alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Edward L. Simon, appellant, v. H. J. Cathroe Company et al., appellees.

Filed July 15, 1921.

No. 21936.

Appeal from the district court for Lancaster County! "Willard E. Stewart, Judge.

*Affirmed.*

*Robert J. Greene*and *Hugh G. Wilson,*for appellant.

*Kennedy, Holland, DeLacy*cf- *McLaughlin, contra.*

Heard before .Morrissey, C.J., Aldrich, 'Day, Dean, *536Euansburg and Bose, JJ.

Per Curiam.

This is a claim under the workmen's compensation act. Laws 1913, ch. 19S. Plaintiff was injured while in the employ of defendant, H. J. Cathroe Company, and under judgments heretofore pronounced has recovered compensation. The present proceeding is in the nature of an application to have the court declare that there has been a change in plaintiff's condition since the former judgment wherein plaintiff was found to be suffering from permanent partial disability, and the court is now asked to hold that he is suffering from permanent total disability. There was no new question of law presented, and the question before, the trial court was one of fact. Plaintiff offered the testimony of men eminent in the profession of medicine and surgery, one of whom had performed the original operation on plaintiff and had testified on a former hearing of the case. Without undertaking to quote this testimony, but giving it the full force that plaintiff claims it is entitled to, we may say that it tends to support plaintiff’s claim of permanent total disability. But defendant offered testimony of others, also eminent in the profession of medicine and surgery, and, without setting out their testimony, it may be said that it shows plaintiff is suffering permanent partial disability. On this conflicting evidence the trial court found generally for the defendants.

It is the settled law of this state that a finding of the district court on an issue of fact in a compensation case will not be set aside on appeal, where it is supported by sufficient evidence, or where the evidence is substantially conflicting, unless the finding is clearly wrong. *Manning v Pomerene,*101 Neb. 127; *Miller v. Morris & Co.,*101 Neb. 169; *Kanscheit v. Garrett Laundry Co.,*101 Neb. 702; *Anderson v. Kiene,*103 Neb. 773; *American Smelting & Refining Co. v. Cassil,*104 Neb. 706; *Lincoln Gas & Electric Light Co. v. Crowley,*104 Neb. 701; *Christensen*
      *537
      *v. Protector Sales Co.,*105 Neb. 389. And this is the general rule. Note to L. R. A. 1916A, 266.

The evidence being ample to sustain the judgment, the issue of fact determined by the trial court will not be disturbed.

The judgment is

Affirmed.
No. 68506 

FILED 

JUL 2 1 2016 

1E,K,LIViDEMAN 5179 

Y -CLERK 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA 

SCOTT DAVIS, AN INDIVIDUAL; 

OCEANWATER CONSULTANTS, LLC, 

A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY 

COMPANY; AND SANDRA RAMIREZ, 

Appellants, 

vs. 

E. ALAN TIRAS, A PROFESSIONAL 

CORPORATION; E ALAN TIRAS, AN 

INDIVIDUAL; CANADIAN MINING; A4 

DIAMOND, A CANADIAN COMPANY; 

STAN PASYK, AN INDIVIDUAL; US 

BANK, NA., A FOREIGN 

CORPORATION; WELLS FARGO 

BANK, N.A.; AND KEVIN MCDONALD, 

Respondents. 

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL AND DENYING MOTION 7V 

WITHDRAW 

Cause appearing, appellants' motion for a voluntary dismissal 

of this appeal is granted. This appeal is dismissed. NRAP 42(b). 

Attorney Scott S. Hoffmann's motion to withdraw as counsel of 

record for respondent Wells Fargo Bank is denied as the motion•was not 

served on Wells Fargo Bank. NRAP 46(0(3). 

It is so ORDERED. 

