alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### STATE of Mississippi, for the use and benefit of Jimmy P. Wise v. Rudy RICHARDSON and National General Insurance Company.

No. 49899.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Sept. 28, 1977.

Thomas D. Berry, Jr., Gulfport, for appellant.

Stuart Robinson, Jackson, for appellees.

Before SMITH, BROOM and LEE, JJ.

LEE, Justice,

for the Court:

The Circuit Court of Harrison County entered judgment in favor of Jimmy P. Wise against Constable Rudy Richardson and National General Insurance Company, his surety, in the sum of thirty-five hundred dollars ($3,500.00) for abuse of process. Subsequently, the trial court sustained a motion for new trial filed by Richardson and National General. Wise has appealed to this Court.

The only error assigned and argued by Wise is that the trial court erred in granting a new trial when there was no showing that the jury was influenced by an attempted jury tampering.

None of the parties have considered Mississippi Code Annotated § 11-7-213 (1972) or the question presented by it. That section disposes of the case, and we raise the question on our own motion.

Mississippi Code Annotated § 11-7-213 (1972) provides:

> *60“Every new trial granted shall be on such terms as the court shall direct; and no more than two new trials shall be granted to the same party in any cause. *Provided, however, that when the sole ground for*a *new trial is the excessiveness or inadequacy of damages assessed, the party aggrieved may elect to appeal from the order granting a new trial."*(Emphasis added).

The statute was construed in *City of Meridian v. Dickson,*266 So.2d 143 (Miss.1972) and cases previous thereto. This Court said in *City of Meridian v. Dickson:*

> “The purpose of the amendment permitting appeals from an order granting a new trial because of the excessiveness or inadequacy of damages was to allow that issue to be determined without the necessity of a second trial. The use of the word ‘sole’ in the last sentence manifests an intent on the part of the legislature that as far as the appellant was concerned the only issue that the party appealing could raise was the amount of damages. Thus, the only issue that the party appealing can raise is whether the trial court abused its discretion in granting a new trial on the question of damages only. *Dendy v. City of Pascagoula,*193 So.2d 559 (Miss.1967).” 266 So.2d at 144.

*See also Byrd v. Sinclair Oil and Refining Co.,*240 So.2d 623 (Miss.1970).

Since there is no basis for appeal here on the error assigned, the appeal must be and it is dismissed.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

PATTERSON, C. J., INZER and SMITH, P. JJ., and ROBERTSON, SUGG, WALKER, BROOM and BOWLING, JJ., concur.
# DLA director visits Maxwell Air Force Base

/ Published Sept. 15, 2017
Maxwell Air Force Base, Ala., 
The director of the Defense Logistics Agency recently visited Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama, an incident staging base for relief efforts led by the Federal Emergency Management Agency of the Department of Homeland Security following Hurricane Irma.Army Lt. Gen. Darrell Williams was impressed with the swift teamwork in response to the Category 3 storm, which ravaged Florida with winds of 135 mph and major flooding.He also commended the operational integration of the multiagency, government-industry team of FEMA, DLA Distribution and J.B. Hunt Transport Services. Williams noted the team is a textbook example of the “forming–storming–norming–performing” model of group development.ISB Maxwell is operating continuously, every day, with 80 personnel who support trailer-transfer operations, information technology communications, FEMA commodity visibility, staging-area management, security and property accountability.The 40-person DLA Distribution Expeditionary team, led by Charles W. Ensinger, deployed to Maxwell to support FEMA’s wide range of services, supplies, and disaster relief with logistics expertise. The DDXX team has provided the mobile command trailer, a yard truck, forklifts, and front-end loaders and has received over 1,300 trucks with more than 1 million shelf-stable meals, as well as bottled water, generators and other commodities to be distributed to communities in Irma’s path. Williams and his team walked through the process for receipt and storage of material and the inbound/outbound process for trucks. Williams also met with FEMA and J.B. Hunt representatives, toured the flightline, and spoke with over 60 personnel, emphasizing the importance of their work and its benefit to the affected residents of Florida. Williams noted the strategic importance of the Maxwell ISB, the largest ISB in FEMA Region IV, has been touted at the highest executive levels, based on his recent meeting with Vice President Mike Pence, Florida Governor Rick Scott and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt. While visiting installations supporting Hurricane Irma relief efforts, Williams also spoke at Robins Air Force Base, Georgia. He and DLA Energy Americas at Houston Commander Lt. Col. Josielyn Carrasquillo answered questions about fuel support. View the interview video on DVIDS, or watch below.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-2133

ROBIN PURCELL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

Z. A. MORSE; CITY OF RALEIGH POLICE

DEPARTMENT,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior

District Judge. (5:05-cv-00460)

Submitted: March 22, 2007 Decided: March 27, 2007

Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robin Purcell, Appellant Pro Se. Dorothy K. Leapley, CITY OF

RALEIGH, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Robin Purcell appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on

the reasoning of the district court. See Purcell v. Morse, No.

