alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Henry MATTHEWS v. John ALFORD d/b/a Istrouma Motors and Transmissions.

No. 7839.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

Dec. 22, 1969.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 2, 1970.

Writ Refused April 3, 1970.

*432C. Alvin Tyler, Baton Rouge, for appellant.

Elven E. Ponder and William J. Doran, Baton Rouge, for appellee.

Before LANDRY, SARTAIN, and ELLIS, JJ.

ELLIS, Judge.

Plaintiff Henry Matthews had a rebuilt transmission installed in his automobile on July 26, 1966, by defendant Istrouma Motors & Transmissions. The transmission was guaranteed by defendant for 90 days. According to plaintiff’s testimony, the transmission heated up and vibrated during the time it was in his car. He brought his car into defendant’s shop on September 17, 1966, and on other occasions during the warranty period but testified that it was never properly repaired. He further testified that on December 6, 1966, after the car had been in defendant’s shop for over a week with no work having been done on it, he took it home and left it there until February 15, 1967, when he took it to Aam-co Transmissions where a new transmission was installed.

This suit was brought for $270.00, the amount paid to Aamco for the new transmission. After trial on the merits, the trial judge found that the transmission installed by the defendant was defective and that the defendant failed to repair or replace it. He awarded plaintiff judgment for $240.00, which was the amount he paid the defendant for installation of the defective transmission. From that judgment, defendant has taken a suspensive appeal.

The specifications of error relate to the finding of fact made by the judge.

We do not have a transcript of the testimony before us, but rather a stipulation as to the sense of the testimony of the various witnesses who testified. Written reasons for judgment were rendered by the trial judge, and also form part of the record.

In effect, plaintiff and his witnesses testified that the transmission was faulty, that it was taken into defendant’s shop on several occasions during the warranty period, that defendant failed to repair it, and that eventually it had to be replaced.

Defendant’s witnesses testified that the car was never brought into the shop during the warranty period, that in December, 1966, there was a minor problem with the transmission which necessitated only cleaning, and that this work was done without charge to plaintiff although the warranty period had then expired. It was further testified by one of defendant’s mechanics that he saw plaintiff’s car being driven on the highway between December 2, 1966, and February 15, 1967.

The trial judge obviously believed plaintiff’s witnesses and did not believe those of defendant. Since he saw and heard the witnesses, he was -in a better position than we to judge their credibility. We are unable to say that in reaching this conclusion the trial judge was manifestly erroneous.

We are of the opinion that the judgment appealed from must be affirmed with all costs to be paid by the defendant.

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 196 (Thursday, October 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 52711]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-26777]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-5-000]


Transwestern Pipeline Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC 
Gas Tariff

October 3, 1997.
    Take notice that on October 1, 1997, Transwestern Pipeline Company 
(Transwestern), tendered for filing to become part of Transwestern's 
FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, Fifth Revised Sheet No. 
5B.02, with an effective of November 1, 1997.
    Transwestern states that the purpose of this filing is to revise 
the Shared Cost Surcharge (SCS) rate for certain Current Customers to 
be effective November 1, 1997 (Year No. 2) in accordance with the 
settlement filed in the referenced dockets.
    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 petitions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. All 
protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken in this proceeding, but will not serve 
to make Protestant a party 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 inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-26777 Filed 10-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 3112 

To require the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection to 

annually review and update CBP policies and manuals to ensure uniform 

inspection practices along the United States border. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 24, 2023 

Mr. RICKETTS (for himself and Mr. TILLIS) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To require the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection to annually review and update CBP policies 

and manuals to ensure uniform inspection practices along 

the United States border. 

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 ‘‘Ensure Uniform Bor5 der Inspection Practices Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. UNIFORM INSPECTION PRACTICES. 

7 (a) ANNUAL REVIEW.—Not later than 180 days after 

8 the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:00 Oct 25, 2023 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S3112.IS S3112

kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 3112 IS

1 after, the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Pro2 tection shall complete the review described in subsection 

3 (b) and any updates that are necessary to accomplish the 

4 objectives described in subsection (c) of the policies and 

5 manuals of— 

6 (1) the Office of Field Operations related to in7 spections at ports of entry; and 

8 (2) the U.S. Border Patrol related to inspec9 tions between ports of entry. 

10 (b) ELEMENTS.—Each review required under sub11 section (a) shall include— 

12 (1) a comprehensive review of how fentanyl is 

13 being transported across the borders of the United 

14 States; and 

15 (2) a comprehensive review of how people are 

16 unlawfully crossing the borders of the United States, 

17 including the places at which such crossings are oc18 curring. 

19 (c) OBJECTIVE.—The Commissioner shall ensure the 

20 uniform implementation of inspection practices at ports of 

21 entry to effectively respond to technological and methodo22 logical changes designed to disguise unlawful activity 

23 (such as smuggling drugs and humans) across the borders 

24 of the United States. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Stephen Clifton BYERS.

No. 60929.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 2, 1977.

In re: Stephen F. Byers applying for writs of review and certiorari.

Granted. (Parish of Webster).

