alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Michael V. COSTELLO, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 75-2392.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

May 31, 1977.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Raymond W. Gearey, Atty. for Fla. Div. of Corrections, John A. Barley, Asst. Atty. Gen., Dept, of Legal Affairs, Civ. Div., William C. Sherrill, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, Fla., for defendant-appellant.

Tobias Simon, Miami, Fla. (court-appointed not under Act), Jack Greenberg, New York City, for plaintiff-appellee.

Brian K. Landsberg, William C. Graves, U. S. Dept, of Justice, Washington, D. C., for amicus curiae.

Before BROWN, Chief Judge, TUTTLE, GEWIN *, THORNBERRY, COLEMAN, GOLDBERG, AINSWORTH, GODBOLD, DYER*, MORGAN, CLARK, RONEY, *507GEE, TJOFLAT, HILL and FAY**, Circuit Judges.

*

 Judge in active service at the time of the en banc hearing and decision, but has since become a Senior Judge.

**

 Judge Fay was not a member of the Court of Appeals at the time of the hearing or decision en banc.

PER CURIAM:

The United States Supreme Court reversed the decision of this Court reported at 539 F.2d 547 (5th Cir. 1976), and remanded the case to this Court for further proceedings consistent with its opinion in *Costello*v. *Wainwright,*- U.S. -, 97 S.Ct. 1191, 51 L.Ed.2d 372 (1977). The case was taken *en bane*for consideration of the three-judge court issue. The Court does not regard the remaining issues in the case to be enbancworthy. Therefore, the Court reinstates the panel opinion reported at 525 F.2d 1239 (5th Cir. 1976) as the decision in this case, and orders that the mandate be issued forthwith.
#### Paul TODD, Appellant, v. Carl L. TODD, etc., et al., Appellees.

No. 76-1214.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Sept. 6, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 27, 1977.

Ronald Sales of Sales & Christiansen, Palm Beach, for appellant.

Herbert P. Benn of Blank, Williams & Benn, West Palm Beach, for appellees.

DOWNEY, Judge.

We have studied the briefs and appendix in this case and conclude that error has not been demonstrated. While the language of the inartfully drawn will of the decedent Grace Todd seems to indicate she contemplated the establishment of a trust, the will in fact does not convey any property in trust. In any event, the complaint for declaratory relief does not allege that the coexecutors as cotrustees could not, in accordance with the will, properly have acceded to the request of the surviving spouse and conveyed the property to him after the establishment of a trust. Absent such an allegation no prejudice is shown and no cause of action is stated.

Accordingly, the judgment appealed from is AFFIRMED.

ALDERMAN, C. J., and GREEN, OLIVER L., Associate Judge, concur.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 182 (Friday, September 19, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 49190]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24935]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 97-202, RM-9129]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Farmersburg, IN

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document requests comments on a petition for rule making 
filed on behalf of Farmersburg Community Broadcasting, requesting the 
allotment of Channel 242A to Farmersburg, Indiana, as that community's 
first local aural transmission service. Coordinates used for Channel 
242A at Farmersburg are 39-15-18 and 87-23-00.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before November 3, 1997, and reply 
comments on or before November 18, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 
20554. In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties 
should serve the petitioner's counsel, as follows: Henry E. Crawford, 
Esq., Law Offices of Henry E. Crawford, 1150 Connecticut Avenue, NW., 
Suite 900, Washington, DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Joyner, Mass Media Bureau, (202) 
418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No. 97-202, adopted September 
3, 1997, and released September 12, 1997. The full text of this 
Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during 
normal business hours in the FCC's Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M 
Street, NW., Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may 
also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, International 
Transcription Service, Inc., 1231 20th Street, NW., Washington, DC 
20036, (202) 857-3800.
    Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of l980 do not apply 
to this proceeding.
    Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to 
Commission consideration or court review, all ex parte contacts are 
prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve 
channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing 
permissible ex parte contacts.
    For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, 
See 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 97-24935 Filed 9-18-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-F
#### STATE ex rel. Richard C. DAVIS v. Ben F. OVERTON, as Judge.

No. 38976.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 1969.

Habeas corpus denied without opinion.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 17

- 00442

- CR

Gilberto Ozuna MORENO

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 399th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016CR11608

Honorable Frank J. Castro, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION

, JUSTICE ANGELINI , AND JUSTICE RIOS

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is

AFFIRMED.

SIGNED June 27, 2018.