5:05-cv-00460 (E.D.N.C. Sept. 18, 2006). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
PUBLIC LAW 106–493—NOV. 9, 2000 114 STAT. 2213

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—S. 1778:

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 106–871 (Comm. on Resources).

SENATE REPORTS: No. 106–271 (Comm. on Energy and Natural Resources).

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 146 (2000):

Apr. 13, considered and passed Senate.

Oct. 23, considered and passed House.

Æ

Public Law 106–493

106th Congress

An Act

To provide for equal exchanges of land around the Cascade Reservoir.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. EXCHANGES OF LAND EXCESS TO CASCADE RESERVOIR

RECLAMATION PROJECT.

Section 5 of Public Law 86–92 (73 Stat. 219) is amended by

striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:

‘‘(b) LAND EXCHANGES.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may exchange land of

either class described in subsection (a) for non-Federal land

of not less than approximately equal value, as determined

by an appraisal carried out in accordance with—

‘‘(A) the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601 et

seq.); and

‘‘(B) the publication entitled ‘Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions’, as amended by the

Interagency Land Acquisition Conference in consultation

with the Department of Justice.

‘‘(2) EQUALIZATION.—If the land exchanged under paragraph (1) is not of equal value, the values shall be equalized

by the payment of funds by the Secretary or the grantor,

as appropriate, in an amount equal to the amount by which

the values of the land differ.’’.

Approved November 9, 2000.

16 USC 486a–

486a note.

Nov. 9, 2000

[S. 1778]
| • | the      quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended      December 31, 2010, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)      or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;  and |
|---------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| • | the      information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      Company. |
|---------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:      February 14, 2011  |   | /s/      Bruce      Widener      |
|------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------|
|                               |   | Bruce      Widener               |
|                               |   | Principal      Executive Officer |

----
# 5K supports breast cancer awareness at DSCC

/ Published Oct. 12, 2017
COLUMBUS, Ohio, 
Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime Commander Navy Rear Adm. Michelle Skubic sounds the horn to officially start the Breast Cancer Awareness Month 5K race at the Defense Supply Center Columbus. 

The Oct. 11 event brought dozens of runners and walkers together to raise awareness and share their stories of survival and resiliency. 

The Equalitarian Chapter of the Federally Employed Women advocacy group organized the race.
Exhibit
99.1





Highlands
Bankshares, Inc. (OTCBB: HBSI) announces its results of operations for the
second quarter and first half of 2008.





Highlands
Bankshares’ operations for the second quarter of 2008 produced net income of
$1,221,000 or 86 cents per weighted average share of common stock outstanding.
This compares to income of $1,123,000 for the second quarter of 2007, an
increase of 8.73%. Earnings per weighted average share of common stock
outstanding were 78 cents for the second quarter of last year. Return on Average
Assets (ROAA) for the quarter was 1.29% and Return on Average Equity (ROAE) was
11.99%. This compares to ROAA of 1.21% and ROAE of 11.78% for the same quarter a
year ago. During the quarter, the Company recorded one time gains totaling
$47,000 relating to calls on available for sale securities and to the sale of a
parcel of real property held by the holding company.





Net
income year to date at June 30 was $2,459,000 for 2008, compared to $2,244,000
for the same six-month period in 2007. Earnings per weighted average share of
common stock outstanding were $1.72 for the first six months of 2008, compared
to $1.56 for the same period a year ago. ROAA for the first six months of 2008
was 1.30% compared to ROAA of 1.23% for 2007 and ROAE for the six months ended
June 30 was 12.09% for 2008 and 11.96% in 2007.





