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

    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 (2.84 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
EXHIBIT 23



               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

To the Board of Directors
Hills Bancorporation

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated February
25, 2003 with respect to the financial  statements of Hills  Bancorporation  and
subsidiaries  included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Hills Bancorporation
for the year ended  December 31, 2002 in Registrant  Statement  No.  33-73606 on
Form S-8 filed  December 30, 1993 and  Registrant  Statement No. 33-2657 on Form
S-8 filed January 10, 1986.


/s/ McGLADREY & PULLEN, LLP
---------------------------

Iowa City, Iowa
March 21, 2003


                                       1
No. 225.

#### Irby *v.*United States.

*A. Andrew Giangreco*for petitioner.

*Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Miller, Beatrice Rosenberg*and *Richard W. Schmude*for the United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.
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

    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 (6.51 MB)
 
 TF 51/5 MARCENT CENTCOM NAVCENT 5th Fleet MME 24.1
 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
November 19, 1962.

No. 119.

No. 142.

#### Murray et al. *v.*Curlett et al., School District of Abington Township, Pennsylvania, et al. *v.*Schempp et al.

*Theodore Leskes, Edwin J. Lukas, Arnold Forster, Paul Hartman*and *Sol Rabkin*on the motion.

constituting the Board of School Commissioners of Baltimore City.

Certiorari, *ante,*p. 809, to the Court of Appeals of Maryland; and

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. (Probable jurisdiction noted, *ante,*p. 807.) The motion of the American Jewish Committee et al. for leave to file brief, as *amici curiae,*is granted.
#### ALFRED M. GAMMAN, Respondent, *v.*DEXTER BERRY, Appellant.

*Contempt*— *a/n order requiring a person to show cause why he should not be puntished, made by a county judge whose term expires before the return day, may be heard before his*successor— *Code of Civil Procedure, secs.*52, 2457, 2462.

Appeal from an order made by the Hon. Harlo Hakes, county judge of Steuben county, adjudging the defendant guilty of contempt, in not appearing before a referee, pursuant to an order of the Hon. George H. MoMaster, county judge, made in proceedings supplementary to execution.

George H. MoMaster, as county judge, made an order for the defendant to show cause why he should not be punished for his alleged misconduct, returnable before the county judge at the next ter.m of the Steuben County Court, in the village of Corning, February 18, 1881. After making the order and before the return day MoMaster’s term of office expired, and Hakes became his successor.

The court at General Term said: “It is contended in the first place that Judge Hakes had no jurisdiction to entertain and continue the proceedings to punish for contempt upon the order to .show cause issued by Judge MoMaster.

'“ Section 52 of the Code provides: *‘*In case of the death, sickness, resignation, removal from office, absence from the county, or •other disability of an officer before whom a special proceeding has -been instituted, where no express provision is made by law for the *139continuance thereof, it may be continued before the officer’s successor or any other officer residing in the same county before whom it might have been originally instituted,’ etc.

“ Section 2457 of the Code provides for the punishment of a person who neglects to attend before the judge or referee, pursuant to an order in supplementary proceedings, and section 2462 provides that section 52, above quoted, *‘*applies to the special proceedings instituted as prescribed in this article.’

“ It appears to us that these provisions of the Code are ample to authorize the continuance of the proceedings commenced before Judge MoMaster by his successor in office, Judge Hakes.”

*Charles JD.*Baker, for the appellant.

*L. W. Wellington,*for the respondent.

Opinion by

Haight, J.;

Bradley, J., concurred; Smith, P. J., and Barker, J., not present.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    2,254,288
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                    328,815
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         439,364
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       190,108
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,212,575
<COMMON>                                        46,405
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      615,463
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            356,045
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>               1,028,641
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           49,100
<PREFERRED>                                     43,000
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           890,511
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                             101,000
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                   65,267
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>               1,035,056
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                3,212,575
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      371,870
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            14,046
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     314,095
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     328,141
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         43,729
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                              (2,485)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  41,244
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        21,682
<NET-INCOME>                                    19,562
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                      1,490
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   18,072
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        22,477
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                            0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          68,319
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.38
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.38
        

</TABLE>
#### Western and Atlantic Railroad Company *v.*Tennessee Coal, Iron and Railroad Company.

Argued April 19,

Decided August 10, 1907.

Action for damages. Before Judge Fite. Bartow superior court. July 20, 1906.

*Tye & Bryan*and *Neel*cG *Peeples,*for plaintiff in error.

*Thomas*W. *Milner & Sons,*contra.

