alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### CITY OF ATLANTA *v.*HARPER.

1. The definition of “ordinary care,” given by the court to the. jury, was substantially that stated in the Civil Code.

2. Tlie evidence warranted the verdict, and the court did not err in refusing to grant a new trial.

Submitted May 28,

Decided November 12, 1907

Action for damages. Before Judge Pendleton. Fulton supe-: rior court. December 1, 1906.

*J. L. May son*and W. *P. Hill,*for plaintiff in error.

*G. D. Hill*and *Moore, Gordon & Branch,*contra.

Fish, C. J.

Ina May Harper, twelve years of age, by her father, M. E. Harper, as next friend, brought an action against the City of Atlanta, for damages from personal injuries alleged to have been sustained in falling on one of the city’s sidewalks by reason of its defective condition. There was a verdict for the plaintiff; .and the case is here on writ of error sued out by the defendant, assigning error, upon the overruling of its motion for a new trial.

1. The only error of law alleged to have been committed on the trial was, that the court, in charging as to the degree of care the city was required to exercise, instructed the jury as follows: “Ordinary care means that care that a prudent person would exercise under the same or similar circumstances.” This definition was in substantial accord with that given of “ordinary diligence,” in the Civil Code, §2898. To same effect is *Richmond & Danville R. Co.*v. *Mitchell,*92 *Ga.*77 (2), (18 S. E. 290.)

2. The only other points referred to in the brief of counsel for plaintiff in error are: that there was a variance between the allegations of the petition and the plaintiff’s testimony, as to how her injuries were caused; that the evidence showed that the city had no notice, actual or constructive, of the defective condition of the sidewalk, and that the plaintiff knew of its defective condition, *416and by the use of ordinary care could have avoided the consequences-to herself caused by such condition. None of these points was well taken. If there were any inconsistency at all between the allegata and the probata as to how the plaintiff’s injuries were caused, it-was not sufficient to constitute a substantial variance. There was evidence to authorize a finding, not only that the defects in the sidewalk had existed a sufficient length of time for the agents and officer's of the city, by the exercise of ordinary care and diligence, to have known of them, but that the city had actual, no tice of such, defects. And while it appeared that the plaintiff had notice that-the sidewalk was defective, the evidence did not require a finding that she knew the bricks therein were loose and likely to turn, if she stepped upon them while walking along the sidewalk, and throw her into the hole therein, nor that she failed in any respect to exercise such care as her capacity, mental and physical, fitted her, as a child of tender years, for exercising, in the actual circumstances of the occasion and situation under investigation. It follows that the court did not err in refusing to grant a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Holden, J.r who did not preside.*
From: Meghan Lepisto

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Thank you for supporting birth control access for all women

Date: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 12:06:18 AM

Dear Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health & Human Services,

I commend the Department of Health & Human Services' landmark decision requiring health insurers to

cover the full cost of contraception, with no co-pay, beginning in August 2012.

This policy places a much-needed importance on women's health that is too-often not a priority in

health care policy. Birth control is a critical part of preventive care, and making contraception available

to all women, regardless of their insurance or ability to pay for it, will significantly reduce long-term

health care costs associated with unplanned pregnancies.

Thank you for prioritizing women's basic health care needs.

Sincerely,

Meghan Lepisto

1716 Kendall Ave

Madison, WI 53726
#### Giddens *et al. v.*Giddens.

Submitted June 28,

Decided August 12, 1907.

Application lor year’s support. Before Judge Little. Talbot superior court. November *3,*1906.

*J. J. Bull,*for plaintiffs in error. *Persons & Mcú-eUee,*contra.

Eish, C. J.

No complaint being made that any error of law was committed upon the trial, the only grounds of the motion for a new trial being that the verdict was contrary to law and to the evidence, and without evidence to support it; and the evidence, though conflicting, being amply sufficient to authorize the verdict, there was no abuse of discretion in. refusing a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concw.*
From: Susan Fleming

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Support Access to Preventive Care and Contraception!

Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 5:58:22 PM

I join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking you to accept the

recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain to coverage of preventive care under the

new health care law, and to reject any exemptions for “religious employers.” These preventive

services are a critical element of the new law and would provide countless women better access to

necessary health care.

While AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women access to

contraceptive services, others, driven by an ideological distaste for all contraceptive services, are

pushing the government to make exemptions even larger. Indeed, some groups are pushing for

the exemption to apply to religiously-run health providers, so hospitals with religious

affiliations would be exempt from the coverage requirement, even though they employ people of

all faiths and ideologies. If granted, this larger exemption would deny access to thousands of

women just because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by accepting IOM’s

recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious refusal exemption provisions.
**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 Quarterly Report of Cardinal Communications, Inc. (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each
      of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
      certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
      906
      of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:




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 our operations.




Date:November
                20, 2006
            By:*/s/
                Edouard A. Garneau*Name:Edouard
                A. GarneauTitle:Chief
                Executive OfficerDate:November
                20, 2006
            By:*/s/
                D. Brian Karr*Name:D.
                Brian KarrTitle:Chief
                Financial Officer





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
      by Section 906, has been provided to Cardinal Communications, Inc. and will
      be
      retained by Cardinal Communications, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
      Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# September 25: Military airstrikes continue against ISIL terrorists in Syria and Iraq

/ Published Sept. 25, 2016
September 25, 201620160925-01**SOUTHWEST ASIA**** –**** Syria**** Iraq**
Exhibit 99.1

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

         In connection  with the Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB (the "Report")
of INVU, Inc. (the  "Company") for the quarterly  period ended April 30, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof, I certify
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.


Date:   June 16, 2003                   By: /s/ David Morgan
                                           ------------------------------------
                                           David Morgan, President &
                                           Chief Executive Officer
                                           (Principal Executive Officer)


Date:   June 16, 2003                   By:  /s/ John Agostini
                                           ------------------------------------
                                           John Agostini, Vice President-Chief
                                           Financial Officer & Secretary
                                           (Principal Financial Officer)


A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to INVU, Inc. and will be maintained by INVU, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 108 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 108

     To reduce the number of executive branch political appointees.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 22, 2001

 Mr. Feingold introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
           referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To reduce the number of executive branch political appointees.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. REDUCTION IN NUMBER OF POLITICAL APPOINTEES.

