alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Lofton *vs.*Murchison *et al.*

A will, made and probated in the year 1847, by which the testator devised to his daughter certain land, “to her and her children, free from the disposition of any future- husband,” (the daughter then having no children,) conveyed to her an absolute fee; and children bom to her after the testator’s death took no estate under the will by way of remainder or otherwise.

July 11, 1888.

Wills. Estates. Remainders. Before Judge John T. Clarke. Early superior court. April term, 1887.

This was an action of ejectment. On the trial, it appeared that the testator’s daughter, to whom the land was *392devised, conveyed it to the defendants’ ancestor in title. This daughter then had no children. She married after the testator’s death. The plaintiff is her child. A verdict was rendered for the plaintiff; a new trial was granted, and she excepted. The decision states the other material facts.

Bacon & Rutherford and W. D. Kiddoo, for plaintiff.

H. O. Sheffield and R. H. Powell, by J. H. Lumpkin, for defendants.

Bleckley, Chief Justice.

The will was made and probated in 1847, long before the adoption of the code, for which reason §2250, if not a mere restatement of- the prior law, has no application to the case. The rule of decision must be found in the law as it existed when the will took effect.

The testator devised to his daughter certain land “ to her and her children, free from the disposition of any future husband.” The daughter then had no children, but bore children after the testator’s death.

Under one of the resolutions in Wilde’s case, 6 Ooke R. 17, as heretofore expounded by this court, this devise, creating no express estate for life in the daughter, but connecting unborn children directly with her in conveying the fee, would in England have created an estate tail. *Wiley Parish, & Co. vs. Smith,*3 *Ga.*551; *Jossey vs. White,*28 *Ga.*270, 271 ; *Sandford vs. Sandford,*58 *Ga.*260. The law of Georgia inhibits entails, and by the act of 1821 (Cobb’s Dig. 169,) enforces the inhibition by enlarging them into estates in fee simple.

There is nothing in this will to negative an estate tail but the exclusion of the daughter’s future husband, and that can have no such effect for the reason that his exclusion is equally consistent with both kinds of estate here in question, to-wit, an estate in the daughter for life only *393(with a contingent remainder to unborn children), and an estate tail. The words of exclusion bar marital rights, and would have their office and some effect, no matter which of these estates the testator contemplated. When a third thing is equally compatible with either of two others, it affords no reason for inferring one of the two rather than the other. *Wilkerson vs.*Clark, this term. The words of exclusion count for nothing in the present case. *Butler vs.*Ralston, 69 *Ga.*485.

Judgment affirmed.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Commission on Civil Rights

# AGENCY:

U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. 

# ACTION:

Notice of Membership of the USCCR Performance Review Board. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice announces the appointment of the Performance Review Board (PRB) of the United States Commission on Civil Rights. Publication of PRB membership is required pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4). 

The PRB provides fair and impartial review of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights' Senior Executive Service performance appraisals and makes recommendations regarding performance ratings and performance awards to the Staff Director, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights for the FY 2006 rating year. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Tyro Beatty, Director of Human Resources, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 624 Ninth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20425.  Telephone: (202) 376-8364. 

## USCCR Performance Review Board Members 

Cynthia G. Pierre, Director, Field Management Programs,  EEOC. 

Lawrence W. Roffee, Executive Director, U.S. Access Board. 

David Enzel, Deputy Director, HUD Office of Appeals Policy Management. 

Dated: February 15, 2007. 

David P. Blackwood, 

General Counsel.

 [FR Doc. E7-2957 Filed 2-21-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
# Main

&"Arial,Bold"Part 1SUPPLEMENT	&"Arial,Bold"DRAFT	&"Arial,Bold"Fiscal Year 2016 ReportingSection V

&"Arial,Bold"DRAFT	&"Arial,Bold"DRAFT V SBR - &P	&"Arial,Bold"IRC Handout July 21, 2016

# Footnotes and Additional Inform

&"Arial,Bold"Part 1SUPPLEMENT	&"Arial,Bold"DRAFT	&"Arial,Bold"Fiscal Year 2016 ReportingSection V

&"Arial,Bold"DRAFT	&"Arial,Bold"DRAFT V SBR - &P	&"Arial,Bold"IRC Handout July 21, 2016
Exhibit 12.3

