alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Florida Department of Environmental Protection Bob Martinez Center 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee,Florida 32399-2400 Rick Scott GQVB~Q~ Jennifer Carroll Lt. Governor Herschel T. Vinyard Jr. Secretary March 13,2012 Ms. Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming RegionalAdministrator U. S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA)

### - Region4 61Forsyth Street, SW Atlanta, GA 30303-8909 Re: Conditional Approval of State Implementation Plan InfrastructureSubmittal for the 1997Revised National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Ozone Dear Ms. Keyes Fleming: I am writing to request conditional approval of Florida's December 13, 2007 confirmation that the so called "infrastructure elements" of its State Implementation Plan (SIP) adequately address the 1997 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS), pending the submittal of a proposed SIP revision to address the section IlO(a)(2)(E)(ii) element, which requires that statescomply with section 128of the Clean Air Act (CAA). With respect to section 128(a)(l), Florida has no boards or bodies with authority over air pollution permits or enforcement actions. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection is an executive agency headed by an appointed Secretary. Appeals of final administrative orders are available only through the judicial appellate process of section 120.68, Florida Statutes. Because there are no boards or bodies involved in the final decisions concerning permits or enforcement actions, section 128(a)(l)of the Clean Air Act does not apply to the Florida State ImplementationMan. With respect to section 128(a)(2), section 112.3143(4), Florida Statutes, requires specific disclosure by any appointed public officer regarding particular matters under immediate consideration and section 112.3144, Florida Statutes, requires annual, public, disclosure of all financial interests by all public officers. These provisions collectively provide for adequate disclosure of potential conflicts of interest for purposes of section 128(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act. As such, the Department hereby commits to submitting a proposed SIP revision to incorporateFlorida Statutes 112.3143(4)and 112.3144into the SIP. These statutes adequately address the requirements of section 128 of the CAA and the SIPinfrastructurerequirements of section IlO(a)(2)(E)(ii) not only for the 1997 ozone standard, but also for the other pending SIPinfrastructureconfirmationsfor Florida.

www. dcpsratefl.usMs. GwendolynKeyes Fleming March 13,2012 Page 2 of 2

The schedulefor this SIPrevision is as follows: 1. Publish SIPrevision for public comment

### -by July 1,2012 2. Address comments received 

### - August through September 2012 3. SubmitfinalSIPrevision for approval

## - October 31,2012 If you have any questions on this request or need additional information, please contact Chad Stevens at (850) 717-9089. Thank you for your continued support of our efforts to implementthe CAA in Florida. Sincerely,

Brian Accardo, Deputy Director Division of Air Resource Management

cc: R. Scott Davis, Chief, Air Planning Branch, EPA Region4 

### (by electronic mail)
No. 00-841.

#### Markham et al. *v.*Comstock et al.

Ct. App. N. Y. Certiorari denied.
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 155 (Tuesday, August 12, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 43152]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21208]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. OA97-614-000]

Lockhart Power Company; Notice of Filing

August 6, 1997.
    Take notice that on July 8, 1997, Lockhart Power Company filed 
original and revised tariff sheets to its Order No. 888 open access 
tariff to comply with FERC Order No. 888-A. Lockhart states that it has 
served copies on this filing on the South Carolina Public Service 
Commission and all parties listed on the official service list in the 
above referenced docket.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 18 CFR 385.214). All such 
motions or protests should be filed on or before August 19, 1997. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-21208 Filed 8-11-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```
* Pursuant to 5 T H 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. 97-60543 Summary Calendar

_____________________
WILLIE JAMES SEYMOUR, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.

_______________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi

(3:96-CV-288-WS)

_______________________________________________________ July 29, 1998 Before REAVLEY, DAVIS and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * The judgment of the district court is affirmed for the reasons given in the Memorandum Opinion and Order dated July 28, 1997.
AFFIRMED.
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida 

Opinion filed February 21, 2024.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D22-2076

Lower Tribunal No. 20-13023

________________

Strybuc Replacement Hardware, LLC,

Appellant,

vs.

