alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
A97A2529.

#### FLINT ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORPORATION v. ED SMITH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.

(512 SE2d 713)

Decided February 24, 1999.

*Chambless, Higdon & Carson, Emmitte H. Griggs, Jon C. Wolfe, Joseph H. Davis, Daniel, Lawson, Tuggle & Jerles, Tom W. Daniel,*for appellant.

*Weissman, Nowack, Curry & Wilco, Leigh M. Wilco, Frances R. Mathis,*for appellee.

Barnes, Judge.

The decision of the Court of Appeals in this case having been reversed by the Supreme Court in *Flint Elec. Membership Corp. v. Ed Smith Constr. Co.,*270 Ga. 464 (511 SE2d 160) (1999), our decision in *Flint Elec. Membership Corp. v. Ed Smith Constr. Co.,*229 Ga. App. 838 (495 SE2d 136) (1997), is hereby vacated, and the judgment of the Supreme Court is made the judgment of this Court.

*Judgment reversed.*

*Ruffin and Eldridge, JJ., concur.*
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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

No. 98-50100 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus CHARLES CRAIG JOHNSTON, also known as Jaws, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. SA-97-CR-315-2

- - - - - - - - - - March 10, 1998 Before DUHÉ, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Charles Craig Johnston appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion for review of the magistrate judge’s detention order and to set conditions of release. The district court’s decision, which affirmed the magistrate judge’s detention order, rests upon the conclusion that Johnston has not rebutted the presumption that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure his presence at trial. See 18 U.S.C.No. 98-50100 -2- § 3142(e). This conclusion is supported by the record. See United States v. Rueben , 974 F.2d 580, 586 (5th Cir. 1992). Accordingly, the district court’s order denying Johnston’s motion for review of the detention order is AFFIRMED.
Case *No.*14,676.

#### UNITED STATES v. BRUCE.

[2 Cranch. C. C. 95.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

Dec. Term, 1813.

Sdaveuv — Manumission.

Ad informal instrument of manumission, accompanied by an actual manumission of the defendant before the commission of the offence charged, followed by a formal deed of manumission after the commission of the offence, is sufficient evidence that the defendant was not a slave at the time of committing the offence.

[Cited in U. S. v. Charles. Case No. 14,786; U. S. v. Gray, Id. 15.252.]

Indictment under the statute of Maryland, 1751, c. 14, for conspiring with Negro Charles to burn Mrs. Love’s house. Charles having been convicted and pardoned. United States v. Charles [Case No. 14,786]. The indictment charged the defendant [Jacob Bruce] as a slave. The statute makes it a capital offence.

*1280Mr. Jones, for the United States,

offered Charles, a slave, as a witness.

John Lee, D. Forest, and Mr. Law, for defendant,

objected that by the Maryland law of 1717, c. 13, § 3, no slave can be a witness even against a slave, in a capital case.

Mr. Jones.

The statute of 1751, c. 14, upon which this prosecution is founded, admits slaves to be witnesses.

The counsel for the defendant, contended that he was not a slave at the time of committing the offence; and as evidence of his freedom, offered an informal paper, purporting to be an instrument of manumission, and evidence that he was actually set free before the commission of the offence by Mr. John M. Goldsborough, his master, for his faithful services; and a formal deed of manumission, executed after the commission of. the offence, agreeably to the provisions of the Maryland law, 1796, c. 67.

THE COURT

(THRUSTON, Circuit Judge, absent)

was of opinion, that as between the master and slave, the informal paper, with actual manumission, was valid, and that the defendant could not be convicted as a slave under the act of assembly.
### Ground-water resources of Camas Prairie, Camas and Elmore Counties, Idaho

By: William Clarence Walton

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp1609

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plate:  **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
**Specifications VikingUAS X6 Model 800 Hexacopter Multirotor Platforms**

**VikingUAS X6 Model 800 Multirotor Aircraft Specifications**The VikingUAS X6 Model 800 Hexacopter is the most versatile hexacopter heavy lif t

multicopter on the planet with fixed hinge mounted booms with threaded fasteners this

frame minimizes vibration by 60% even in temperatures below -10F and upwards of

120F. The ease of taking a large multicopter and transporting can not be any easi er for

such a large multirotor.X6 Model 800 Frame Folded**Frame Extended**

This frame is designed to be used and configured with ALL flight controllers curr ently on

the market our primary flight controllers are the DJI A2 Professional, PiX Hawk, DJI

Naza V2, UTC Piccolo Multirotor. This airframe is also designed to carry a nd integrated

parachute deployment system incase of a failsafe condition. Designed in Ame rica this is

one of the premier multirotors of 2015.**Radio Specifications**

### Attaching the Mooring System

1. The VikingUAS Mooring tether line needs to be fastened as close to the center of

the aerial vehicles CG in order to keep the line from making contact with the

propellers of the multi-rotor if using a balloon place as close to the center at the

bottom of the balloon or blimp.

