alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v Jose Gonzalez, Defendant.

Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County,

October 10, 1978

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Leon Polsky*and *Hyman Feinstein for*defendant. *Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney (Richard Kaye*of counsel), for plaintiff.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Julian A. Hertz, J.

The defendant is charged with rape in the first degree in violation of section 130.35 of the Penal Law. He now moves to dismiss the charge after a preliminary hearing. The issue posed is: Can an admitted prostitute be raped when she has sexual intercourse with a client who, instead of paying the agreed upon fee, draws a pistol and obtains the quid pro quo? The court has not been able to find any prior case that has ruled on this issue.

For the purpose of this instant decision on the motion to dismiss after the People’s case on the preliminary hearing, the facts as presented by the complainant are credited. Her statements to the court include her admission as to her profession and the meeting when the defendant approached her on the sidewalk on August 25, 1978, sometime between 11:00 a.m. and 11:30 a.m. at 38th Street off 12th Avenue in New York City. The complainant and the defendant agreed on a fee for *640her sexual services. He suggested the act to take place in an abandoned trailer. They mounted a crate to gain access to the trailer. Since the door did not close securely, she was able to see the pistol (instead of money) produced by the defendant when she requested payment prior to performing.

Having been compelled to perform without payment, a question arises as to whether the complainant was raped. Doubtless, she consented to sexual intercourse. However, the question remains as to whether said consent was revoked at the time of the refusal to pay the agreed fee. A fact finder could conclude that the complainant did not consent.

It is the conclusion of this court that sexual intercourse with an admitted prostitute accomplished, if proven, by evidence establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, by the coercive force of the weapon described, constitutes rape in the first degree in violation of section 130.35 of the Penal Law. The motion to dismiss is denied.
261SOUTH261 NORTH 

# N 

# Mt. Holly Bake Furnace Layout Schematic

261G ID# 53001 

# BAKE OVENALUMINA SCRUBBINGMEDIAFUMESFUMES FLUID COKE

GREEN ANODES

NATURAL GAS OR PROPANE
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8326 

To amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act with respect to the treatment 

of dates for processing under certain marketing orders. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 8, 2024 

Mr. RUIZ introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, 

for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case 

for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the 

committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act with respect to 

the treatment of dates for processing under certain marketing orders. 

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

3 SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF DATES FOR PROCESSING 

4 UNDER MARKETING ORDERS. 

5 Section 8e(a) of the Agricultural Adjustment Act (7 

6 U.S.C. 608e–1(a)), reenacted with amendments by the Ag7 ricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, is amend8 ed— 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8326 IH

1 (1) by inserting ‘‘including dates for proc2 essing,’’ after ‘‘dates,’’; and 

3 (2) by striking ‘‘, other than dates for proc4 essing,’’ each place it appears. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v THOMAS FLOYD FJERMESTAD, Seaman Recruit, U. S. Navy, Appellant

17 USCMA 287, 38 CMR 85

No. 20,393

November 17, 1967

*Major L. G. Bohlen,*USMC, was on the pleadings for Appellant, Accused.

*Lieutenant Charles*Freeland, USNR, was on the pleadings for Appellee, United States.

Opinion of the Court

Ferguson, Judge:

The issue in this ease is whether the president of the special court-martial which tried the accused erred prej-udicially in failing to note that the inclusion of a bad-conduct discharge in the sentence was possible only because “the authorized confinement without substitution for such offenses is six months or more.” Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, 1951, paragraph 127c, section B. Our decision in United States v Yocom, 17 USCMA 270, 38 CMR 68, this day decided, governs the question.

The decision of the board of review is reversed, and the record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy. The board may reassess the sentence or order a rehearing thereon.

Judge Kilday concurs.

Quinn, Chief Judge

(dissenting):

• In my opinion, there is no fair risk the instructional error prejudiced the accused. He was in the. service less than a year when he committed a series of offenses. In a previous conviction he was sentenced to a bad-conduct discharge for a number of offenses, including several unauthorized absences. The discharge was remitted by the supervisory authority on November 22, 1966. Less than three weeks later, the accused again absented himself without authority. The two unauthorized absences for which he was tried here were terminated by apprehension by civil authorities in distant cities. The accused himself acknowledged that the reason for the second of his two absences did not con-constitute “a very good excuse.”

I would affirm the decision of the board of review.
Exhibit 31 (c)**CERTIFICATION**I, Anthony J. Orlando, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of MSW Energy Finance Co., Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date:November 9, 2005         By: /s/ Anthony J. Orlando Anthony J. Orlando   Chief Executive Officer and President
Exhibit 10.23(b)

 

	
Typed by: SG
    	
PLEASE SIGN AND RETURN BOTH COPIES.
    
	
Proofed by: [ILLEGIBLE]
    	
A FULLY EXECUTED COPY WILL BE RETURNED TO YOU.
    