_____________________________ Irene Rios, Justice
- 000100fc
- 000200fi
- 000300tp
- 00040000
- 00050000
- 00060000
- 00070001
- 00080002
- 00090003
- 00100004
- 00110000
- 00120000
- 00130000
- 00140000
- 00150005
- 00160006
- 00170007
- 00180008
- 00190009
- 00200010
- 00210011
- 00220012
- 00230013
- 00240014
- 00250015
- 00260016
- 00270017
- 00280018
- 00290019
- 00300020
- 00310021
- 00320022
- 00330023
- 00340024
- 00350000
- 00360000
- 003700bi
- 003800bc
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 190 (Wednesday, October 1, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 51506]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-26024]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

September 19, 1997.
    The Department of Treasury has submitted the following public 
information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-13. Copies of 
the submission(s) may be obtained by calling the Treasury Bureau 
Clearance Officer listed. Comments regarding this information 
collection should be addressed to the OMB reviewer listed and to the 
Treasury Department Clearance Officer, Department of the Treasury, Room 
2110, 1425 New York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220.

Financial Management Service (FMS)

    OMB Number: 1510-0007.
    Form Number: SF 1199A.
    Type of Review: Extension.
    Title: Direct Deposit Sign-Up Form.
    Description: The Direct Deposit Sign-Up Form is used by recipients 
to authorize the deposit of Federal payments into their accounts at 
financial institutions. This information is used to route the Direct 
Deposit payment to the correct account at the correct financial 
institution. It identifies persons who have executed the form.
    Respondents: Individuals or households, Business or other for-
profit, Federal Government.
    Estimated Number of Respondents/Recordkeepers: 2,197,960.
    Estimated Burden Hours Per Response/Recordkeeper: 10 minutes.
    Frequency of Response: Other (one-time).
    Estimated Total Reporting/Recordkeeping Burden: 373,653 hours.
    Clearance Officer: Jacqueline R. Perry, (301) 344-8577, Financial 
Management Service, 3361-L 75th Avenue, Landover, MD 20785.
    OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt (202) 395-7860, Office of 
Management and Budget, Room 10202, New Executive Office Building, 
Washington, DC 20503.
Lois K. Holland,
Departmental Reports Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-26024 Filed 9-30-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-35-P
### Profile surveys in 1915 along the Rio Grande, Pecos River, and Mora River, New Mexico

By: William Harrison Herron

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp421

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 5**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 6**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 7**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 8**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 9**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 10**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 11**                            (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.
1

The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District

of Nebraska.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 08-3050

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Nebraska.

Veronica Perales, also known *

as Veronica Ramirez, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: October 27, 2009

Filed: November 9, 2009

___________

Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Veronica Perales appeals the sentence the district court1

 imposed upon revoking

her supervised release, arguing that the sentence should have been more lenient, and

that the court abused its discretion and failed properly to consider the 18 U.S.C.

§ 3553(a) sentencing factors. Upon careful review, we conclude that the revocation

sentence was not unreasonable. See United States v. Tyson, 413 F.3d 824, 825 (8th

Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (standard of review). The sentence is within the statutory
-2-

limits of 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3). Furthermore, contrary to Perales’s argument, the

court explicitly considered multiple relevant section 3553(a) factors, including

Perales’s violations of supervised release, the high risk that she would commit new

felonious conduct, the prior sentencing leniency given to her, and the need for

substance abuse treatment that best could be provided in prison. Cf. United States v.

Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 922-24 (8th Cir. 2006) (record must show that court

considered relevant matters and stated reason for its decision; no error in imposing 60-

month sentence that exceeded Guidelines recommended range of 5-11 months, where

sentence was within statutory maximum, court expressed grave concern over

defendant’s numerous and repeated violations of supervised release and inability to

complete drug treatment programs, and defendant persisted in criminal conduct

despite many chances afforded by probation office). 

Accordingly, we affirm. 

______________________________
FIRST COMMUNITY
                              FINANCIAL CORPORATION

                     PROMISSORY NOTE MODIFICATION AGREEMENT

                                Modification # 2

Date:   December 30,  1996      Borrower: Poore Brothers Distributing, Inc.,
Obligation #00011                         an Arizona corporation


         The undersigned (individually/collectively  "Borrower"), is indebted to
First Community  Financial  Corporation  ("Lender")  under that certain Multiple
Advance  Promissory  Note,  dated  July 26,  1996,  in the  original  amount  of
$800,000.00, which has been amended and modified from time to time (the "Note").