This ease being for decision by a full bench, and the six Justices being evenly divided in opinion, the judgment is affirmed by operation of law.
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.3


                                         1998
                           SENIOR MANAGEMENT INCENTIVE PLAN

For Fiscal 1998, incentive will be determined by Corporate Earnings per Share 
as follows:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                        BONUS AWARD AS A PERCENT
             EARNING PER SHARE               OF BASE SALARY
             -----------------          ------------------------
             <S>                        <C>
               $ 1.20-1.24                        30                 
                 1.25-1.31                        40
                 1.32+                            50

</TABLE>

If unusual major factors significantly change Fiscal 1998 Earnings, decisions 
regarding any adjustments will be made by the Compensation Committee of the 
Board of Directors.

The Company's 1998 Senior Management Incentive Plan shall be governed by the 
following rules:

A.   The incentive compensation for the 1998 fiscal year computed as
     provided for in the Plan, shall be divided into two (2) equal
     installments, one payable on the first day of February 1999, and the
     other on the first day of February 2000 (the "Payment Dates").

B.   A participant shall become entitled to the installment payable on each
     Payment Date, on that date, if and only if, he then continues to be in
     the employ of the company, or if not, that the termination of his
     employment by the Company was caused by death, complete disability,
     retirement after age sixty (60) or discharged by the Company without
     cause.

C.   Should any installment be payable to a Participant who is not entitled
     thereto on any Payment Date as provided for above, such installment
     shall not revert to the Company but shall be reallocated and paid to
     the other Participants proportionate to the amounts to which they are
     otherwise entitled to receive under the plan.

D.   All determinations arising under the Plan shall be determined by the
     Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company, whose
     decision thereon shall be final, conclusive and binding.

E.   Employees participating in a commission override program will
     participate at the rate of one half of the amount of scheduled amount
     called for.

F.   Any senior management employees participating in any other
     division/local incentive plans, shall not participate in the foregoing
     plan.
/ TONEY 

( CHIROPRACTIC 

August 9, 2010 

Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight 


Department of Health and Human Services 


Attention: OCIIO-9991-IFC 


P.O. Box 8016 


Baltimore, MD 21244-1850 


Re: Interim Final Rule for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Relating to Status 

as a Grandfathered Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 

- -----,.-....-...-... 

Below are my comments regarding the Interim Final Rule for Group Health Plans and Health 

Insurance Coverage Relating to Status as a Grandfathered Health Plan Under the Patient 

Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). 

I believe that every effort should be made to increase the number of individuals covered by 

PPACA, especially as of January 1, 2014 when most of the reform components (Insurance 

Exchanges, Subsidies, Tax Credits, etc.) come into play. 

The average consumer has a broad definition of "benefits." Consumers view their health plan 

;0 beyond the covered benefits, cost sharing, and the contribution levels associated with the plan. 

-~ It is my opinion that the Rule may still result in some confusion to the marketplace in its 

application. For example, if an employer raised the copayment level beyond the maximum in one 

area (i.e. outpatient services) but retained the copayment level for primary care doctor visits, does 

that mean a loss of grandfather status? Clarity will be critical both for the employer and the 

employee. 

Even by the most optimistic estimates, a substantial portion of the employee population will 

remain outside the PPACA as ofJanuary 2014 based on the current rules. While I understand the 

difficulty involved in making change, creating another large sub-population of excluded 

individuals will only add to costs, increase confusion, and mitigate the potential impact ofthe 

legislation. --..­

The Rule needs to be clear, reasonable, and with no ambiguities involved in determining whether 

a group health plan is "in or out." The decisions the federal government makes today will 

determine the outcomes for tomorrow. We may need to make some difficult decisions to create a 

sustainable health care system that will support a growing economy in the future. That means 

getting as many citizens across the country participating at the beginning to make it work and 

delivering on its promises to retain their support. 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this regulation. 

Yours for better health ... the natural way! 

d{/J;'r~ Christopher Toney DC 

Toney Chiropractic and WeIlness I6616 N. Washington Ave, Ste D IOcean Springs, MS 39564 

(228) 875-5200 Iinfo@toneychiropractic.com Itoneychiropractic.com
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 12

                              BellSouth Corporation
                    Computation Of Earnings To Fixed Charges
                              (Dollars In Millions)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                 For the Year Ended December 31,
                                                                       1998       1997       1996       1995       1994
                                                                       ----       ----       ----       ----       ----
<S>                                                                   <C>        <C>        <C>        <C>        <C>    
1. Earnings

   (a) Income from continuing operations before deductions for
taxes and interest                                                    $ 6,588    $ 6,182    $ 5,329    $ 3,312    $ 4,069