Window Parts Warehouse, Inc.,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, William 

Thomas, Judge.

The Kobak Law Firm, P.A., and Paul L. Kobak, for appellant.

Rosenberg & Cummings, PLLC, and Marc Edward Rosenthal, and 

Casey Ryan Cummings (Ft. Lauderdale); Cowen Edwards, PLLC, and Paul 

David Edwards (Ft. Lauderdale), for appellee.

Before LOGUE, C.J., and FERNANDEZ, and LINDSEY, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.
2

Appellant, Strybuc Replacement Hardware, LLC, appeals a Final 

Judgment in favor of Appellee, Window Parts Warehouse, Inc., and an order 

denying Strybuc’s Motion for New Trial. Strybuc argues that the trial court’s 

sua sponte interference with the impeachment of a witness constitutes 

reversible error. See Ruchimora v. Grullon, 307 So. 3d 95, 97 (Fla. 3d DCA 

2020) (“We review the denial of a motion for new trial and a trial court’s 

evidentiary rulings for abuse of discretion.”). We disagree.

Generally, it is not the role of a trial judge in a civil case to make 

objections for the opposition; rather, a trial judge should remain a neutral 

umpire. See Fla. Power & Light Co. v. Velez, 365 So. 3d 1194, 1198 (Fla. 

3d DCA 2023) (“A trial judge crosses the line when he becomes an active 

participant in the adversarial process . . . .” (quoting Great Am. Ins. Co. v. 

2000 Island Blvd. Condo. Ass’n, Inc., 153 So. 3d 384, 388 (Fla. 3d DCA 

2014))). Here, however, we do not find reversible error based on the record 

before us. See E.R. Squibb & Sons, Inc. v. Farnes, 697 So. 2d 825, 826 

(Fla. 1997) (“[The] ‘abuse of discretion’ standard is highly deferential . . . .”); 

In re Doe, 325 So. 3d 99, 100 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019) (holding that, because 

“[t]he abuse of discretion standard is highly deferential . . . the order must be 

affirmed unless ‘no reasonable person would take the view adopted by the 

court’” (quoting Treloar v. Smith, 791 So. 2d 1195, 1197 (Fla. 5th DCA 

2001))).
3

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 155 (Tuesday, August 12, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 43187]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21386]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD


Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME: 9:30 a.m., Tuesday, August 19, 1997.

PLACE: The Grand Ballroom, Loews L'Enfant Plaza Hotel, 480 L'Enfant 
Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 20024.

STATUS: Open.

MATTERS TO BE DISCUSSED:

    6704B  Aircraft Accident Report: In-Flight Fire and Impact with 
Terrain, ValuJet Airlines Flight 592, DC-9-32, N904VJ, Everglades, 
Miami, Florida, May 11, 1996.

NEWS MEDIA CONTACT: Telephone: (202) 314-6100.

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Bea Hardesty, (202) 314-6065.

    Dated: August 8, 1997.
Bea Hardesty,
Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-21386 Filed 8-8-97; 12:05 pm]
BILLING CODE 7533-01-P
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1279 

To establish certain requirements relating to the provision of services to 

minors by family planning projects under title X of the Public Health 

Service Act. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 21, 2005 

Mr. COBURN (for himself, Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. DEMINT, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. 

CORNYN, Mr. SANTORUM, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. BUNNING, Mr. ENSIGN, 

Mr. ALLEN, and Mr. VITTER) introduced the following bill; which was 

read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 

and Pensions 

A BILL 

To establish certain requirements relating to the provision 

of services to minors by family planning projects under 

title X of the Public Health Service Act. 