The petition of the relator in the above entitled and numbered case having been duly considered,

It is ordered that a Writ of Certiorari issue herein, directing the Honorable Louis H. Padgett, Jr., Judge of the 26th Judicial District, Court for the Parish of Webster, to transmit to the Supreme Court of Louisiana, on or before the 16th day of December, 1977, the record in duplicate, or a certified copy of the record in duplicate, of the proceedings complained of by the relator herein, to the end that the validity of said proceedings may be ascertained.

It is further ordered that the aforesaid Judge of said Court and the respondent through counsel shall show cause, in this court, on a date to be fixed by this court, at 10 o’clock A.M., why the relief prayed for in the petition of the relator should not be granted.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           145,531
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                           16,114
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                             16,104
<EQUITIES>                                      16,479
<MORTGAGE>                                      15,935
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 224,793
<CASH>                                           3,682
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                               2,697
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                          12,498
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 361,955
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                141,871
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                             55,333
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                 39,774
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            95
<OTHER-SE>                                     111,773
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   361,955
<PREMIUMS>                                     172,846
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                             12,866
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                 883
<OTHER-INCOME>                                       0
<BENEFITS>                                      95,087
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                     33,877
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                            24,633
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 20,699
<INCOME-TAX>                                     6,518
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             14,181
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    14,181
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.48
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.48
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                  83,024
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                             90,565
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                4,522
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                              41,060
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                39,281
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                 97,770
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                        (4,600)


</TABLE>
#### SENTRY INSURANCE COMPANY and Hardware Mutual Casualty Company, Petitioners, v. JAMES A. KNOWLES, INC., Respondent.

No. 40831.

Supreme Court of Florida.

May 19, 1971.

Certiorari denied. 242 So.2d 768.

ROBERTS, C. J., and ERVIN, CARLTON, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 13, 2020

No. 04

- 19

- 00518

- CR

Camron Leo SANCHEZ

- VASQUEZ,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CR8320

The Honora ble Velia J. Meza, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Sitting: Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Beth Watkins, Justice

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

This court’s February 3, 2020, submission letter setting this appeal for form al submission

and oral argument on March 26, 2020, at 9:00 a.m. is WITHDRAWN. All requests for oral

argument are DENIED.

The above cause is set for formal submission ON BRIEFS ONLY before this c ourt on

March 26, 2020, before a panel consisting of Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Beth Watkins,

and Justice Liza A. Rodriguez.

It is so ORDERED on March 13, 2020

.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: _________________________

Michael A. Cruz

Clerk of Court
[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: Motorvehicle use map. Buffalo Gap National Grassland. Wall Ranger District, SouthDakota**
 
2010 | 2013| 2015
 
SuDoc Number:A 13.28:B 86/3/
Item Number:0080-G (online)
CGP systemNumber:000911429
 
June 28, 2018
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 199 (Wednesday, October 15, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 53650]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27213]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management
[NV-030-97-1330-00]


Notice of Closure of Public Lands

ACTION: Notice of closure of public lands to discharge of firearms, 
Carson City, Nevada.

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

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that certain public lands in the 
vicinity of Pine Nut Road #2 are closed to the discharge of firearms. 
This closure is necessary for public safety and to prevent impacts to 
soil and vegetative resources at a BLM community sand and gravel pit 
that recently had an extensive cleanup conducted at the site.

EFFECTIVE DATES: This closure will take effect on or before November 
14, 1997. Interested parties may submit comments to the Carson City 
District Manager, John O. Singlaub.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This closure applies to the discharge of 
firearms except for emergency and law enforcement personnel during the 
conduct of their official duties. The public lands affected by this 
closure are discribed as follows:

Mt. Diablo Meridian.

T. 12 N., R. 21 E., Sec. 7: S\1/2\SE\1/4\,
    Sec. 18: N\1/2\NE\1/4\, N\1/2\SE\1/4\NE\1/4\, N\1/2\NE\1/4\NW\1/
4\, N\1/2\S\1/2\NE\1/4\NW\1/4\.

    Authority: 43 CFR 8364-Closure and Restriction Orders; 43 CFR 
8365.1-6-Supplementary Rules of Conduct.

Penalty

    Any person who fails to comply with this closure may be subject to 
imprisonment for not more than 12 months, or a fine in accordance with 
the applicable provisions of 18 USC 3571, or both.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ronald J. Tauchen, Bureau of Land 
Management, Carson City Field Office, 5665 Morgan Mill Road, Carson 
City, Nevada 89701, Telephone: (702) 885-6000.
    A map of the closed area is available at the Carson City District 
Office.

    Dated: September 24, 1997.
John O. Singlaub,
District Manager, Carson City District.
[FR Doc. 97-27213 Filed 10-14-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-HC-M
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AU GUST 20, 2014

NO. 03

- 12

- 00774

- CR

Benito Elizondo

- Vasquez, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 426TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, P EMBERTON, AND ROSE

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE PURYEAR

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed

the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the

trial court’s judgment . Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment of conviction

. The

appellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Cour t and the court below.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

SAMUEL MENDEZ, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) Civil Action No. 05-35 Erie

v. )

)

PA. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, et al., ) 

)

Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

This civil rights action was received by the Clerk of Court on January 28, 2005,

and was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter for report

and recommendation in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1),

and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrates. 

