alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Rockingham,

May 4, 1915.

#### David Urch *v.*Maria Rand.

Trespass *quare dausum.*Trial by the court. Transferred from the October term, 1913, of the superior court by *Branch,*J., on the plaintiff’s exception to an order of nonsuit.

*Thomas H. Simes*and *William E. Marvin,*for the plaintiff.

*Kelley & Hatch*and *Page, Bartlett & Mitchell,*for the defendant.

Parsons, C. J.

The plaintiff’s evidence tends to prove his possession of the tract of flats upon which the defendant trespassed. Possession is sufficient evidence of the right of possession in issue in trespass *quare clausum,*in the absence of proof of title in the defendant. The facts, if established, that the premises may be entirely covered by tidewater and that the plaintiff does not own the adjoining upland, do not conclusively controvert the plaintiff’s possession or establish the defendant’s title.

*Exception sustained.*

All concurred.
From: lrjwva@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:37:48 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Larry Jackson

Culloden, WV 25510
From: randy.norman@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:34:24 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Randall Norman

Jenison, MI 49428
From: durmfanger@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:32:06 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services to which they object. I again urge you in the

strongest way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of

mandatory preventive services.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth Yarmark

Westerville, OH 43081
H. Res. 1388 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

July 31, 2008. 

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 

XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 

the bill (H.R. 1338) to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act 

of 1938 to provide more effective remedies to victims of discrimination in the payment of wages on the basis of sex, and 

for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the 

bill are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of 

rule XXI. General debate shall be confined to the bill and 

shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by 

the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee 

on Education and Labor. After general debate the bill shall 

be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It 

shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Com-
2 

•HRES 1388 EH 

mittee on Education and Labor now printed in the bill. The 

committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be 

considered as read. All points of order against the committee 

amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived except 

those arising under clause 10 of rule XXI. Notwithstanding 

clause 11 of rule XVIII, no amendment to the committee 

amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in the report of the Committee on Rules 

accompanying this resolution. Each such amendment may be 

offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered 

only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the 

report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 

opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not 

be subject to a demand for division of the question in the 

House or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order 

against such amendments are waived except those arising 

under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise 

and report the bill to the House with such amendments as 

may have been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate 

vote in the House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute. The previous question 

shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments 
3 

•HRES 1388 EH 

thereto to final passage without intervening motion except 

one motion to recommit with or without instructions. 

SEC. 2. During consideration in the House of H.R. 1338 

pursuant to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of 

the previous question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the bill to such time as may be designated by the 

Speaker. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
From: philipyount@msn.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:21:33 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans, especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services to which they object. I again urge you in the

strongest way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of

mandatory preventive services.

Sincerely,

Philip R. Yount

, 97223-4226
No. 304, Misc.

#### Franano *v.*United States.

Petitioner *pro se.*

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

C. A. 8th

Cir. Certiorari denied.
From: hollyvold@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:22:07 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

HOLLY VOLD

Burnsville, MN 55306
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1430 

Expressing support for the goals of the National Step Up For Kids Day 

by promoting national awareness of the needs of the children, youth, 

and families of the United States, celebrating children, and expressing 

the need to make their future and well-being a national priority. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 11, 2008 

Mr. LOEBSACK (for himself and Mr. PLATTS) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing support for the goals of the National Step Up 

For Kids Day by promoting national awareness of the 

needs of the children, youth, and families of the United 

States, celebrating children, and expressing the need to 

make their future and well-being a national priority. 

Whereas there are approximately 73 million children in the 

United States; 

Whereas nine million children are without health insurance 

and do not receive timely or comprehensive medical attention; 

Whereas three million children are reported abused or neglected each year, thousands of whom are killed or severely injured; 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1430 IH 

Whereas more than 13 million children and youth live below 

the poverty level; 

Whereas millions of children and youth are unsupervised at 

the end of the school day and would benefit from participation in quality after school programs; 

Whereas millions of infants, toddlers, and preschoolers lack 

access to affordable, high-quality early care, and education; 

Whereas safe, nurturing, and stimulating experiences in the 

first years of life promote school-readiness, future academic success, and other positive social outcomes; and 

Whereas the future success, health, prosperity, and security 

of our Nation depend on an educated, healthy, and secure 

citizenry, all of which is founded in childhood: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) recognizes that wise investments in children 

3 will lead to a better-educated citizenry and a more 

4 competitive workforce in the United States; 

5 (2) supports the goals and ideals of the Na6 tional Step Up For Kids Day; 

7 (3) recognizes that every child matters; and 

8 (4) encourages the citizens of the United States 

9 to make children, youth, and families a priority 

10 throughout the year. 

Æ 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of FSP 303 East Wacker Drive
Corp. (the "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, George J. Carter, President and principal executive officer of the
Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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 operations of the
Company.

















Date:
      March 12, 2009
            /s/ George J.
      CarterGeorge
      J. CarterPresident
      (Principal Executive Officer)
#### The First National Bank of Richfield Springs, Respondent, v. G. Hyde Clarke, Appellant.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Opinion by Follett, J.
|   | (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods indicated. |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: November 12, 2010 | /s/ Toni M. Perazzo        |
|-------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------|
|                    | Toni M. Perazzo                                               |
|                    | Chief Financial Officer                                       |
|                    |                                                          |
From: robertfischer@rushmore.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:43:05 AM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Robert Fischer

Rapid City, SD 57702
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF PAMECO CORPORATION FOR THE YEAR ENDED AUGUST 31, 1999
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-2000
<CASH>                                             115
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   76,297
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,364
<INVENTORY>                                    116,622
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               192,043
<PP&E>                                          13,391
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,964
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 251,530
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           80,812
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     36,783
<COMMON>                                            31
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   251,530
<SALES>                                        141,869
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               141,869
<CGS>                                          108,521
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  139,673
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    87
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,847
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (738)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (738)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.24)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.24)


</TABLE>