alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Lois SCHIFFMAN, Appellant, v. POWELL SYSTEM, INC. d/b/a Budget Rent-A-Car of Florida, and Anna B. Alleva, Appellees.

No. 70-752.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 6, 1971.

Howard N. Pelzner and Peter S. Schwe-dock, Miami, for appellant.

Richard E. Hardwick, Coral Gables, and Sam Daniels, Miami, for appellees.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and BARK-DULL and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff below, Lois Schiffman, sued the defendants (appellees) and sought to recover for damages she allegedly suffered and incurred as a result of an automobile accident with Anna B. Alieva. The jury verdict was for the defendants and plaintiff appeals from the final judgment rendered thereon.

She raises three points on appeal and they all have reference to the jury instructions. At the charge conference the trial judge stated he would not give a charge requested by plaintiff orally on the doctrine of sudden emergency. On appeal plaintiff says the refusal to give this charge was reversible error. We find no error in the refusal of the trial judge to give a charge to the jury on the doctrine of sudden emergency under the facts presented in this case. See Smith v. Cobb, Fla.1952, 61 So.2d 378; LeSuer v. State Road Department, Fla.App.1970, 231 So.2d 265; Rule 1.470(b), R.C.P., *17230 F.S.A. and Florida Standard Jury Instructions 4.8.

We have examined the plaintiff’s second point on appeal and find it to be without merit. See Medina v. McAllister, Fla.1967, 202 So.2d 755; Warmuth v. Greenberg, Fla.1951, 49 So.2d 793; Carver v. Jenkins, Fla.App.1968, 209 So.2d 882; and Zanetti v. Weissler, Fla.App.1965, 179 So.2d 383. In addition, we note that no objection was made in the trial court to this point which is argued on appeal. Cf. Advance Company v. Albert, Fla.App.1969, 216 So.2d 474.

Plaintiff’s third point is that the court committed error in giving an instruction to the jury on contributory negligence when there was no evidence to support such a charge. The pleadings raised the issue of the contributory negligence of plaintiff and we find sufficient evidence in the record on appeal to support a charge by the trial court on this issue.

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 23.2

Consent of Independent Auditors

The Board of Directors
Disc Graphics, Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement No. 333-28013 on Form S-8 of Disc
Graphics, Inc. of our report dated February 2, 2001, except for notes 5 and 16, which are as of April 13, 2001,
relating to the consolidated balance sheet of Disc Graphics, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2000, and
the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity and cash flows for each of the years in
the two-year period ended December 31, 2000, which report appears in the December 31, 2001 annual report on Form
10-K of Disc Graphics, Inc.

KPMG LLP
Melville, New York
February 28, 2002
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas Nove mber 14, 2017 No. 04 - 17 - 00400 - CR , 04 - 17 - 00401 - CR, 04 - 17 - 00402 - CR, 04 - 17 - 00403 - CR & 04 - 17 - 00404 - CR Logan Trey FIELD , Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 216th Judicial District Court, Gillespie County, Texas Trial Court No. 5810 , 5811, 5812, 5813 & 5814 Honorable N. Keith Williams, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R Appellant Logan Field filed sep arate notices of appeal for five related trial court causes from Gillespie County in appeals numbered 04 - 17 - 00400 - CR, 04 - 17 - 00401 - CR, 04 - 17 - 00402 - CR, 04 - 17 - 00403 - CR, and 04 - 17 - 00404 - CR. Appellant moved this court to consolidate these appeals. Because each of the Gillespie County appeals pertains to the same event and the same grounds for a motion to suppress, we granted Appellant’s mo tion in part. We ordered Appellant and the State to file motions, briefs, and other pleadings as if the appeals wer e one and to include all five appeal numbers in the style of the case. We advised the parties that this court would include each appeal num ber in any further orders, but we would maintain a separate appellate record for each appeal. On November 1, 2017, Appellant filed a motion for extension of time to file his brief in these cases, and a mot ion to consolidate the five Gillespie County app eals with four appeals from K e rr County numbered 04 - 17 - 00321 - CR, 04 - 17 - 00322 - CR, 04 - 17 - 00323 - CR, and 04 - 17 - 00324 - CR. Those appeals are all based on the same event that occurred in Gillespie County on July 14, 2015. Appellant’s motion to consolidate the Kerr County and Gillespie County appeals for purposes of briefing and arguments is DENIED. However, this court will treat the Kerr County and Gillespie County appeals as companion cases. The two sets of appeals will be considered and decided by the same panel at the same time.Appellant’s motion for extension of time to file the brief is GRANTED. Appellant’s

brief is due on November 15, 2017.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 14th day of November, 2017 .