"clakar c 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 412.4° —g.2eSS- 
cc: Hon. Patrick Flanagan, District Judge 

Lansford W. Levitt, Settlement Judge 

Hejmanowski & McCrea LLC 

Watson Rounds 

Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP/Reno 

Parsons Behle & Latimer/Reno 

Holland & Hart LLP/Las Vegas 

Scott S. Hoffmann 

Washoe District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 9 

(0) 1907A ce
EX-4.1



 Exhibit 4.1 

SPECIMEN STOCK CERTIFICATE 
  






 
 Incorporated Under The Laws Of The State Of Delaware 
XX XX 
Galleria Co. 
THIS CERTIFIES THAT XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX is the owner of XXXXXX (XXXX) fully paid and non-assessable shares of common stock of the par value of $XXX.XX each of the above Corporation
transferable only on the books of the Corporation by the holder hereof in person or by duly authorized Attorney upon surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed.

WITNESS the seal of the Corporation and the signatures of its duly authorized officers. 
Dated: XXXXXXXX 
XXXXXXXX, XXXXXX 
XXXXXXXX, XXXXXX
From: Sandra M. Cobb

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Women"s Health Care

Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 6:56:19 PM

Hello,

All employers should be required to offer the SAME health benefits to

all employees. Employees shouldn't be denied benefits because of their

employers religeous views.

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.
No. 550.

#### International Harvester Co. et al. *v.*City of Kansas City, Kansas, et al.

*Frederick Bernays Wiener*and *J. Donald Lysaught*for petitioners.

*Charles S. Rhyne, Thomas P. Brown III*and *Alfred J. Tig he, Jr.*for respondents.

*William M. Ferguson,*Attorney General of Kansas, for the State of Kansas, as *amicus curiae,*in opposition.

C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
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 (2.34 MB)
 
 Central Asia USCENTCOM CENTCOM Coalition International Hybrid Warfare Defense Ministers
 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
October 13, 1962.

No. 102.

#### Koppers Company, Inc., et al. *v.*United States.

*John M. Crimmins, Templeton Smith*and *Robert L. Kirkpatrick*for appellants.

*Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney*
      *857
      *General Loevinger, Robert B. Hummel*and *William H. McManus*for the United States.

*856Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. Dismissed pursuant to Rule 60 of the Rules of this Court.
107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1175

AN ACT

To modify the boundary of Vicksburg National Military Park

to include the property known as Pemberton’s Headquarters, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Vicksburg National

5 Military Park Boundary Modification Act of 2002’’.
 †

2

S 1175 ES

1 SEC. 2. BOUNDARY MODIFICATION.

2 The boundary of Vicksburg National Military Park

3 is modified to include the property known as Pemberton’s

4 Headquarters, as generally depicted on the map entitled

5 ‘‘Boundary Map, Pemberton’s Headquarters at Vicksburg

6 National Military Park’’, numbered 306/80015A, and

7 dated August, 2001. The map shall be on file and available

8 for inspection in the appropriate offices of the National

9 Park Service.

10 SEC. 3. ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY.

11 (a) PEMBERTON’S HEADQUARTERS.—The Secretary

12 of the Interior is authorized to acquire the properties de13 scribed in section 2 and 3(b) by purchase, donation, or

14 exchange, except that each property may only be acquired

15 with the consent of the owner thereof.

16 (b) PARKING.—The Secretary is also authorized to

17 acquire not more than one acre of land, or interest therein,

18 adjacent to or near Pemberton’s Headquarters for the

19 purpose of providing parking and other facilities related

20 to the operation of Pemberton’s Headquarters. Upon the

21 acquisition of the property referenced in this subsection,

22 the Secretary add it to Vicksburg National Military Park

23 and shall modify the boundaries of the park to reflect its

24 inclusion.
†

3

S 1175 ES

1 SEC. 4. ADMINISTRATION.

2 The Secretary shall administer any properties ac3 quired under this Act as part of the Vicksburg National

4 Military Park in accordance with applicable laws and regu5 lations.

6 SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

7 There is authorized to be appropriated such sums as

8 may be necessary to carry out this Act.

Passed the Senate July 24, 2002.

Attest:

Secretary.
107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1175

AN ACT

To modify the boundary of Vicksburg National

Military Park to include the property known asPemberton’s Headquarters, and for other purposes.
#### Solomon Baldwin, Respondent, v. Rhoda J. Lason, Appellant.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Boardman, J.
EXHIBIT 21

SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

Name

Direct Parent(s)

Ownership

Jurisdiction of
IncorporationGenzyme Europe B.V.

