alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, *v.*Public Service Mutual Insurance Company, Surety. John Davis, Principal.

Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County,

April 8, 1966.

*Frank S. Ilogan, District Attorney (John A. K. Bradley*of counsel), for plaintiff. *E, Edan Spencer*for surety.

Seymour Bieber, Spec. Ref.

Pursuant to stipulation between counsel for the surety company and the District Attorney of New York County, and by designation of the Administrative Judge of the Supreme Court, First Judicial District, this *876application regarding reconsideration of a motion for remission of bail forfeiture was referred to me, to hear and determine.

The record shows that defendant John Davis was arrested and charged with violation of section 1897 of the Penal Law (possession of a weapon). He was found guilty on October 24, 1963, fined $100 or 30 days in jail, and was given until October 31 to pay. Upon his then failure to appear and pay the fine, bail of $1,500 was forfeited.

Under these circumstances, I find the surety may not be held responsible for its principal’s failure to appear. When a defendant such as Davis appears for judgment and sentence is pronounced, absent a forfeiture *prior*thereto, the liability of a surety terminates. If at this point of a criminal proceeding, the sentencing court, in its discretion, affords a defendant an opportunity to make payment of a levied fine at some future date, unless it consents thereto (a fact apparently not present here), that is no longer the concern or responsibility of the surety. Contrary to the position advocated here by the District Attorney, there is no authority in applicable case law or statute for a court, in effect, to extend unilaterally the surety’s obligation on its bond. To permit such procedure would, in substance, require a surety to act as the guarantor for payment of fines imposed in lieu of imprisonment. This is a result completely contrary to the intent and purpose of applicable law relating to a bail bond surety’s contractual obligations (see *People*v. *Bowles,*280 App. Div. 476, 482; see, also, *People*v. *Public Serv. Mut. Ins. Co.,*40 Misc 2d 341, 344). Accordingly, the surety’? application in this matter is granted.
June 1, 1945

No. 6157.

#### *M. V. Jenkins et al.*v. *United States.*

Entered at Sumas and Blaine, Wash. Reap. Dec.’s 6040, 6050, and 6131. Motion by appellant.
No. 74-5759.

#### Fernandez *v.*United States.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
123 STAT. 3028 PUBLIC LAW 111–114—DEC. 14, 2009 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—S. 1860: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 155 (2009): 

Nov. 5, considered and passed Senate. 

Nov. 19, considered and passed House. 

Æ 

Public Law 111–114 

111th Congress 

An Act 

To permit each current member of the Board of Directors of the Office of Compliance 

to serve for 3 terms. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. ADDITIONAL TERM FOR MEMBERS OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE. 

Notwithstanding the second sentence of section 301(e)(1) of 

the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1381(e)(1)), 

any individual serving as a member of the Board of Directors 

of the Office of Compliance as of September 30, 2009, may serve 

for 3 terms. 

Approved December 14, 2009. 

2 USC 1381 note. 

Dec. 14, 2009 

[S. 1860] 


kgrant on DSKHRRP4G1 with PUBLAW
No. 43181.

#### Protests 979771-G, etc., of Louis Meyers & Son, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Brown, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Steinberger*v. *United States*(3 Cust. Ct. 187, C. D. 229) the white doeskin leather in question was held dutiable as chamois leather at 20 percent under paragraph 1530 (c) and the French Trade Agreement as claimed.
2000 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

4-18-2000

Society Hill Towers Owners' Assn. v. Rendell

Precedential or Non-Precedential:

Docket 98-1937

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2000

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2000 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"Society Hill Towers Owners' Assn. v. Rendell" (2000). 2000 Decisions. Paper 82.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2000/82
Filed April 18, 2000 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT 

No. 98-1937 

SOCIETY HILL TOWERS OWNERS' ASSOCIATION, 

ROBERT D. GREENBAUM; ZOE COULSON; 

JOHN Q. LAWSON; JEREMY SIEGEL; 

PENELOPE H. BATCHELER; GRAY SMITH; 

ROXANNE GALEOTA, 

 Appellants 

v. 