   (b) Portion of rental expense representative of interest factor         80         91         90         84        100

   (c) Equity in losses from less-than-50% owned investments
(accounted for under the equity method of accounting)                      97         78         68        163         79

   (d) Excess of earnings over distributions of less-than-50%-owned
investments (accounted for under the equity method of accounting)         (46)       (85)       (53)       (45)       (53)
                                                                      -------    -------    -------    -------    -------

      TOTAL                                                           $ 6,719    $ 6,266    $ 5,434    $ 3,514    $ 4,195
                                                                      -------    -------    -------    -------    -------
                                                                      -------    -------    -------    -------    -------

2. Fixed Charges

   (a) Interest                                                       $   867    $   783    $   739    $   745    $   686

   (b) Portion of rental expense representative of interest factor         81         91         90         84        100
                                                                      -------    -------    -------    -------    -------

       TOTAL                                                          $   948    $   874    $   829    $   829    $   786
                                                                      -------    -------    -------    -------    -------
                                                                      -------    -------    -------    -------    -------
   Ratio (1 divided by 2)                                                7.09       7.17       6.55       4.24       5.34
                                                                      -------    -------    -------    -------    -------
                                                                      -------    -------    -------    -------    -------

</TABLE>
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the Court has determined th a t

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________________

No. 99-10040

_______________________

IN THE MATTER OF: BILLY RAY DELP, JR.,

Debtor.

HBF FINANCIAL, LTD.,

Appellee,

versus

BILLY RAY DELP, JR.,

Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas

(4:96-CV-235-Y)

_________________________________________________________________
December 14, 1999

Before JONES, BARKSDALE, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

This court has carefully considered the brief s, oral

arguments of counsel, and the lower courts’ orders in order to

determine whether we have appellate jurisdiction. The parties are

well aware of this court’s settled jurisprudence that when a

district court, sitting in review of a bankruptcy court judgment,

remands the case to the bankruptcy court for significant further

proceedings, this court lacks jurisdiction over the d istrict

court’s order. S ee , e.g. , Beal Bank, S.S.B. v. Caddo Parish-Villas2

South, Ltd.

, ( Matter of Caddo Parish-Villas South, Ltd. ), 174 F.3d

624 (5th Cir. 1999). Viewed in light of this jurisprudence, it

appears to us that the district court’s opinion on appeal intended

to remand this case for some type of significant further

proceedings in the bankruptcy court. This conclusion is reinforced

by the district court’s pointed reference to the fact that the

bankruptcy co urt “did not base its ruling on any of the other

arguments raised in Delp’s brief.”

Accordingly, this appeal is D ISMISSED for lack of

jurisdiction.
#### William P. Sherman and another, Appellants, v. Franz Baeder and others, Respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Brady, J.,

and by Davis, P. J., dissenting.
```

[House Report 107-654]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

107th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     107-654
======================================================================
 
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 5193, BACK TO SCHOOL TAX RELIEF ACT 
                                OF 2002

                                _______
                                

 September 11, 2002.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

   Mr. Reynolds, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 521]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 521, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

    The resolution provides for consideration in the House of 
H.R. 5193, the Back to School Tax Relief Act of 2002, under a 
closed rule. The rule provides one hour of debate in the House 
equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means.
    The rule waives all points of order against consideration 
of the bill. The rule provides that the amendment recommended 
by the Committee on Ways and Means now printed in the bill 
shall be considered as adopted.
    Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit with or 
without instructions.
    The waiver of all points of order against consideration of 
the bill includes a waiver of clause 4(a) of rule XIII 
(requiring a three-day layover of the committee report), which 
is needed because the committee report was not filed until 
Wednesday, September 11 and the bill may be considered by the 
House as early as Thursday, September 12.

                            COMMITTEE VOTES

    Pursuant to clause 3(b) of House rule XIII the results of 
each record vote on an amendment or motion to report, together 
with the names of those voting for and against, are printed 
below:

Rules Committee record vote No. 170

    Date: September 11, 2002.
    Measure: H.R. 5193.
    Motion by: Mr. Frost.
    Summary of motion: To make in order the substitute 
amendment offered by Mr. Rangel and to grant it the appropriate 
waivers.
    Results: Defeated 4 to 7.
    Vote by Members: Linder--Nay; Pryce--Nay; Diaz-Balart--Nay; 
Myrick--Nay; Sessions--Nay; Reynolds--Nay; Frost--Yea; 
Slaughter--Yea; McGovern--Yea; Hastings (FL)--Yea; Dreier--Nay.

                                

```