         Borrower and Lender hereby agree that the Note shall be modified in the
following respects:

         1). Effective January 1, 1997,  interest shall be charged on the unpaid
         principal  balance hereof, to the date of maturity on a daily basis for
         the actual number of days any portion of said principal is outstanding,
         at the rate (the "Note  Rate") equal to the prime rate  announced  from
         time to time by Bank One,  Phoenix,  Arizona  (whether or not it is the
         lowest rate  actually  charged by such bank) plus 3.5 % per annum.  The
         current  Note Rate  under the note is 11.75 % per  annum  based  upon a
         prime rate of 8.25 %. In the event such prime rate is from time to time
         hereafter changed,  the Note Rate of interest shall  correspondingly be
         adjusted as of the effective  date of the prime rate change;  provided,
         however, that the Note Rate payable hereunder shall in no event be less
         than 11.75% per annum.

         2). All other terms and conditions shall remain-unchanged.

Except as amended hereby,  the Note (as the same may have been amended from time
to time)  shall  continue  in full force and effect and is hereby  ratified  and
confirmed.

DATED this 30th day of December, 1996.

Agreed & Accepted                          Agreed & Accepted
Poore Brothers Distributing, Inc.          First Community Financial Corporation
an Arizona corporation                     An Arizona corporation
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

COW 

26, tnwhioh you ask 

and it 1s our opinion that unless otherwise provided wlthln 

the St;otUt6S, thf.8 18W EiUflt &OlT6Ell th6 ltJ8tW’i~ d&F8 Of m 

iSSU6 OS bonds. 

cbZQt6i' 2, Of !fitbS &?, d6t8ilS the tm66 Of boIld6 that 

LU8y b6 iSSUed by 8 CQUUt~. AHdale 7x8 8peaiPically 8UthOtiZ6S 

a county to is8t.m bortda.for the follw3ng gnwposest 
3.. Toereotaaeuntyo -6 Btd jail or 

Sither. 

for publla puracm8tituter tke 

k8ofar 8s your 3etter dceanct atate whether the road 

bonds 'Of your county wet?6 $.ssued 8s oounty~ obligations, 

or pursu8ut to seotiti 52, Article 3 of ti-xe Constitution, w6 

Psel that lm Iimst potit out Article 7!52i of Cha@xw3, TLt10 

22, whbh mad8 as Pollwas 

'%uahbonds shaXlwhwenot laterthanf;hLtiy 

years fmm#eiPdate,exct3@aahcr8;tnoth8mW3 

provided; they z&a&l be iesued ia suuob den&&nation8 
wnarable,Esvid Cole, psg6 3 

anCtpaptble8t 5~ohti~116~time8 85~5yb6d~ 

most l?aped*t by the oeiiaseL-; oourt and 

shallbear interestnottosxo66dfive8ndane-half 

per c6nt pQr.8aamml. !vhe &aaerel lmrs relative to 

county bondll, not ia oonfliot wtkh the p.twLslons 

of this Act, shdll 8pp1y to the 18su8no8, a-1 

Snd~ CertifiCatiOll, the ??6~iStI'&iOn, th6 581e &b 

~ym6ntorth6bc5xI8p~r~inthiaA6t." 

fewill behnded that tlda mtiole speoific8ll 

9 

stat65 

thatthe~enercrllavsrelativetoc~~boada~agp~to 

thsl5suano6or5whbozodawhonsuohlrntsareaol;inoonPliot 

with th6 ~rovisloneof this Aotc Artia16 7!%% of chspt6X' 3, 

!mle 22, oont~l5tc5 th6 issU5na6 of bOnda POP a?O5d pnFpO5es 

88 8UthOPiXed w S66tiOlI 52 Of h'tiO%B 3 Of th6 COaStitUtiOU Of 

.tb1s.state, and the 8Ptlolt3s sUb5equant to Arti 7528 d6t8I.l 

then8nne~invhLohbo~moybeis5usabgthso~~forroad~ 

purposes; aI@ 5iluof8r a8 t&6 g6ll6Pa~ lava P615t~V6 to countyI 

bonds we-n& in oorif'l~otvlth the ~z?Ovfsi0as Of this Oh8~t62', 

th6&priIl6r8l~l8w55h8llE~. 

au are, therefore; ‘i%3Yl306 that In OUT oplaton Am.016 

720, Chapter 2, Title 22, Is 839ll68bla to aerial rQ8d bands of 

8 aOW~tyWh6XkiasU6dUnd6VCh8pt6F2,Titl62& ondamiaetti6 

aon5titutiopa1 ra8d 8nd brLdg6 t8x pavldad ia seotlon 9, 5rt;lole 

8 of the CodUiution but In the event th6 bonds are laau6d 

um36-2 Chfaptw 3, title 22, pursuant to Sedtian 52, &tiOl6 3 Of 

the Conl%tltutton, Artlale 7!xx would b6 applia8bls to the ultil&t'3 lnaturity dates or such boa Isaw'. 