Imtix SangStat (Switzerland) GmbH


100
%
The NetherlandsGenzyme Flanders BVBA

Genzyme International Holdings Limited
Genzyme Global S.à.r.l.


99.9
0.1
%%
BelgiumGenzyme International Holdings Limited

Genzyme Global S.à.r.l.


100
%
Republic of IrelandGenzyme Ireland Limited

Genzyme International Holdings Limited


100
%
Republic of IrelandGenzyme Limited

Genzyme Global S.à.r.l


100
%
United KingdomGenzyme Securities Corporation

Genzyme Therapeutic Products Limited Partnership


100
%
Massachusetts, United StatesGenzyme Polyclonals S.A.S.

SangStat Medical, LLC
SangStat Atlantique S.A.S.


1
99
%%
FranceGenzyme Therapeutic Products Limited
Partnership

Genzyme Therapeutic Products Corporation
Genzyme Corporation


1
99
%%
Massachusetts, United StatesGenzyme Therapeutic Products Corporation

Genzyme Corporation


100
%
Massachusetts, United StatesImtix SangStat (Switzerland) GmbH

Genzyme Global S.à.r.l.


100
%
SwitzerlandSangStat Atlantique S.A.S.

SangStat Medical, LLC


100
%
FranceGenzyme Global S.à.r.l.

Genzyme Luxembourg S.à.r.l.


100
%
LuxembourgGenzyme Luxembourg S.à.r.l.

Genzyme Corporation


100
%
Luxembourg


---



QuickLinks
-84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74

36 38 40 

### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲


### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 1000 18 12 06 00 06/25 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 25 Jun 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 39.44 N 77.04 WMeters AGL
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

April 25, 2011 

d0418 

Order 

 

April 25, 2011 

142219 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 142219 

 COA: 293182 

Oakland CC: 2008-220867-FH 

GORDON GRAHAMLATTA WELLS, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 14, 2010 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

 ZAHRA, J., did not participate because he was on the Court of Appeals panel.
No. 214.

#### Joseph L. O’Brien Co. *v.*Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

*Francis T. Anderson*for petitioner.

*Solicitor General Cox, Acting Assistant Attorney General Jones, Meyer Rothwacks*and *Morton K. Rothschild*for respondent.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.
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 (1.14 MB)
 
 PASSEX United Kingdom USS Bataan Wasp-Class
 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE MARCH
31, 1998 FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           1,061
<SECURITIES>                                   887,217
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,916
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               898,194
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 898,194
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          790,071
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            81
<OTHER-SE>                                     105,763
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   898,194
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                14,475
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,149
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,049
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,277
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,277
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,277
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.28
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1394 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1394

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to repeal the medicare 
                outpatient rehabilitation therapy caps.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 4, 2000

  Mr. Ensign introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to repeal the medicare 
                outpatient rehabilitation therapy caps.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Medicare Access to Rehabilitation 
Services Act of 2001''.

SEC. 2. OUTPATIENT THERAPY CAP REPEAL.

    Section 1833 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395l) is 
amended by striking subsection (g).
                                 <all>
```
From: Kjadt@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Mandates For Contraceptive Coverage

Date: Thursday, August 04, 2011 7:16:26 PM

I oppose a mandate for contraceptive coverage. It is not a disease, and should not be regarded as a

preventative health service. Conscience protection should be granted to ALL employers, insurers, and

policy issuers, not just religious employers, who have a moral, ethical or religious objection to this

coverage.

K. O'Keefe
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of United Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Randall M.
Greenwood, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as enacted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

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

         (4) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

/s/ Randall M. Greenwood
--------------------------
Randall M. Greenwood,
Chief Financial Officer

March 29, 2004
From: Alenka Dionne

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Support Access to Preventive Care and Contraception!

Date: Sunday, August 14, 2011 11:52:04 AM

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.

Truthfully yours,

Alenka Dionne

alenkadionne@comcast.nt

Bolingbrook, Illinois 60440