EDWARD G. RENDELL, Mayor of the City of Philadelphia; 

CITY OF PHILADELPHIA; ANDREW M. CUOMO, 

Secretary of Housing and Urban Development; 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING 

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

ON APPEAL FROM THE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

(D.C. Civil No. 96-cv-04778) 

District Judge: Honorable Eduardo C. Robreno 

Before: ALITO, McKEE, Circuit Judges, and 

SCHWARTZ, Senior District Judge* 

ORDER AMENDING OPINION 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the Slip Opinionfiled in

this case on April 17, 2000, be amended as follows:

_________________________________________________________________ 

* The Honorable Murray M. Schwartz, Senior District Judge of the United 

States District Court for the District of Delaware, sitting by 

designation. 
 At line 4 on page 9 of the opinion delete the apostrophe 

 on "Residents' " appearing between "the" and "had."; 

 At line 12 on page 12 of the opinion change lower case 

 "landing" to uppercase "Landing" after"Penn's." 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 BY THE COURT, 

 /s/ Theodore A. McKee 

 Circuit Judge 

DATED: April 18, 2000 

A True Copy: 

Teste: 

 Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals 

 for the Third Circuit 

 2
# C_2016068EN.01000201.xml

| 22.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 68/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 68/2

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 17 December 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de première instance francophone de Bruxelles — Belgium) — Proximus SA, formerly Belgacom SA v Commune d’Etterbeek

(Case C-454/13) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Electronic communications networks and services - Directive 2002/20/EC - Articles 12 and 13 - Administrative charges - Fee for rights to install facilities - Scope - Municipal legislation - Charge on mobile telephony antennae))

(2016/C 068/02)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunal de première instance francophone de Bruxelles

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Proximus SA, formerly Belgacom SA

Applicant:

Defendant: Commune d’Etterbeek

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 12 and 13 of Directive 2002/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services (Authorisation Directive) must be interpreted as not precluding a charge, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, being imposed on any natural or legal persons who are proprietors of a right in rem over, or of a right to operate, a mobile telephony antenna.

---

(1)  OJ C 313, 26.10.2013.

1

---
# C_2015026EN.01000501.xml

| 26.1.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 26/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.1.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 26/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 20 November 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Novo Nordisk Pharma GmbH v S.

(Case C-310/13) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 85/374/EEC - Consumer protection - Liability for defective products - Material scope of the directive - Special liability system existing on the date of notification of that directive - Permissibility of a national liability system enabling information on the adverse effects of pharmaceutical products to be obtained))

(2015/C 026/05)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Novo Nordisk Pharma GmbH

Applicant:

Defendant: S.

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Council Directive 85/374/EEC of 25 July 1985 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products, as amended by Directive 1999/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 May 1999, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation — such as that at issue in the main proceedings, establishing a special liability system for the purposes of Article 13 of that directive — under which, in consequence of an amendment to that legislation made after the directive had been notified to the Member State concerned, the consumer has the right to require the manufacturer of the medicinal product to provide him with information on the adverse effects of that product.

---

(1)  OJ C 260, 7.9.2013.

1

---
No. 96-424.

#### Garza *v.*Weekley, Mayor, City of San Benito.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLANewsNews Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Logistics on location: CIIP clothes soldiers from head to toe

By DLA Public AffairsDLA Public Affairs

                Fort Benning, Georgia  –              
The Clothing Initial Issue Point at Fort Benning, Georgia, partners with DLA to provide soldiers with top-notch clothing and textiles. Each year, between 26 and 32,000 soldiers receive uniform items from undergarments to trousers, coats and boots through the 30th AG Reception Battalion at Fort Benning. Learn how CIIP prepares soldiers to train.

View the video on YouTube.

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

CIIPFort Benningclothing and textiles
# C_2014261EN.01001001.xml

| 11.8.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 261/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.8.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 261/10

---

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 5 June 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny — Poland) — Gmina Międzyzdroje v Minister Finansów

(Case C-500/13) (1)

1

((Request for a preliminary ruling - VAT - Directive 2006/112/EC - Deduction of input tax - Capital goods - Immovable property - Adjustment of deductions - National legislation providing for an adjustment period of 10 years))

2014/C 261/16

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Gmina Międzyzdroje

Applicant:

Defendant: Minister Finansów

Defendant:

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

Articles 167, 187 and 189 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax together with the principle of neutrality of value added tax must be interpreted as not precluding provisions of national law, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, which, in a case where there is a change in the purpose of immovable property acquired as capital goods from an initial use in activities not conferring entitlement to deduct input tax to a subsequent use in activities which do confer such entitlement, provide for an adjustment period of 10 years starting from the time at which the goods are first used and, therefore, do not permit a one-off adjustment during a single tax year.

---

(1)  OJ C 367, 14.12.2013.

1

---
EXHIBIT 32.1


                     COMPUTER ACCESS TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION

                                  CERTIFICATION

      In  connection  with the  periodic  report of Computer  Access  Technology
Corporation  (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission  (the  "Report"),  I, Carmine
Napolitano, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify
as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350
of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:

      (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.

      A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or
other  document  authenticating,   acknowledging,   or  otherwise  adopting  the
signature  that  appears in typed form  within  the  electronic  version of this
written statement  required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and  furnished  to the  Securities  and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

      This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, "filed" with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.