WISCONSIN POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY

RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES AND RATIO OF EARNINGS TO COMBINED FIXED CHARGES
    AND PREFERRED DIVIDEND REQUIREMENTS

|                                                    | Years Ended Dec. 31, 
|--------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------
|                                                    |                      
|                                                    | 2007                 
|                                                    |                      
|                                                    | (dollars in millions)
|                                                    |                      
|EARNINGS:                                           |                      
|Net income                                          |                      
|Income taxes (a)                                    |                      
|                                                    |                      
|Income before income taxes                          |                      
|                                                    |                      
|Fixed charges as defined                            |                      
|                                                    |                      
|Adjustment for undistributed equity earnings        |                      
|                                                    |                      
|Total earnings as defined                           |                      
|                                                    |                      
|FIXED CHARGES:                                      |                      
|Interest expense                                    |                      
|Estimated interest component of rent expense        |                      
|                                                    |                      
|Total fixed charges as defined                      |                      
|                                                    |                      
|Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges                  |                      
|                                                    |                      
|Preferred dividend requirements (pre-tax basis) (b) |                      
|                                                    |                      
|Fixed charges and preferred dividend requirements   |                      
|                                                    |                      
|Ratio of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges and     |                      
|Preferred Dividend Requirements                     |                      
|                                                    |                      

(a) Includes net interest related to unrecognized tax benefits.

(b) Preferred dividend requirements (pre-tax basis) are computed by dividing the
preferred dividend requirements by one hundred percent minus the respective annual effective income tax rate.
Before the Third Division,

August 29, 1949

No. 53527.

protests 135104-K and 136874-K (Baltimore).

#### Crosse & Blackwell Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Cline, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
----

DIRECTORATE GENERAL ENVIRONMENT (DG ENV)

Publication of a notice of vacancy for the post of Principal Adviser (grade AD 14)

COM/2006/10033

(2006/C 262 A/01)

We propose:

The position of Principal Adviser, who will need to work on the various policy areas covered by the DG and bring together analysis and conclusions on a wide range of inter-related issues and questions. In particular, the tasks of the Principal Adviser will focus on cross-cutting issues to contribute to the internal coordination of the DG and to enhance the integration of environmental priorities in other Community policies, for example: Environment and transport, sustainable mobility, the links to climate change, etc.; Environment and energy, including renewable energy, more efficient use of fossil fuels, etc.; Environment and competitiveness, for example looking at eco-efficiency, costs of environmental damage, trade-off between environment and economic benefits, the link with the Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs etc.; Impacts of environmental damage on human health.

We look for:

Candidates who must have a sound and extensive knowledge and experience in coordination of a wide range of public policy issues, preferably both at Community and Member State levels. Experience in integration of the environment into other policies would be an advantage. The candidate must be able to demonstrate: — Proven negotiating skills; — Excellent written and oral communication skills; — A sound understanding of economics and the business world. Experience in developing policy is necessary. Applicants should demonstrate a good knowledge of the EU Institutions.

Applicants must:

The Principal Adviser will be selected and appointed by the Commission according to its selection and recruitment procedures. Salaries and conditions of employment are those laid down in the Staff Regulations for AD 14 grade officials of the European Communities. The Commission applies an equal opportunities policy.

Full job description, selection criteria and application details can be found at

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/personnel_administration/working_senior_mgt_en.htm.

The link to the on-line application is:

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/personnel_administration/seniormanagementvacancies/index_en.html.

If you encounter technical problems, please send an e-mail to:

ADMIN-MANAGEMENT-ONLINE@ec.europa.eu.

The closing date for registration is 4 December 2006. On-line registration will not be possible after 12 noon Brussels time.

----
Case 2:02-cv-04444-PBT     Document 29      Filed 07/22/2005     Page 1 of 1
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4133 

To amend the National Labor Relations Act to require secret ballot elections, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 16, 2024 

Mrs. BLACKBURN (for herself, Mr. TUBERVILLE, and Mr. HAGERTY) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To amend the National Labor Relations Act to require secret 

ballot elections, 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 ‘‘Protecting Workers 

5 from Coercion Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE NATIONAL LABOR RELA7 TIONS ACT. 