CRC :s:f?o 

APPROVXI SRP. 14, 1939
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Onthe lambda and phi operators of radiative transfer theory**
 
PDF | Mobi | ePub
 
SuDoc Number:SI 1.12/2:5/11
Item Number:0909-B (online)
CGP systemNumber:001068414
 
August 28, 2018
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

STEVEN J. MUNIC, :

:

Plaintiff :

:

v. : CIVIL NO. 4:CV-13-2245

:

WARDEN DAVID LANGAN, ET AL., : (Judge Brann)

:

Defendants :

MEMORANDUM

October 4, 2016

Background

 Steven J. Munic filed this pro se civil rights action regarding his prior

confinement at the Lackawanna County Prison, Scranton, Pennsylvania. An

Amended Complaint was subsequently filed. Following his release from prison

the Plaintiff took up residence in Pleasantville, New Jersey. By Memorandum

and Order dated September 18, 2015, Defendants’ motion for partial dismissal was

granted.

Remaining Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on June 15, 2016, stating

that Plaintiff passed away on May 16, 2016. See Doc. 118. Munic’s parents

Martin and Joan Munic, and brother, Jeffrey Carino, were identified in a copy of

1

Case 4:13-cv-02245-MWB-JVW Document 122 Filed 10/04/16 Page 1 of 3
an obituary accompanying the motion as being the decedent’s next of kin.1

On June 21, 2016, this Court issued an Order in accordance with Federal

Rule of Civil Procedure 25(a)(1).2

 The Order granted Plaintiff's survivors and his

personal representative or representatives ninety (90) days in which to notify this

Court in writing if they wish to be substituted for the Plaintiff in this action. In

addition, the Order forewarned the Plaintiff's successor or representative that if a

motion for substitution was not filed within the relevant time period, this action

would be dismissed. 

A copy of the Amended Complaint and the June 21, 2016 Order was mailed

to the Plaintiff’s last known address and as well as the address for his parents

1 Plaintiff’s parents are listed as being residents of Coral Lakes, Boynton

Beach, Florida.

2 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(a)(1) provides:

(a) Death.

(1) If a party dies and the claim is not extinguished, the court

may order substitution of the proper party. A motion for

substitution may be made by any party or by the decedent’s

successor or representative. If the motion for substitution is

not made within 90 days after service of a statement noting

the death, the action by or against the decedent shall be

dismissed.

2

Case 4:13-cv-02245-MWB-JVW Document 122 Filed 10/04/16 Page 2 of 3
which appeared in the obituary. Both mailings were returned as undeliverable. 

See Docs. 120 & 121. The deadline has passed and this Court has not received a

motion for substitution or any correspondence whatsoever from any representative

or successor of the Plaintiff. In accordance with the June 21, 2001 Order, this

matter will be dismissed. An appropriate Order will enter.

BY THE COURT:

 s/ Matthew W. Brann 

Matthew W. Brann

United States District Judge

3

Case 4:13-cv-02245-MWB-JVW Document 122 Filed 10/04/16 Page 3 of 3
#### Luis Fernando BAZO, Appellant, v. S. E. PETERS and Ernestine C. Peters, Appellees.

No. 69-92.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Sept. 16, 1969.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 24, 1969.

PER CURIAM.

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






AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002






CERTIFICATION OF SOLE REMAINING OFFICER-DIRECTOR






In connection with this Quarterly Report of GYK Ventures, Inc. , a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), on 10-QSB for September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Dan Sifford, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), that to my knowledge:






(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and






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






Table On Dated: November 15, 2004






/s/J. Dan Sifford






J. Dan Sifford






secretary/director
#### Keith DAVIS v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 50613.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Aug. 16, 1978.

Constance Slaughter-Harvey, Forest, for appellant.

A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen., by Robert D. Findley, Special Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

Before SMITH, P. J., and BROOM and LEE, JJ.

AFFIRMED.