

No Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                             612
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,340
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        265
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,993
<PP&E>                                          24,131
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,298
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  23,377
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           21,114
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            71
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,026
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    23,377
<SALES>                                         21,468
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                21,468
<CGS>                                            9,577
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   16,467
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,359
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,141
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,192)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,192)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,192)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


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


<ARTICLE>                           9
<LEGEND>
This schedule  contains  financial  information  extracted from the consolidated
financial  statements of FirstBank  Corp. for the six months ended September 30,
1998 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001035513
<NAME>                   FirstBank Corp.
<MULTIPLIER>                           1
<CURRENCY>                           USD
       
<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>            MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>               JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                 SEP-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                        1
<CASH>                            16,525
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>             7,325
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                   1,945
<TRADING-ASSETS>                       0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>       12,975
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>             4,651
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>               4,590
<LOANS>                          155,010
<ALLOWANCE>                        1,297
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                   202,370
<DEPOSITS>                       123,165
<SHORT-TERM>                      22,500
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                1,807
<LONG-TERM>                       24,727
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                  0
<PREFERRED>                            0
<COMMON>                              20
<OTHER-SE>                        28,820
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>   202,370
<INTEREST-LOAN>                    6,656
<INTEREST-INVEST>                    469
<INTEREST-OTHER>                     378
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                   7,504
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                 2,456
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                 3,618
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>              3,885
<LOAN-LOSSES>                        201
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                     0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                    3,683
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    1,485
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>           946
<EXTRAORDINARY>                        0
<CHANGES>                              0
<NET-INCOME>                         946
<EPS-PRIMARY>                       0.52
<EPS-DILUTED>                       0.52
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                      4.34
<LOANS-NON>                           19
<LOANS-PAST>                           6
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                       0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                        0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                   1,120
<CHARGE-OFFS>                         24
<RECOVERIES>                           0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                  1,297
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>               1,297
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                    0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                0
        

</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 (1.54 MB)
 
 388 FW 388th Fighter Wing pilot AFCENT Air Combat Command ACC F-35 readiness Hill AFB Hill Air Force Base fighter combat deploy
 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
From: Dan Taylor [mailto:dtaylor@GAnderson.com] 

Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2010 2:03 PM 

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA 

Subject: 401(k)s and other retirement vessels

Having hard working citizens convert their retirement accounts over to government control 

and promises of future payouts is a bad idea and should not be pursued. It lays the ground 

work for forced investment in government bonds. 

Dan Taylor
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

697 

CAF 12-01583 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CARNI, SCONIERS, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ. 

 

IN THE MATTER OF JOHNATHAN B.M., 

RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. 

-------------------------------- MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

STEUBEN COUNTY ATTORNEY, 

PETITIONER-RESPONDENT. 

WENDY S. SISSON, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD, GENESEO, FOR

RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. 

ALAN P. REED, COUNTY ATTORNEY, BATH, FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Steuben County (Peter

C. Bradstreet, J.), entered August 2, 2012 in a proceeding pursuant to

Family Court Act article 3. The order, among other things, placed

respondent in the custody of the Commissioner of Social Services of

Steuben County for a period of one year. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is

unanimously reversed on the law without costs and the petition is

dismissed. 

Memorandum: On appeal from an order of disposition placing him

in the custody of the Commissioner of Social Services of Steuben

County for a period of one year, respondent contends that his

admission to acts that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the

crime of forcible touching was defective because Family Court failed

to comply with Family Court Act § 321.3 (1). We agree. That section

prohibits a court from consenting to the entry of an admission unless

it has ascertained, through an allocution of the respondent and his or

her parent, that respondent is aware of, inter alia, “ ‘all possible

dispositional alternatives’ ” (Matter of Sean R.P., 24 AD3d 1200,

1201, lv denied 6 NY3d 711). “ ‘The statute’s requirements . . . are

mandatory and nonwaivable,’ ” and preservation therefore is not

required (id.). Here, respondent’s admission was defective inasmuch

as “the court failed to ascertain that respondent and his parents were

aware of ‘all possible dispositional alternatives’ ” (id.), such as

the possibilities of a conditional discharge or an extension of

placement (see Matter of Melvin A., 216 AD2d 227, 227-228; see also

Matter of Andrew J.S., 48 AD3d 1224, 1225; Matter of Franklin M., 11

AD3d 469, 469-470; Matter of Joseph P., 229 AD2d 318, 318; cf. Matter

of Daquan BB., 83 AD3d 1281, 1282-1283; Matter of Eric CC., 298 AD2d

632, 633). “Because the period of respondent’s placement has expired,

the petition must be dismissed” (Sean R.P., 24 AD3d at 1201; see

Matter of Alex Z., 82 AD3d 995, 996; cf. Matter of Dakota L.K., 70
-2- 697 

CAF 12-01583 

AD3d 1334, 1335; Matter of Tyler D., 64 AD3d 1243, 1243; Franklin M.,

11 AD3d at 470).

In view of our determination, we do not address respondent’s

remaining contentions concerning the factual sufficiency of the

admission or the disposition.

Entered: June 12, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
#### HARRY K. USLAN, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. JAMES BOWEN, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Submitted October 14, 1932

Decided March 25, 1933.

*228Before Justices Teenci-iaed, Case and Beogan.

For the plaintiff-respondent, *Irving Charles Picker (Maurice C. Bñdgier,*of counsel).

For the defendant-appellant, *Edward P. Stout.*

Per Curiam.

The action was brought to recover the balance claimed to be due from the defendant for plastering work done by the plaintiff on the defendant’s premises. The state of case shows in part that the plaintiff was sworn and testified that he entered into an oral agreement with the defendant to do the work for the sum of $587.50; that plaintiff performed the work properly, had received $275 on account and that there was a balance due him of $312.50. That evidence supports the finding of the judge, sitting without ,a jury, that “the work was properly done, in a good and workmanlike manner, and that the plaintiff was entitled to the balance of the contract price amounting to $312.50.” Upon that finding judgment was given to the plaintiff.

It is well settled that upon appeal from the District Court that tribunal’s judgment should be sustained if there be any evidence to support it; and there was such evidence in this case. *Breithart*v. *Lurich,*98 *N. J. L.*556; 120 *Atl. Reg.*11.

Appellant’s first specification is that the court bases its judgment on immaterial and irrelevant testimony; a proposition that we think is contradicted by the foregoing citation from the record.

The second specification is that the court based its judgment on an erroneous theory of law; a proposition for which we find no support.

The third specification is that the plaintiff failed to sustain the burden of proof as to the contract price; but the burden of proof is not for us to consider on an appeal.

The final specification is that the evidence and findings of fact by the court do not support the judgment; a statement which likewise is shown by the record to be incorrect.

Judgment below will be affirmed, with costs.