 

L E A S E  E X T E N S I O N

 

 

	
Date:
    	
July 30, 2014
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
RE:
    	
20725 S. Western Avenue, #136, Torrance, CA 90501
    


 

The undersigned hereby agree to extend that certain lease dated March 12, 2008 between EMMAUS MEDICAL, INC. and 20655 S. WESTERN AVENUE, LLC on a month to month basis commencing August 1, 2014 at a monthly rent of $5,902.00 payable in advance on the first day of each month.

 

ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SAID LEASE WILL REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT AND ARE IN NO WAY AFFECTED BY THIS RENEWAL.

 

 

	
LESSEE:
    	
EMMAUS MEDICAL, INC.
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
BY:
    	
/s/ Willis C. Lee
    	
 
    	
DATE:
    	
7/31/2014
    
	
 
    	
Willis C. Lee, COO/Emmaus Medical, Inc.
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
LESSOR:
    	
20655 S. WESTERN AVENUE,   LLC
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
BY: SURF MANAGEMENT, INC.
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
BY:
    	
/s/ Steven P. Fechner
    	
 
    	
DATE:
    	
8/4/14
    
	
 
    	
Steven P. Fechner, President
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
						


 

Please return to: Surf Management, Inc., P.O. Box 3217, Torrance, CA 90510 Phone 310.533.5900

 











 

	
Typed by: SG
    	
PLEASE SIGN AND RETURN BOTH COPIES.
    
	
Proofed by: [ILLEGIBLE]
    	
A FULLY EXECUTED COPY WILL BE RETURNED TO YOU.
    


 

L E A S E  E X T E N S I O N

 

 

	
Date:
    	
July 30, 2014
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
RE:
    	
20725 S. Western Avenue, #134, Torrance, CA 90501
    


 

The undersigned hereby agree to extend that certain lease dated January 28, 2014 between EMMAUS MEDICAL, INC. and 20655 S. WESTERN AVENUE, LLC on a month-to-month  basis commencing August 1, 2014 at a monthly rent of $2,548.00 payable in advance on the first day of each month.

 

ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SAID LEASE WILL REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT AND ARE IN NO WAY AFFECTED BY THIS RENEWAL.

 

 

	
LESSEE:
    	
EMMAUS MEDICAL, INC.
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
BY:
    	
/s/ Willis C. Lee
    	
 
    	
DATE:
    	
7/31/2014
    
	
 
    	
Willis C. Lee, COO/Emmaus Medical, Inc.
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
LESSOR:
    	
20655 S. WESTERN AVENUE,   LLC
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
BY: SURF MANAGEMENT, INC.
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
BY:
    	
/s/ Steven P. Fechner
    	
 
    	
DATE:
    	
8/4/14
    
	
 
    	
Steven P. Fechner, President
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
						


 

Please return to: Surf Management, Inc., P.O. Box 3217, Torrance, CA 90510 Phone 310.533.5900
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 18

- 00024

- CV

Jeffrey M. Templeton, Director and

Shareholder

v.

RKR Investments Inc., A Nevada Corp.; RKR Operations, Inc., a Texas Corp.; RKR Technologies, LTD., a Texas Limited Partnership; and Bob Reece, as Trustee of the Bobby Neale Reece Revocable Trust §

§

§

§ From the 48th District Court

of Tarrant County (048

- 290383

- 17)

May 24, 2018

Opinion by Justice Walker



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

there was n o error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of

the trial court is affirmed.

It is further ordered that appellant Jeffrey M. Templeton shall pay all of the

costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By

_ /s/ Sue Walker

__________________ Justice Sue Walker
**Exhibit 12.1****Mediacom Communications Corporation and Subsidiaries****Schedule of Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges**                       **For the years ended December 31,**   **2005**  **2004**  **2003**  **2002**  **2001**   **(in thousands, except ratio amounts)** Earnings:                    (Loss) income before income taxes $(24,965) $13,628  $(62,051) $(161,458) $(189,147)Interest expense, net  208,265   192,740   190,199   188,304   139,867 Amortization of capitalized interest  2,357   2,055   2,083   611   1,365 Amortization of debt issuance costs  8,613   8,725   6,696   7,183   5,725 Interest component of rent expense (1)  5,267   4,931   4,583   3,968   3,045                 Earnings available for fixed charges $199,537  $222,079  $141,510  $38,608  $(39,145)                                     Fixed Charges:                    Interest expense, net $208,265  $192,740  $190,199  $188,304  $139,867 Capitalized interest  3,756   3,012   6,957   6,778   4,221 Amortization of debt issuance costs  8,613   8,725   6,696   7,183   5,725 Interest component of rent expense (1)  5,267   4,931   4,583   3,968   3,045                 Total fixed charges $225,901  $209,408  $208,435  $206,233  $152,858                 Ratio of earnings to fixed charges  —   1.06   —   —   —                 Deficiency of earnings over fixed charges $(26,364) $—  $(66,925) $(167,625) $(192,003)                 (1) A reasonable approximation (one-third) is deemed to be the interest factor includedin rental expense.
91
#### Koren, Appellant, *v.*United Steelworkers of America.

Argued October 7, 1968.

Before Bell, 0. J., Musmanno, Jones, Cohen, Eagen, O’Brien and Roberts, JJ.