8 Section 9 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 

9 U.S.C. 159) is amended— 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4133 IS

1 (1) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘designated or 

2 selected for the purposes of collective bargaining’’ 

3 and inserting ‘‘for the purposes of collective bar4 gaining selected by secret ballot in an election con5 ducted by the Board,’’; and 

6 (2) in subsection (c)— 

7 (A) in paragraph (1), in the flush matter 

8 following subparagraph (B), by inserting ‘‘, not 

9 later than 1 month after such petition was 

10 filed,’’ after ‘‘it shall’’; and 

11 (B) by adding at the end the following: 

12 ‘‘(6) An election may not take place after the 

13 filing of any petition until the Board conducts a 

14 hearing, and makes a ruling, on— 

15 ‘‘(A) any issues regarding unit inclusion or 

16 exclusion or eligibility of an individual; and 

17 ‘‘(B) any other legal dispute concerning 

18 the election alleged by the employer or a labor 

19 organization seeking recognition as the collec20 tive bargaining representative of employees of 

21 the employer.’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 11 (a)
IRWIN FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
EXHIBIT 11(a) - COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER
SHARE



Year Ended December 31,      1998       1997       1996
(In thousands except per
share amounts)


AVERAGE NUMBER OF SHARES      21,732     22,326     22,716
OUTSTANDING

NET INCOME                   $30,503    $24,444    $22,428

BASIC EARNINGS PER SHARE     $  1.40    $  1.09    $  0.99
(Note 2)




DILUTED SHARES
OUTSTANDING:
  Average number of           21,732     22,326     22,716
shares outstanding
  Assumed exercise of            407        396        314
stock options (Note 1)
  Total shares (Note 2)       22,139     22,722     23,030


NET INCOME                   $30,503    $24,444    $22,428

DILUTED EARNINGS PER         $  1.38    $  1.08    $  0.97
SHARE (Note 2)

(1)  The dilutive effect of stock options is based on the Treasury Stock 
method.
  
(2)  Adjusted for the two-for-one stock splits effective May 27, 1998 and 
December 30, 1996. Previously reported per share data have been
adjusted to reflect these splits.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                                 SUBSIDIARY LIST

1.    AEG Finance Corporation, a Delaware corporation, wholly owned by Maytag
      Aircraft Corporation

2.    Excel Cargo, Inc., a California corporation, wholly owned by Mercury Air
      Group, Inc.

3.    Hermes Aviation Canada, Inc., a Canadian corporation, wholly owned by
      Excel Cargo, Inc.

4.    Hermes Aviation, Inc., a California corporation, wholly owned by Mercury
      Air Cargo, Inc.

5.    Hermes Aviation de Mexico S.A. de C.V., a Mexican corporation, owned 99%
      by Mercury Air Cargo, Inc. and 1% by Hermes Aviation, Inc.

6.    Jupiter Airline Automation Services, Inc., a Florida corporation, wholly
      owned by Mercury Air Group, Inc.

7.    Maytag Aircraft Corporation, a Cayman corporation, wholly owned by Maytag
      Aircraft Corporation.

8.    Maytag Aircraft Corporation, a Colorado corporation, wholly owned by
      Mercury Air Group, Inc.

9.    MercFuel, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, wholly owned by Mercury Ai r
      Group, Inc.

10.   MercMed, LLC., a Nevada Limited Liability Company 68.47% Owned by Mercury
      Air Group, Inc. and 31.53 % owned by Phillip J. Fagan

11.   Mercury Acceptance Corporation, Inc., a California corporation, wholly
      owned by Mercury Air Group, Inc.

12.   Mercury Air Cargo, Inc., a California corporation, wholly owned by Mercury
      Air Group, Inc.

13.   Mercury Air Center-Long Beach, Inc., a California corporation wholly owned
      by Mercury Air Group, Inc.

14.   Mercury Aviation (Israel), LTD.,50 % owned by Mercury Air Group, Inc. and
      50% owned by Shavit Industries, LTD.

15.   Mercury Aviation Staffing, LLC. , a California Limited Liability Company,
      owned by Mercury Air Cargo, Inc.

16.   Pegasus de Mexico S.A. de C.V., a Mexican corporation, owned 99% by
      Mercury Air Cargo, Inc. and 1% by Hermes Aviation, Inc.

17.   Vulcan Aviation, Inc., a California corporation, wholly owned by Mercury
      Air Cargo, Inc.
EXHIBIT 4.12

                     PLEDGED SHARE AMENDMENT


     This Pledged Share Amendment, dated as of December 11, 1997, is
delivered pursuant to Section 5 of the Pledge Agreement referred to
below.  The undersigned hereby agrees that this Pledged Share
Amendment may be attached to the Pledge Agreement dated as of
May 26, 1992, between the undersigned and Chemical Bank, as Trustee
(the "Pledge Agreement"; capitalized terms defined therein being
used herein as therein defined), and that the Pledged Shares listed on
this Pledged Share Amendment shall be deemed to be part of the
Pledged Shares and shall become part of the Pledged Collateral and
shall secure all Senior Obligations as provided in the Pledge
Agreement.