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 ‘‘Parent’s Right to 

5 Know Act of 2005’’. 
2 

•S 1279 IS 

1 SEC. 2. PROVISIONS REGARDING TITLE X FAMILY PLAN2 NING PROJECTS. 

3 (a) PROVISION OF CONTRACEPTIVE DRUGS OR PRE4 SCRIPTION DEVICES TO MINORS.—None of the funds ap5 propriated in any Federal Act for any fiscal year for car6 rying out title X of the Public Health Service Act (42 

7 U.S.C. 300 et seq.) may be made available to any family 

8 planning project under section 1001 of such title if any 

9 provider of services in the project knowingly provides con10 traceptive drugs or prescription devices to a minor, un11 less— 

12 (1) such provider of services has given actual 

13 written notice to a custodial parent or custodial legal 

14 guardian of the minor, notifying the parent or legal 

15 guardian of the intent to provide the drugs or pre16 scription devices, at least five business days before 

17 providing the drugs or prescription devices; 

18 (2) the minor has the written consent of a cus19 todial parent or custodial legal guardian to receive 

20 the drugs or prescription devices; 

21 (3) the minor is emancipated under applicable 

22 State law; or 

23 (4) a court of competent jurisdiction has di24 rected that the minor may receive the drugs or pre25 scription devices. 
3 

•S 1279 IS 

1 (b) CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE.—Each provider 

2 of services under section 1001 of title X of the Public 

3 Health Service Act shall each year certify to the Secretary 

4 of Health and Human Services compliance with this sec5 tion. Such Secretary shall prescribe such regulations as 

6 may be necessary to effectuate this section. 

Æ
No. 44330.

#### Protests 944530-G, etc., of John Thallon & Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Stokby*v. *United States*(4 Cust. Ct. 343, C. D. 358) it was held that the merchandise is properly dutiable at 3)4 cents per pound under paragraph 703, Tariff Act of 1930, on the basis of the net weight of the contents of the cans less 10 percent allowance for the gelatinous material.
#### George T. BLACKWELL, Jr. v. Evelyn Sue BLACKWELL.

Civ. 1122.

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

July 20, 1977.

See also, Ala.Civ.App., 340 So.2d 448.

Arthur J. Hanes, Jr., Birmingham, for appellant.

Jack Martin Bains, Oneonta, Pat H. Boone, Birmingham, for appellee.

BRADLEY, Judge.

This appeal is from a judgment denying a request to modify a previous divorce decree awarding periodic alimony to the wife.

In his petition to modify the husband contended that Title 34, Section 31, Code of Alabama 1940 (Recomp.1958) is unconstitutional and consequently he should be relieved of the alimony payments. After a hearing the trial court denied the husband’s request for modification of the alimony decree and he appeals.

In brief appellant-husband raises only one issue: the constitutionality of Title 34, Section 31, Code of Alabama 1940 (Recomp. 1958). He says he is aware of our recent case of *Orr v. Orr,*Civ. 1006 (Ala.Civ.App., 1977) wherein we decided that the alimony statutes, i. e. Title 34, Sections 31-33, Code of Alabama 1940 (Recomp. 1958), were not violative of the equal protection clause of the United States Constitution’s fourteenth amendment, but asks us to reconsider that decision in the light of the recent supreme court case of *Peddy v. Montgomery,*Ala., 345 So.2d 631 (1977). Appellant argues that the *Peddy*case makes sex a suspect classification and the alimony statute is based on sex, hence the statute denies equal protection and is unconstitutional.

The supreme court in *Peddy*— as we understand that decision — struck down a statute denying a wife the power of alienating or mortgaging her lands without the assent and concurrence of her husband. The court specifically declined to decide whether all *501gender-based classifications are inherently suspect; consequently, we do not consider *Peddy*to require that we alter the position we took in *Orr, supra.*

Based on the authority of *Orr v. Orr, supra,*we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

AFFIRMED.

WRIGHT, P. J., and HOLMES, J., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 151 (Wednesday, August 6, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42239-42240]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20671]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Bonneville Power Administration


Pre-Subscription, Post 2001 Contracts

AGENCY: Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), Department of Energy 
(DOE).

ACTION: Notice of availability of Record of Decision (ROD).