The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 51], filed on

April 28, 2006, recommended that the motion to dismiss filed by the Pennsylvania

Department of Corrections [Doc. No. 16] be granted; that the motion to dismiss filed by

Dr. Baker and Prison Health Services [Doc. No. 19] be granted; that the motion to

dismiss filed by Dr. Fraider [Doc. No. 23] be granted; and that Plaintiff’s motion to

amend the complaint [Doc. No. 29] be denied as futile. The parties were allowed ten

(10) days from the date of service to file objections. Service was made on Plaintiff by

certified mail and on Defendants. No objections were filed. After de novo review of the

complaint and documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendations,

the following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 17th day of May, 2006;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion to dismiss filed by the Pennsylvania

Department of Corrections [Doc. No. 16] is GRANTED; the motion to dismiss filed by

Dr. Baker and Prison Health Services [Doc. No. 19] is GRANTED; the motion to dismiss

filed by Dr. Fraider [Doc. No. 23] is GRANTED; and Plaintiff’s motion to amend the

complaint [Doc. No. 29] is DENIED as futile. 

The Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 51] of Magistrate Judge Baxter, filed

Case 1:05-cv-00035-SJM-SPB Document 52 Filed 05/17/06 Page 1 of 2
2

on April 28, 2006, is adopted as the opinion of the Court.

 s/ Sean J. McLaughlin

United States District Judge

cm: All parties of record

Susan Paradise Baxter, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 1:05-cv-00035-SJM-SPB Document 52 Filed 05/17/06 Page 2 of 2
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT UNITED STATES OF AM ER IC A, Plaintiff - Appe lle e , v. R IC HARD V. NGUYEN, De fe nda

nt - Appe lla

nt. No. 13-50611

D.C . No. 2:08-c r-00796-AB C M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the C e ntra l Distric t of C a lifornia Audre y B . C ollins, District Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d M a

y 13, 2014 ** B e fore : C LIFTON, B EA, a nd WATFORD, C irc uit Judge s. R ic ha rd V. Nguy e n a

p pe a ls from

the re voc ation of supervise d re l e a se and 12-m onth se nte nc e im

pose d upon re voc ation. Pursua nt to Ande rs v . C

alifornia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Nguye n’ s c ounse l ha s file d a brie f stating tha

t the re are no grounds for re lie f, a long with a m otion to withdra

w a s c o unse l of re c ord. W e have



# FIL ED MAY22 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S
. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).provide d Nguy e n the opportunity to file a pro se supple m e nta l brie f. No pro se supple m e nta l brie f or answe ring brie f ha s be e n file d . Our inde pe nde nt re v i e w of the re c ord pursua nt to Pe nson v . Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), disc lose s no a rgua ble grounds for re lie f on dire c t a ppe a l. C ounse l’ s m otion to withdra w is G RANT E D. AFFIRM E D.

1 3 - 5 0 6 1 1 2
June 22, 1998



Rabar Market Research
10 Bank St. - Suite 830
White Plain, N.Y. 10606

Attention:  Mr. John Dreyer & Mr. Paul Rabar

         Re:      Management Agreement Renewal
                  Smith Barney Principal Plus Futures Fund L.P.

Dear Mr. Dreyer & Mr. Rabar:

We are  writing  with  respect  to  your  management  agreement  concerning  the
commodity pool to which reference is made above (the "Management Agreement"). We
would like to extend the term of the Management  Agreement through June 30, 1999
and make the attached  modification  on Rider 1. The  incentive  fee will now be
paid annually  instead of  quarterly.  All other  provisions  of the  Management
Agreement will remain unchanged.

Please indicate your agreement to and acceptance of this modification by signing
one copy of this letter and returning it to the attention of Mr. Daniel Dantuono
at the address above or fax to 212-723-8985.  If you have any questions I can be
reached at 212-723-5416.

Very truly yours,

SMITH BARNEY FUTURES MANAGEMENT INC.



By:
         Daniel A. Dantuono
         Chief Financial Officer,
         Director & Treasurer


AGREED AND ACCEPTED

RABAR MARKET RESEARCH

By:

Print Name:

DAD/sr
Exhibit 99.1


                        CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                         18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                         AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
              SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


Each  of  the  undersigned hereby certifies, in his/her  capacity  as  an
officer  of  Atlantic Coast Airlines Holdings, Inc. (the "Company"),  for
purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

  -  the  Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the period  ended
December  31, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section  13(a)
or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
78o(d)); and

  -  the  information contained in such report fairly  presents,  in  all
material  respects, the financial condition and results of  operation  of
the Company.

Dated:  March 29, 2003


/s/__________________
Name:     Kerry B. Skeen
Title:    Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

/s/__________________
Name:     Richard J. Surratt
Title:    Executive Vice President, Treasurer, and Chief Financial
Officer


A  signed original of this written statement required by Section 906  has
been  provided  to  Atlantic Coast Airlines Holdings, Inc.  and  will  be
retained by Atlantic Coast Airlines Holdings, Inc. and furnished  to  the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.