*Herbert B.*Lebovitg, with him *Lebovitg & Lebovitg,*for appellant.

*Morton B. DeBroff,*with him *Leo I. Shapiro,*for appellee.

November 12, 1968:

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Judgment affirmed.

Mr. Justice Musmanno did not participate in the decision of this case.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 46 (Friday, March 9, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 10712]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-4221]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[I.D. 030507E]


New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of a public meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) is 
scheduling a public meeting of its Ad Hoc Sector Omnibus Committee 
(Committee) in March, 2007 to consider actions affecting New England 
fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Recommendations from 
this group will be brought to the full Council for formal consideration 
and action, if appropriate.

DATES: The meeting will be held on Thursday, March 29, 2007, at 9:30 
a.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Holiday Inn, 31 Hampshire 
Street, Mansfield, MA 02048; telephone: (508) 339-2200; fax: (508) 256-
2550.
    Council address: New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water 
Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, 
New England Fishery Management Council; telephone: (978) 465-0492.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Committee will continue development of 
sector programs and operational guidelines.
    Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come 
before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject 
of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to 
those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising 
after publication of this notice that require emergency action under 
section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's 
intent to take final action to address the emergency.

Special Accommodations

    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. 
Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids 
should be directed to Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, at (978) 465-
0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Authority:  16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: March 6, 2007.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E7-4221 Filed 3-8-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
#### Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company v. T. W. McIlvaine, as administrator *cum testamento annexo de bonis non*of the Estate of J. H. Brown Scheuyeaulle, deceased.

177 So. 552.

Division A.

Opinion Filed December 8, 1937.

*Evan Evans,*for Defendant in Error.

Per Curiam.

This is the third appearance of this case in the Supreme Court. See A. C. L. Ry. Co. v. Webb, 112 Fla. 449, 150 Sou. 741; A. C. L. Ry. Co. v. McIlvaine, 121 Fla. 78, 163 Sou. 496. After the suit was tried under the title of A. C. L. Ry. Co. v. Webb, McIlvaine, as administrator, was substituted for Webb.

The law of the case has been enunciated in the opinions above referred to and we find no good reason to further discuss the issues presented.

Upon the last trial the plaintiff, appellee here, recovered verdict and judgment in the sum of $1,000.00 and costs.

There is practically no difference between the evidence submitted as shown by the record in this case and that as shown by the records heretofore presented to the Court and on each occasion when we considered the case here*342tofore we, in effect, held the evidence sufficient to warrant recovery.

An examination of the entire record discloses no reversible error and, therefore, the judgment should be affirmed.

It is so ordered.

Affirmed.

Ellis, C. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.

Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Chapman, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
1The HONORABLE WILLIAM R. WILSON, JR., United States District Judge

for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the

HONORABLE H. DAVID YOUNG, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern

District of Arkansas.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 01-1351

___________

Bufford McDonald, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Arkansas.

Jay Winters, Sheriff, Pope County *

Sheriff’s Department; John Does, * [UNPUBLISHED]

Employees of the Pope County *

Sheriff’s Department, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: June 18, 2001

 Filed: June 20, 2001

___________

Before BOWMAN, BEAM, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Arkansas inmate Bufford McDonald appeals from the district court’s1 adverse

grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Having carefully reviewed
-2-

the record and the parties’ briefs, we agree that summary judgment was proper for the

reasons stated by the district court. See Liebe v. Norton, 157 F.3d 574, 578 (8th Cir.

1998) (de novo review). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
No. 49264.

#### Protests 90317-K, etc., of Louis Wolf & Co., Inc., et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

ELIZABETH VISCAINO

, Ap p ellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

, Appellee

. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 14

- 00239

- CR

Appeal from the

County Court

of Presidio County, Texas

(TC#5810)



### O R D E R

The Court on its own motion ORDERS the Official Court Reporter for the County Court

of Presidio County, Texas, to electronically submit a supplemental reporter’s record containing

State’s Exhibit No. 1 (Receipt), State’s Exhibit No. 2 (“Disk”), and State’s Exhibit 3 ( written ).

The supplemental reporter’s record is due in this Court on or before December 23, 2016.

IT IS SO ORDERED THI S 14 TH DAY OF DECEMBER , 201 6

.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
#### Nelson D. Morehouse, *Appellant, v.*Joel B. Morehouse, *Respondent, Impleaded, etc.*

Judgment reversed; new trial granted, costs to abide event. Opinion by Learned, P. J.; Bockes, J., not acting.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C.§1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of The Frontier Fund on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2007,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned hereby certifies, to the best of 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 Frontier Fund.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                                              
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Robert J. Enck                                                                                            
|Robert J. Enck                                                                                                
|President and Chief Executive Officer of Equinox Fund Management, LLC, the Managing Owner of The Frontier Fund
|                                                                                                              
|/s/ Brent Bales                                                                                               
|Brent Bales                                                                                                   
|Chief Financial Officer of Equinox Fund Management, LLC, the Managing Owner of The Frontier Fund              

Date: August 13, 2007