2. If you do not have pre-drilled 1/8” hole in your aircraft you will need to drill one

for the 4-40 screw attachment to anchor the aluminum stand-off.

3. Once tether is attached and line is spooled out we recommend you to practice at

low level to get a feel for the tether on your aircraft. Each platform reacts

differently with the line which can easily be dialed in through the gains in yo ur

flight control software you can do this manually through the Skylark Radio follow

the instructions on sub-trim adjustment. The key is that your’re comfortable with

the flight characteristics to safely operate the platform. If at any t ime you do not

feel comfortable disconnect tether and seize flight operations immediate ly.

4. Operation above 149 feet AGL must comply with CFR 14 Part 101.13 (a) (1) (3) (4) and

(b) Part 101

. 17 (a) & (b).

5. Operation will be conducted with a minimum 150 foot Safety Perimeter where

nonparticipating personnel and property will not be allowed in t o the operational area.
EXHIBIT 10.4

| EG&G Technical Services,      Inc. |     |              |
|----------------------------------------|----------|-------------------|
|                                   |     |              |   |
| Dated:                                 | 12/18/09 |              | By: | /s/ H.      Thomas Hicks |   |
|                                   |     |              |   |
|                                   | Title:   | VP      & CFO |   |
|                                   |     |              |   |

----
No. 96-5680.

#### Dayse *v.*Department of Veterans Affairs.

C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit
32.2





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 Sajan, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q
for the fiscal period ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Timothy Clayton, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:





1.
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities 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.





/s/
      Timothy ClaytonTimothy
      Clayton,
                  Chief
      Financial OfficerNovember
      12, 2010
Before the Third Division,

December 12, 1949.

No. 53805.

protests 107465-K, etc. (Nogales).

#### Arizona Flour Mills et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Cline, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as that involved in *E. C. Lineiro*v. *United States*(37 C. C. P. A. 10, C. A. D. 411), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Skip Navigation

#         Archive-It      

Login

      - HOME
      - EXPLORE
      - LEARN MORE
      - CONTACT US

### The leading web archiving service for collecting and accessing cultural heritage on the web 

Built at the Internet Archive

        - Explore
        - Federal Depository Library Program Web Archive
        - CFO, United States Chief Financial Officers Council

#  CFO, United States Chief Financial Officers Council 

**Collected by:** Federal Depository Library Program Web Archive 

**Archived since:**Aug, 2018

**Description:**
The Council was established pursuant to Chief Financial Officers (CFO) Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-576). It is an organization of the CFOs and Deputy CFOs of the largest Federal agencies, senior officials of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Department of the Treasury who work collaboratively to improve financial management in the U.S. Government. The Council was established under the provisions of the CFO Act of 1990 to advise and coordinate the activities of the member agencies on such matters as consolidation and modernization of financial systems, improved quality of financial information, financial data and information standards, internal controls, legislation affecting financial operations and organizations, and any other financial management matter.

**Subject:**    	    Government - US Federal,     	    Economics & Finance

**Creator:**    	    United States Chief Financial Officers Group

**Language:**    	    English

**Collector:**    	    U.S. Government Publishing Office

## Narrow Your Results

### 

            There are no further ways to narrow your results.           

Sites for this collection are listed below. Narrow your results at left, or enter a search query below to		      find a site, specific URL or to search the text of archived webpages.
Clear

              - Sites
              - Search Page Text

Page 1 of 1  (2 Total Results)

**Sort By:**
                - Title (A-Z)
                - Title (Z-A)
                - URL (A-Z)
                - URL (Z-A)

### URL:     https://cfo.gov/

	  	Loading Wayback Capture Info...	  

Loading video data...

### URL:     https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOA4flqyQapZcN-RaLRRHvA/

	  	Loading Wayback Capture Info...	  

Loading video data...

Page 1 of 1  (2 Total Results)

Archive It

#### Archive-It 

*Built at the Internet Archive*
2014 Archive-ItThe leading web archiving service for collecting and accessing  cultural heritage on the web 

      - Home
      - Learn More         - About Archive-It
        - News/Press
        - Meet the Team
        - Publications
      - Contact Us
No. 96-5614.