The
balance of the Company’s assets decreased 2.00% from December 31, 2007 to June
30, 2008 and at June 30, 2008 totaled $373,209,000. Shareholders’ Equity at June
30, 2008 was $39,212,000, a decrease of 3.40% from December 31, 2007. On April
8, 2008, Highlands announced a share repurchase program and during the quarter
repurchased 76,441 shares of the Company’s outstanding shares of common stock at
a total expenditure of $2,550,000.





During
the quarter Highlands paid dividends to its shareholders of 27 cents per
share.





Highlands
Bankshares Inc. operates eleven banking locations in West Virginia and Virginia
through its two wholly owned subsidiary banks, The Grant County Bank and Capon
Valley Bank, and offers insurance services through its wholly owned subsidiary
HBI Life Insurance Company.





Certainstatements in
this release may constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of
the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.  Forward-looking
statements are statements that include projections, predictions, expectations or
beliefs about future events or results or otherwise are not statements of
historical fact.  Although the Company believes that its expectations
with respect to certain forward-looking statements are based upon reasonable
assumptions within the bounds of its existing knowledge of its business and
operations, there can be no assurance that actual results, performance or
achievements of the Company will not differ materially from any future results,
performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking
statements. The Company does not update any forward-looking statements that may
be made from time to time by or on behalf of the Company.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 4 (Tuesday, January 7, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 986]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-222]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP97-201-000]


National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation; Notice of Proposed Changes 
in FERC Gas Tariff

December 31, 1996.
    Take notice that on December 23, 1996, National Fuel Gas Supply 
Corporation (National Fuel), tendered for filing as part of its FERC 
Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets listed in 
Appendix A to the filing, to be effective April 1, 1997.
    National Fuel states that this filing is submitted as a companion 
filing to its December 16, 1996 Order No. 587 compliance filing. 
National Fuel states that the purpose of this filing is to make certain 
changes intended to facilitate its compliance with Order No. 587 and to 
streamline its tariff and operations, including: (1) expedition of the 
nomination and scheduling process, (2) simplification of the allocation 
process, (3) contracts with operators of interconnecting facilities, 
(4) a new bulletin board system, (5) consolidation of provisions 
regarding requests for service, (6) removal of certain provisions 
relating to National Fuel's Order No. 636 restructuring, (7) timing of 
flowback credits, (8) removal of certain forms from the tariff, and (9) 
conversion of service under the SS-1 and SS-2 Rate Schedules to a 
dekatherm basis.
    National Fuel states that it is serving copies of the filing with 
its firm customers, interested state commissions and each person 
designated on the official service list compiled by the Secretary. 
Copies are also being served on all interruptible customers as of the 
date of the filing.
    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 Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
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 in the Public 
Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-222 Filed 1-6-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
|  |
|--|

FDA Home Page |CFSAN Home | Search/Subject Index |Q & A | Help

May 19, 2006

# Hurricanes and Floods -Key Tips for ConsumersAbout Food and Water Safety 

***Community Flyer:**This reproducible can be printed on one 8 1/2 x 11" page.You may choose to photocopy this flyer on one side and theKey Tips forPower Outageson the reverse for easy distribution.*

#### BePrepared:

      - Keep liquid, household bleach on hand.
      - Store a supply of food, water, andmedication on shelves that will be safely out of the way in case of flooding.
      - Know where you can get dry ice.
      - Keep on hand a few days worth ofready-to-eat foods that do not require cooking or cooling, which depend onelectricity.
      - Know what to do in case of a poweroutage.

#### WhenFlooding Occurs:

      - Water Safety         - Use bottled water not exposed to floodwaters, if available.
        - If bottled water is not available, boilwater for one minute, let it cool, and store it in clean containers with acover.
        - If bottled water is unavailable andboiling water is not possible, then drinking water can be made by adding 1/8 teaspoon(or 8 drops) of regular, unscented, liquid household bleach to 1 gallon water. Stirit well and let it stand for 30 minutes before using.  (If the water is cloudy, filter it through clean cloths orallow it to settle, and draw off the clear water before adding bleach.)
        - Don't drink water from a well that hasflooded unless the water has been tested and shown to be safe to drink. 
      - Food Safety         - Do not eat any food directly exposed toflood water.
        - Do not eat food from non-waterproofcontainers or damaged cans.
        - All-metal, non-damaged canned food canbe used if the cans are cleaned, rinsed, and sanitized in a solution of 1tablespoon household bleach in 1 gallon water for 15 minutes. Labels should beremoved prior to cleaning, and the cans should be relabeled afterwards.
        - Thoroughly wash, rinse, and sanitize (usinga solution of 1 tablespoon household bleach in 1 gallon of water) all metalpans, ceramic dishes, and utensils (including can openers), and countertops. 