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of the ROD for Pre-
Subscription, Post 2001 Contracts. This ROD relies on BPA's Business 
Plan Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0183, June 1995 and the 
Business Plan ROD (August 15, 1995).
    BPA has decided to enter into a limited number of power sales 
contracts extending beyond 2001, in advance of the subscription process 
recommended by the Comprehensive Review of the Northwest Energy System. 
This decision is consistent with BPA's market-driven approach for 
participation in the increasingly competitive electric power market. 
BPA will be responsive to its customers' needs while ensuring the 
financial strength necessary to produce public benefits.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Business Plan EIS, Business Plan ROD, and this 
ROD are available from BPA's Communications Office, P.O. Box

[[Page 42240]]

12999, Portland, Oregon 97212. Copies of these documents may also be 
obtained by calling BPA's toll-free document request line: 1-800-622-
4520.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katherine S. Pierce, Environmental 
Specialist--EC-4, Bonneville Power Administration, P.O. Box 3621, 
Portland, Oregon, 97208-3621, phone number (503) 230-5166, fax number 
(503) 230-5699.

    Issued in Portland, Oregon, on July 24, 1997.
Randall W. Hardy,
Administrator and Chief Executive Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-20671 Filed 8-5-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
#### Mose L. LINDSAY et al. v. CUMIS INSURANCE SOCIETY, INC., et al.

No. 60425.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 14, 1977.

In re: Mose L. Lindsay et ux applying for certiorari, or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 347 So.2d 1285.

Writ denied.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Alton Thomas Davis, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

October 26, 2010 

d1018 

Order 

 

October 26, 2010 

141500 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 141500 

 COA: 287916 

Ingham CC: 07-000938-FC 

WILLIE DORIAL JONES, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 22, 2010 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
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

#  Former supply director of the ‘Mighty Land’ inducted into DLA Hall of Fame

By Amanda NeumannDLA Public Affairs

                Fort Belvoir, Virginia  –              

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

Hall of FameIvan HallDLA Land and Maritimelong term contractDLA
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

PHILIP FINKLE,

Claimant-Appellant

v.

DENIS MCDONOUGH, SECRETARY OF 

VETERANS AFFAIRS,

Respondent-Appellee

______________________ 

2023-1474

______________________ 

Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for 

Veterans Claims in No. 19-5787, Judge Michael P. Allen.

______________________ 

JUDGMENT

______________________ 

KENNETH M. CARPENTER, Law Offices of Carpenter 

Chartered, Topeka, KS, argued for claimant-appellant. 

 MATTHEW JUDE CARHART, Commercial Litigation 

Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued for respondent-appellee. 

Also represented by BRIAN M. BOYNTON, MARTIN F.

HOCKEY, JR., PATRICIA M. MCCARTHY; JONATHAN KRISCH,

Y. KEN LEE, Office of General Counsel, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC.

Case: 23-1474 Document: 31 Page: 1 Filed: 07/11/2024
 ______________________ 

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (PROST, CLEVENGER, and CHEN, Circuit 

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

July 11, 2024

Date

Case: 23-1474 Document: 31 Page: 2 Filed: 07/11/2024
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002


In connection with the Annual Report on
Form 10-K of Hudson Valley Holding Corp. (the
Company) for the year ending December 31, 2004
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, Stephen R. Brown, Senior
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 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 the Report
    fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
    condition and result of operations of the Company.



| |                                 
| | --------------------------------
| | /s/ STEPHEN R. BROWN            
| |                                 
| | Stephen R. Brown                
| | Senior Executive Vice President,
| | Chief Financial Officer and     
| | Treasurer                       

Dated: March 11, 2005
No. 99-8008.

#### Gomez *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
#### Robert H. GREENE, Petitioner, v. FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION and H. F. McCue, Respondents.

No. 77-1592.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

April 10, 1978.

Rehearing Denied May 23, 1978.

Benjamin T. Shuman, Orlando, for petitioner.

Bruce I. Kamelhair, Orlando, and Howard Hadley, Winter Garden, for respondents.

*52PER CURIAM.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari denied.

ALDERMAN, C. J., and CROSS and LETTS, JJ., concur.