#### Stone *v.*Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services.

Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration StatementsNo. 333-77509 and No. 333-79605 on Form S-8 of our reports dated March 7, 2006, relating to the consolidated financial statements of Navigant International, Inc. (which report expresses an unqualified opinion on such financial statementsand includes an explanatory paragraph referring to the Company’s change in its method of accounting for earnings per share to conform to the provisions of EITF 04-8, *The Effect of Contingently Convertible Instruments on Diluted Earnings perShare*) and management’s report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Navigant International, Inc. for the year ended December 25, 2005. 

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP 

Denver, Colorado 

March 7, 2006
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20
- 6419

KEREEM RANDOLPH , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. BETSY JIVIDEN; J.T. BINION; JESSICA THORNHILL; PRIMECARE MEDICAL , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia , at Charleston

. Thomas E. Johnston, Chief District Judge. ( 2:18

- cv
- 01357 )

Submitted : July 23, 2020 Decided: July 28, 2020

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ , and R ICHARDSON , Circuit Judges.

Remanded by un published per curiam opinion

.
Kereem Randolph , Appellant Pro Se. William E. Murray , ANSPACH MEEKS ELLENBERGER PLLC , Charleston, West Virginia; Anne Liles O ’ Hare , OFFUTT NORD, PLLC , Huntington, West Virginia , for Appellee s.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Kereem Randolph seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2018) complaint. The district court entered its dismissal order on January 3, 2020. Randolph filed his notice of appeal, at the latest, on March 23, 2020. Appellees have moved to dismiss this appeal as untimely. Randolph, however, claimed that he never received a copy of the district court’s order, and there is some evidence in the record supporting this assertion. Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6), the district court may reopen the time to file an appeal for a 14

- day period if: (1) the movant did not receive prope r notice of the entry of the judgment within 21 days after entry; (2) the motion to reopen the appeal period is filed within 180 days after the order is entered or within 14 days after the movant receives proper notice of the entry, whichever is earlier; a nd (3) no party would be prejudiced. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 77(d). Because Randolph claimed that he did not receive a copy of the court’s order, and he filed the notice of appeal within 180 days after entry of the order, we construe Randolph’s notice of appeal as a motion to reopen the appeal period under Rule 4(a)(6). We remand to the district court to determine whether the appeal period should be reopened. The record, as supplemented, will be returned to this court for
further co nsideration.
REMANDED
Second Addendum to License Agreement

This Second Addendum to License Agreement (hereinafter "Second Addendum")
entered into as of this 25th day of January, 2000 supplements the License
Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement") dated December 11, 1998
by and between Med-Design Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Licensor")
and Becton Dickinson and Company (hereinafter referred to as "Becton") as
amended by an Addendum between Licensor and Becton dated December 11, 1999
(hereinafter referred to as the "Addendum").

Whereas the parties wish to modify the terms of the Addendum;

Now, therefore, for and in consideration of the premises and the mutual promises
contained herein, and other and good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, it is agreed by and between the
parties hereto, as follows:

1.   Paragraph 1 of the Addendum is amended to include as an Additional Option
     Product AV Fistula Needles for use in hemodialysis, using retractable
     needle technology.

2.   Paragraph 2 of the Addendum is amended to further extend the Option under
     Article IX, Section 1 of the Agreement for 45 days to March 10, 2000.

3.   The second sentence of Paragraph 2 is amended to read "The parties will
     negotiate in good faith for a license to such Option Products that Becton
     notifies Licensor it desires to license during the subsequent fourteen (14)
     days following the notice."

4.   Paragraph 5(c) of the Addendum is amended to change "one-half" to
     "one-sixth"

5.   Becton agrees to work diligently to evaluate the Additional Option
     Products. The parties will review the status of Becton's progress on or
     about February 22, 2000 and if it appears that despite working diligently
     additional time is needed for an adequate evaluation to be completed of the
     technology disclosed and the market opportunity, they will in good faith
     negotiate a brief extension of limited duration to enable the evaluation to
     be completed. Such extension will be for no further consideration.

6.   Licensor agrees that for the duration of the extension under Paragraph 2
     hereof relative to the Option Products under Article IX, Licensor will not
     negotiate to license or sell the Option Products to any third party.

<PAGE>

7.   Other than as set forth above, the terms and conditions of the Agreement as
     modified by the Addendum shall govern the rights and duties of the parties.

The parties, intending to be legally bound, indicate their agreement to the
foregoing at the places provided below.


Med-Design Corporation                      Becton Dickinson and Company

By: /s/ James M. Donegan                    By:
    --------------------                        ------------------------
    James M. Donegan                            Roy Webber
    CEO-President                               Associate General Counsel

Date: 1/25/2000                             Dated:
#### Tyran PAUL v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY and Dayna Talley.