          AMERICAN BANKNOTE CORPORATION


          By: S/ Harvey J.  Kesner
          Name:  Harvey J.  Kesner
          Title:  Executive Vice President & General Counsel



                                                         Percentage of
                        Stock                            All Capital
              Class of  Certificate  Par     Number of   Stock
Stock Issuer  Stock     Number       value   Shares      Outstanding

ABN CBA,
Inc.          Common    1            $0.01   1,000       100%
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT JUNE 30, 2000 AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF
INCOME FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,
2000.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           2,143
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   51,425
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,550
<INVENTORY>                                      3,428
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                57,406
<PP&E>                                         108,925
<DEPRECIATION>                                  43,792
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 135,115
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           39,138
<BONDS>                                         65,202
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            64
<OTHER-SE>                                      30,601
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   135,115
<SALES>                                        254,474
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               338,742
<CGS>                                          223,053
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  305,629
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                28,182
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 5,408
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,340
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,931
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,923
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,008
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  (979)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,029
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .30


</TABLE>
No. 58511.

protests 206601-K, etc. (New York).

#### Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *R. C. Williams & Co., Inc.*(40 C. C. P. A. 130, C. A. D. 508) and *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
-1- 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

CASE NO. 04-CV-893 WBS DAD

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

TODD M. NOONAN (CA SBN 172962) 

STEVENS & O’CONNELL LLP 

400 Capitol Mall, Suite 1400 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

Telephone: (916) 329-9111 

Facsimile: (916) 329-9110 

DEBORAH S. BIRNBACH (admitted pro hac vice) 

Testa, Hurwitz & Thibeault, LLP 

125 High Street 

Boston, MA 02110 

Telephone: (617) 248-7602 

Facsimile: (617) 790-0031 

Attorneys for Defendant 

Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ALBERT D. BOLT, 

Plaintiff, 

 v. 

MERRIMACK PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.,

Defendant. 

Case No. 04-CV-893 WBS DAD 

STIPULATION RE BRIEFING RELATED 

TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR 

SUMMARY JUDGMENT; AND 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

WHEREAS, the parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment, which are 

presently set for hearing on June 13, 2005. 

WHEREAS, on May 16, 2005, concurrently with its opposition to plaintiff’s motion for 

summary judgment, defendant Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, Inc. filed a Motion to Strike the

Testimony Of Plaintiff’s Expert Witness, Jeffery Rogers, and a Motion to Strike Portions of 

Plaintiff’s Statement of Undisputed Facts, which were directed at evidence and pleadings 

submitted by Plaintiff Albert Bolt in support of his motion for summary judgment. 

Case 2:04-cv-00893-WBS-DAD Document 71 Filed 05/31/05 Page 1 of 2
-2- 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

CASE NO. 04-CV-893 WBS DAD

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WHEREAS the parties have met and conferred and reached an agreement on further 

briefing on these two motions to strike. 

NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS: 

Plaintiff Albert Bolt’s opposition/response to the motion to strike the testimony of 

plaintiff’s expert witness, Jeffery Rogers, and the motion to strike portions of plaintiff’s statement 

of undisputed facts will be filed on or before June 6, 2005, either as part of or in conjunction with 

Plaintiff’s reply brief in support of his motion for summary judgment. No earlier response or 

opposition need be filed by Plaintiff. Defendant’s reply brief in support of its motion for summary 

judgment will also be filed on or before June 6, 2005. Briefing will be complete on the parties’ 

cross-motions for summary judgment and the two motions to strike with the filing of the parties’ 

respective briefs on June 6, 2005. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

DATED: May 24, 2005 DOWNEY BRAND LLP 

By:/S/WILLIAM R. WARNE (authorized 5/24/05)

WILLIAM R. WARNE 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

ALBERT BOLT 

DATED: May 24, 2005 STEVENS & O’CONNELL LLP 

By:__/S/ TODD M. NOONAN_______________ 

TODD M. NOONAN 

Attorneys for Defendant 

MERRIMACK PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: May 27, 2005 

Case 2:04-cv-00893-WBS-DAD Document 71 Filed 05/31/05 Page 2 of 2