Date: August 13, 2004                By:  /s/  CARMINE J. NAPOLITANO
                                         ------------------------------------
                                         Carmine J. Napolitano
                                         President and Chief Executive Officer
**EXHIBIT 13.1**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), theundersigned officer of Global-Tech Appliances Inc. (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that: 

(1) The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the period ended March 31, 2008 (the “Form 20-F”) of the Company, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as amended;and 

(2) The information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in the Form 20-F. 

Date: September 30, 2008 

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is notbeing filed as part of the Form 20-F or as a separate disclosure document. 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 hasbeen provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon requested.
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 00369

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2

File Name Description

00369\00369_ HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 00369\00369_Part A.XLS Plant submitted survey file

x 00369\00369_Part B.XLS Plant submitted survey file

x 00369\00369_Part C.XLS Plant submitted survey file

x 00369\00369_Part D.XLS Plant submitted survey file

x 00369\00369_Part H.XLS Plant submitted survey file

x 00369\Supporting Documents\00369_Calc Sheet.doc EPA Technical Review Sheet

00369\Certification Statement_00369.pdf Plant certification statement

x 00369\Supporting Documents\00369_Fly_Ash_Handling.PDF Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 00369\Supporting Documents\00369_WB-1.PDF Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 00369\00369_ACAD-lamarpp-working S1-North (1).pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 00369\00369_ACAD-lamarpp-working S2-South (1) (2).pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 00369\00369_Checklist.XLS EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

00369\00369_Completeness Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket.
Order entered November 3, 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas** No. 05 - 14 - 00681 - CV FRITZ MANAGEMENT, LL C, Appellant V. HUGE AMERICAN REAL E STATE, INC., Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4 Dallas County, T exas Trial Court Cause No. CC - 14 - 00657 - D 

### O RDER W e GRANT appellant’s October 30, 2014 motion to extend time to file reply brief and ORDER the brief be filed no later than November 12, 2014

. No further extensions will be granted absent exigent circumstanc es.

/s/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE
October 3, 1949

No. 7743.

#### *United States*v. *M. V. Jenkins et al.*

Entered at Sumas, Wash., and Blaine, Wash. Reap. Dec. 7730. Motion by plaintiff.
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 Annual Report of
Rubicon Minerals Corporation(the
“Company”) on Form 40-F for the period ended
December
      31, 2007as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David W. Adamson,
      Chief Executive 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 Exchange Act of 1934;
      and




(2)           
The
      information contained in this
      Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
      results of operations of the Company.









March
      31,
      2008                                                                
/s/
      "David W.
      Adamson"




David
      W.
      Adamson


Chief
      Executive
      Officer





A
      signed original of this written
      statement required by Section 906 has been provided toRubicon Minerals Corporationand will be
      retained byRubicon Minerals Corporationand furnished to the Securities and
      Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request.
REVISED 03/28/13

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT 

_____________________

No. 11-30770

_____________________

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

Plaintiff-Appellee

vs.

BOH BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, L.L.C.,

Defendant-Appellant

__________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Eastern District of Louisiana, New Orleans

__________________________

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

(Opinion July 27, 2012, 5 Cir., 2012, 689 F.3d 458)

Before STEWART, Chief Judge, KING, JOLLY, DAVIS, JONES, SMITH,

DENNIS, CLEMENT, PRADO, OWEN, ELROD, SOUTHWICK, HAYNES,

GRAVES and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

BY THE COURT:

A member of the court having requested a poll on the petition for

rehearing en banc, and a majority of the circuit judges in regular active

service and not disqualified having voted in favor,

IT IS ORDERED that this cause shall be reheard by the court en banc

with oral argument on a date hereafter to be fixed. The Clerk will specify a

briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

March 27, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

              (BROUSSARD, POCHE, LEWIS & BREAUX, L.L.P. LETTERHEAD)

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


As Independent Auditors, we hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in
this Form 10-K of American Bancorp, Inc. for the years ended December 31, 2002,
2001 and 2000 of our report dated January 28, 2003, which appears on Pages 28
through 57 of the annual report to shareholders.


                                    /s/ BROUSSARD, POCHE, LEWIS & BREAUX, L.L.P.


Lafayette, Louisiana
January 28, 2003
**EXHIBIT 13.2**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of 

Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) 

Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Global-Tech Advanced Innovations Inc. (the “Company”), doeshereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that: 

(1) The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the period ended March 31,2009 (the “Form 20-F”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as amended; and 

(2) The information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in the Form20-F. 

Date: September 30, 2009 

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350and is not being filed as part of the Form 20-F or as a separate disclosure document. 

A signed original of this written statement required bySection 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.