    (a) Definition.--In this section, the term ``political appointee'' 
means any individual who--
            (1) is employed in a position on the executive schedule 
        under sections 5312 through 5316 of title 5, United States 
        Code;
            (2) is a limited term appointee, limited emergency 
        appointee, or noncareer appointee in the senior executive 
        service as defined under section 3132(a) (5), (6), and (7) of 
        title 5, United States Code, respectively; or
            (3) is employed in a position in the executive branch of 
        the Government of a confidential or policy-determining 
        character under Schedule C of subpart C of part 213 of title 5 
        of the Code of Federal Regulations.
    (b) Limitation.--The President, acting through the Office of 
Management and Budget and the Office of Personnel Management, shall 
take such actions as necessary (including reduction in force actions 
under procedures established under section 3595 of title 5, United 
States Code) to ensure that the total number of political appointees 
shall not exceed 2,000.
    (c) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on October 1, 
2001.
                                 <all>
```
From: LizatDans@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: (no subject)

Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 6:38:43 PM

I join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking you to accept the

recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain to coverage of preventive care under the

new health care law, and to reject any exemptions for “religious employers.” These preventive

services are a critical element of the new law and would provide countless women better access to

necessary health care.

While AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women access to

contraceptive services, others, driven by an ideological distaste for all contraceptive services, are

pushing the government to make exemptions even larger. Indeed, some groups are pushing for

the exemption to apply to religiously-run health providers, so hospitals with religious

affiliations would be exempt from the coverage requirement, even though they employ people of all

faiths and ideologies. If granted, this larger exemption would deny access to thousands of women

just because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by accepting IOM’s

recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious refusal exemption provisions.
EXHIBIT 99.14

                           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  Quarterly  Report of  Industrial  Minerals,  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2002 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report").  I,
John Melnyk, Chief Financial Officer of the company, certify, pursuant to 18 USC
Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief.

        (1)     The Report fully complies with the requirements of Sction 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/ John Melnyk
                                                --------------------------------
                                                John Melnyk, CFO

Dated:  11/12/02
Order entered January 21, 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 14
- 00671
- CR
WILLIAM GERARD PALME R, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 4

Dallas County, Texas Tria l Court Cause No. F12
- 00445
- K



### O RDER
T he Court GRANTS appellant’s January 16, 2015 second motion for extension of time to file appellant’s brief.
We ORDER appellant to file the brief within THIRTY (30) DAYS from the date of this
order

.
/s/ LANA MYERS JU STICE
An official website of the United States government                

----

end of header

# Foreign Trade

Skip top of page navigation

###### You are here: Census.gov › Business & Industry ›Foreign Trade › U.S. International Trade Data

                - Main
                - About
                - Data
                - Outreach
                - AES
                - Regulations
                - Reference
                - Definitions
                - Schedule B
                - FAQs

### More DATA

                          - Trade Highlights
                          - Balance by Partner Country
                          - Country/Product Trade
                          - State/Metropolitan Data
                          - Historical Series
                          - Notices and Corrections
                          - Related Party Trade
                          - Press Releases
                          - Data Products

### Important Links

                          - Global Reach Blog
                          - Newsletters
                          - ACE AESDirect
                          Related Sites- Business and Industry
- Briefing Room
- North American Industry                Classification System (NAICS)
Economic Indicator Database
                          Commodity Concordance - Monthly SubscriptionDownload a file- Click on the appropriate month below to download your file.
-  If you are having technical difficulties or need help, feel free to email us at ftd.data.dissemination@census.gov or call 301-763-2311 for immediate assistance.
- Record	      layouts of the files are  available	      online .
Select Statistical Month:- January 2018  
- February 2018 
- March 2018  
-  April 2018  
- May 2018  
- June 2018 
-  July 2018 
-  August 2018 
-  September 2018  
-  October 2018 
- November 2018 
-  December 2018 

                          Export Training
Collection of videos to enhance export training.

Spanish Language Webinars 2020-2021 (Seminarios en Línea en Español 2020-2021)
2017 And Prior Year Webinars Archive.
Upcoming Outreach Activities
Upcoming Outreach Activities
Contact Us
				Contact the International Trade Macro Analysis Branch: Email us! or use our feedback form!

                  Call us: (301)763-2311 or 1-800-549-0595 option 4			  
CONNECT WITH US**********- Information Quality
- Data Linkage Infrastructure
- Data Protection and Privacy Policy
- Accessibility
- FOIA
- Inspector General
- No FEAR Act
- U.S. Department of Commerce
- USA.gov