No. 98-C-2962.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 8, 1999.

In re Allstate Insurance Co.; Talley, Dayna; — Defendant(s); applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 98-CA-0499; Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court, Div. “E”, No. 489-307.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant the writ.

KNOLL, J., not on panel.
#### Charles D. JONES v. BOARD OF ETHICS FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS. Charles D. JONES v. BOARD OF ETHICS.

No. 98-C-0782.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 8, 1998.

In re Jones, Charles D.;—Plaintiff(s); applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; Parish of East Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court, Div. “D”, No. 429,619; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Nos. CA97 2854, CW97 2686.

Denied.

CALOGERO, C.J., and JOHNSON, J., would grant the writ.

KNOLL, J., not on panel.
No. 44265.

#### Protests 968919-G, etc., of R. H. Macy & Co., Inc., et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Evans, J.

On the records presented the protests were overruled.
No. 39103.

#### Protest 707999-G of Geo. S. Bush & Co., Inc. (Seattle).

Opinion by

Sullivan, J.

It -was stipulated that the merchandise consists of balls the same as those passed upon in *United States*v. *Woolworth*(24 C. C. P. A. 338, T. D. 48770). The claim at 30 percent under paragraph 1502 was therefore sustained.
No. 48799.

#### Protest 605611-G of Herbert S. Wheeler (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

At the trial a witness for the plaintiff testified without contradiction that certain items consisted of 8-bu. hats similar to those involved in *Caradine*v. *United States*(9 Cust. Ct. 69, C. D. 664). In accordance therewith the merchandise covered by entry 749606 was held dutiable at only 25 percent as claimed. Protest sustained to this extent.
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

PETER MARONEY,

Petitioner, 

v. 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, 

Respondent. 

____________________ 

2010-3173 

______________________

 

 Petition for review of an arbitrator’s decision in FMCS 

case no. 09-60135 by Abigail Modjeska. 

______________________ 

JUDGMENT 

______________________ 

M. JEFFERSON EUCHLER, The Law Office of M. 

Jefferson Euchler, of Virginia Beach, Virginia, argued for 

petitioner. 

BRYANT G. SNEE, Deputy Director, Commercial 

Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States 

Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for 

respondent. On the brief were TONY WEST, Assistant 

Attorney General, JEANNE E. DAVIDSON, Director, and 

BRIAN SIMKIN, Assistant Director, HILLARY A. STERN, 

Senior Trial Counsel. 

______________________ 
THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (BRYSON, O’MALLEY, and REYNA, Circuit 

Judges). 

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36. 

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

July 11, 2011 /s/ Jan Horbaly

 Date Jan Horbaly 

 Clerk
(Reap. Dec. 9616)

#### Cosmic Radio Corp. Globe Shipping Co., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 989608.

(Decided March 1, 1960)

Plaintiffs not represented by counsel.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Lawrence, Judge:

When the above-enumerated appeal for a re-appraisement was called for hearing, there was no appearance on behalf of plaintiffs.

An examination of the official record discloses no reason for disturbing the presumptively correct value for the merchandise found by the appraiser.

I, therefore, find and hold the proper dutiable value of the merchandise covered by said appeal to be the value found by the appraiser.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
EXHIBIT 21.1



SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT



|    |  |                              |  |                                                             
|--- |  | ---------------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------
|    |  | NAME                         |  | STATE OR OTHER JURISDICTION OF INCORPORATION OR ORGANIZATION
|1.  |  | ClassroomDirect.com, LLC     |  | Delaware                                                    
|2.  |  | Childcraft Education Corp.   |  | New York                                                    
|3.  |  | Bird-in-Hand Woodworks, Inc. |  | New Jersey                                                  
|4.  |  | Frey Scientific, Inc.        |  | Delaware                                                    
|5.  |  | Sportime, LLC                |  | Delaware                                                    
|6.  |  | Sax Arts & Crafts, Inc.      |  | Delaware                                                    
|7.  |  | Global Video, LLC            |  | Wisconsin                                                   
|8.  |  | New School, Inc.             |  | Delaware                                                    
|9.  |  | Premier Agendas, Inc.        |  | Washington                                                  
|10. |  | Premier School Agendas, Ltd. |  | Canada                                                      
|11. |  | Amalgamated Widgets, Inc.    |  | Wisconsin                                                   
|12. |  | Select Agendas, Corp.        |  | Canada                                                      
|13. |  | Califone International, Inc. |  | Delaware