----

For more information see: www.FoodSafety.gov -Consumer Advice: Disaster Assistance

For more hurricane assistance, seeHealth and Safety Before and Aftera Storm (FDA) andDisasters &Emergencies: Hurricanes (HHS).

Hurricane, Power Outages, & Floods

CFSAN HomeCFSAN Search/Subject IndexCFSAN Disclaimers & Privacy PolicyCFSAN Accessibility/HelpFDA Home PageSearch FDA SiteFDA A-Z IndexContact FDA
FDA/Center for Food Safety & Applied NutritionHypertext updated by ear May 19, 2006
#### J. A. COLEMAN, Appellant, v. Jacob O. SMITH, d/b/a Southern Printing Service, Appellee.

No. II-343.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 14, 1978.

Eric C. Eggen, Pensacola, for appellant.

Joseph C. Rubel, of Fisher & Bell, P. A., Pensacola, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The documentary and other evidence in support of appellee’s motion for summary judgment does not demonstrate that the parties intended that the unconditional monetary obligation expressed in the promissory note should be vitiated if the parties did not within six months agree upon the terms of and perform further contracts discharging the principal obligation. The summary judgment is therefore

REVERSED.

McCORD, C. J., and SMITH, J., concur.

BOYER, J., dissents.
#### WILLIAMS & REED, INC., Appellant, v. Ellen Rowell CHASE et al., Appellees.

No. 69-174.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Oct. 3, 1969.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 28, 1969.

*76Carroll Dunscombe, Stuart, for appellant.

Robert J. Randolph, Stuart, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from an order dismissing plaintiff’s petition with prejudice for lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter. We have examined plaintiff’s petition in the light of the appellate presentment and find that plaintiff was improperly and solely seeking, in the guise of a creditor’s bill, the probate of an estate in the circuit court. Fla.Const. art. V, § 6(3), F.S.A.; Fla.Const. art. V, § 7(3); F.S. 1967, Section 36.01, F.S.A.; F.S.1967, Section 36.02, F.S.A.; F.S.1967, Section 36.16 (1), F.S.A. and F.S.1967, Section 732.01, F.S.A. Thus, the trial court decision was entirely correct.

Plaintiff also contends on appeal that it should have been permitted to amend to assert a creditor’s bill. But there was not the slightest showing in the petition of matters within the jurisdiction of the circuit court and, because of this, we cannot say that the trial court was in error. Thus, while our affirmance shall stand as a bar to plaintiff’s attempts to have the circuit court exercise the jurisdiction of the county judge s court, it is without prejudice to its right to file a new and independent action, if any it has, which may he properly cognizable in the circuit court.

Affirmed.

WALDEN, McCAIN and REED, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO  SECTIONS 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Each of the undersigned hereby certifies that, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in his
capacity as an officer of HPL Technologies, Inc. that this quarterly report on Form 10-Q (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of HPL Technologies, Inc.

|Date: December 16, 2002 |  |                                                                                
|----------------------- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                        |  | /s/THOMAS A. TOMASETTIThomas A. Tomasetti
President and Chief Executive Officer
|Date: December 16, 2002 |  |                                                                                
|                        |  | /s/MICHAEL P. SCARPELLIMichael P. Scarpelli
Chief Financial Officer            

---

QuickLinks
FNB
      FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION








**Certification
      of Periodic Financial Report**


**Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**








Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
      adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the
      undersigned officers of FNB Financial Services Corporation (the “Company”)
      certify that the Annual Report on Form 11-K of the FNB Financial Services
      Corporation Employees’ Savings Plus and Profit Sharing Plan (the “Plan”) for the
      year ended December 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section
      13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
      information contained in that Form 11-K fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition of the Plan at the end of such period and
      the
      results of operations of the Plan for such period.





A
      signed original 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.








Dated:  June
                29, 2007
            /s/
                Pressley A. RidgillPressley
                A. RidgillChief
                Executive OfficerDated:  June
                29, 2007
            /s/
                Michael W. SheltonMichael
                W. SheltonChief
                Financial Officer











*This
      certificate is made solely for purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject to
      the
      knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other
      purpose.








Page
      15