Measuring America's People, Places, and Economy
✕Is this page helpful?YesNo✕NO THANKS255 characters maximum255 characters maximum reached✕Thank you for your feedback.Comments or suggestions?  Source: U.S. Census Bureau | Foreign Trade |  ftdwebmastet@census.gov |     Last Revised:  June 17, 2022
Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4239

Ground-Water Discharge Determined from Measurements of Evapotranspiration, Other Available HydrologicComponents, and Shallow Water-Level Changes, Oasis Valley, Nye County, Nevada

----

# PDF Version of Report

To view PDF documents, you need to have the **Adobe Acrobat Reader** (free from Adobe Systems) installed on yourcomputer. Download Acrobat Reader.

  Report text (3,233 Kb). Includes report cover, table of contents, text, figures, andtables (plates 1 and 2 and figures 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 10 are not included in this file but will open for viewingautomatically -- see **notes 1** and **2** below).

  Plate1 (849 Kb). Plate measures 25-1/2 inches by 32 inches.

  Plate2 (482 Kb). Plate measures 25-1/2 inches by 33 inches.

**Note 1**: In the PDF report, all references to figures, tables, and plates are shown in blue.Click the blue text to go directly to the corresponding item.

**Note 2**: To reduce overall file sizes, figures 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 10 have been placed in separate files. Theywill open automatically when you click the corresponding bookmark or blue text in the body of the report.

To **print** the entire report using a desktop printer, print the report text(3,233 Kb), then print figure 1 (541 Kb), figure 2(1,627 Kb), figure 3 (720 Kb), figure 4 (3,240Kb), figure 7 (979 Kb), and figure 10 (842 Kb). Plate 1 (849 Kb) and Plate 2 (482 Kb) can be printed bya plotter.

----

Table of Contents
Report HomePage
From: Cynthia Soll

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Thank you for supporting birth control access for all women

Date: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 6:41:45 PM

Dear Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health & Human Services,

I commend the Department of Health & Human Services' landmark decision requiring health insurers to

cover the full cost of contraception, with no co-pay, beginning in August 2012.

This policy places a much-needed importance on women's health that is too-often not a priority in

health care policy. Birth control is a critical part of preventive care, and making contraception available

to all women, regardless of their insurance or ability to pay for it, will significantly reduce long-term

health care costs associated with unplanned pregnancies.

Thank you for prioritizing women's basic health care needs.

Sincerely,

Cynthia Soll

1401 Short Street

Copperas Cove, TX 76522
James F. Johnson, Plaintiff,
v. Brenda Robinson, etat., Defendants. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

# FILED JAN 

## 15 2009 NANCYMAYER WHITTINGTON CLERK U.S. DISTRleTCOURT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil ActionNo. 08-2149

MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffmoves for reconsideration ofthe Order filed December 11, 2008, dismissing this
case for lack ofsubject matterjurisdiction. Plaintiffrequests in the alternative that the submission be treated as his notice ofappeal. A motion for reconsideration need not be granted "unless the district court finds that there is an intervening change in controlling law, the availability ofnew evidence orthe need to correct a clear error orprevent manifest injustice." Firestone v. Firestone, 76 F.3d 1205, 1208 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (citations and quotation marks omitted). The motion provides no basis for vacating the dismissal order. Accordingly, it is this**~** 

# -&...= day ofJanuary 2009, ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for reconsideration [Dkt. No.5] is DENIED; and it is FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk docket the submission also as plaintiffs notice of appeal.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-8103

THOMAS LOUIS DAVIS,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

ANGELA MCCALL TANNER; KIMBERLY SMITH, Ex Solicitor; MCDUFFEY STONE, III, Head Solicitor; ALEXANDER ROBINSON, Solicitor; LARRY WEIDNER, Private Attorney; PERRY M. BUCKNER, Judge; CARMEN T. MULLEN; JAMES E. LOCKEMY; HOWARD P. KING, Judge; J. ERNEST KINARD, Judge; O. G. CHASE, Magistrate Judge; NANCY SADLER, Magistrate Judge; BRYANT BEARED, Head Chief Detective; LARRY D. EHLER; MICHAEL R. SEWARD,

Defendants – Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (9:08-cv-02248-GRA)

Submitted: July 23, 2009 Decided: July 27, 2009

Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas Louis Davis, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Thomas Louis Davis appeals the district court’s order

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and denying

reconsideration thereof. We have reviewed the record and find

no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons

stated by the district court. Davis v. Tanner , No. 9:08-cv02248-GRA (D.S.C. Sept. 15, 2008). 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.

AFFIRMED
From: John C. Bailey

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Thank you for supporting birth control access for all women

Date: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 7:35:02 PM

Dear Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health & Human Services,

I commend the Department of Health & Human Services' landmark decision requiring health insurers to

cover the full cost of contraception, with no co-pay, beginning in August 2012.

This policy places a much-needed importance on women's health that is too-often not a priority in

health care policy. Birth control is a critical part of preventive care, and making contraception available

to all women, regardless of their insurance or ability to pay for it, will significantly reduce long-term

health care costs associated with unplanned pregnancies.

Thank you for prioritizing women's basic health care needs.

Sincerely,

John C. Bailey

4107 31st Street

Mount Rainier, MD 20712