___________________________________ K eith E. H ottle Clerk of Court
EXHIBIT 10.3 AMENDMENT TO STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT ThisAMENDMENT TO STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT (this Agreement) by and between IA GLOBAL, INC.,a Delaware corporation (the Company), and Inter Asset Japan LBO No.1 Fund (Voluntary Partnership) (the Purchaser) is entered into as of April 16, 2010. The Company and Purchaser are entering into this agreement to memorialize the amended terms and conditions upon which Purchaser commits to purchase and acquire shares of the Companys common stock, $0.01 par value per share (the Common Stock). NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, the Company and Purchaser hereby amend the August 17, 2009 Stock Purchase Agreement and the January 26, 2010 Amendment to Stock Purchase Agreement as follows: I.          STOCK PURCHASE COMMITMENT; REPRESENTATIONS BY PURCHASER 1.1         The Company sold to the Purchaser 18,383,750 shares of Common Stock for $735,350. The Stock Purchase Agreement dated August 17, 2009 and the Amendment to Stock Purchase Agreement dated January 26, 2010 between the Company and the Purchaser are hereby terminated. Further resolved, this satisfactorily concludes all matters between the parties on this August 17, 2009 Stock Purchase Agreement and the January 26, 2010 and April 16, 2010 Amendments to Stock Purchase Agreement: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and year set forth below. IA Global, Inc./s/Mark Scott
By: Mark ScottTitle: Chief Financial OfficerInter Asset Japan LBO No.1 Fund (Voluntary Partnership)/s/ Minoru YamashitaBy: Minoru YamashitaTitle: Representative  1
#### John L. PEARSON v. The FARMERS COOPERATIVE (AAL).

No. 49907.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

March 22, 1978.

Liston, Crull & Gibson, Luther P. Crull, Jr., Winona, for appellant.

Murray L. Williams, Water Valley, for appellee.

EN BANC.

SUGG, Justice,

for the Court.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

PATTERSON, C. J., SMITH and ROBERTSON, P. JJ., and WALKER, BROOM, LEE and BOWLING, JJ., concur.

COFER, J., took no part.
#### Dorothy Mae CULPEPPER v. AMCO MESH & WIRE COMPANY et al.

No. 45924.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Oct. 19, 1970.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 2, 1970.

Laurel G. Weir, Joe Mulholland, Philadelphia, for appellant.

Watkins & Eager, Elizabeth Hulen, Jackson, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3254 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 3254

   To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow expenses for 
  parents to be taken into account as medical expenses, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            November 8, 2023

Ms. Rosen (for herself and Mr. Cassidy) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow expenses for 
  parents to be taken into account as medical expenses, and for other 
                               purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Lowering Costs for Caregivers Act of 
2023''.

SEC. 2. HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNTS.

    (a) In General.--Subparagraph (A) of section 223(d)(2) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting ``, any parent of 
either such individual or such spouse'' after ``the spouse of such 
individual''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to amounts paid after December 31, 2023.

SEC. 3. FLEXIBLE SPENDING AND HEALTH REIMBURSEMENT ARRANGEMENTS.

    (a) In General.--Subsection (b) of section 105 of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following: ``A 
health flexible spending arrangement or health reimbursement 
arrangement shall not fail to be treated as meeting the requirements of 
this subsection or section 106, and no amount shall be included in 
gross income of the taxpayer, solely because, under the arrangement, 
the taxpayer may use amounts contributed to such arrangement for 
medical care (as defined in section 213(d), without regard to paragraph 
(1)(D) thereof) for a parent of the taxpayer or of the spouse of the 
taxpayer.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to expenses incurred after December 31, 2023.

SEC. 4. ARCHER MSAS.

    (a) In General.--Subparagraph (A) of section 220(d)(2) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting ``, any parent of 
either such individual or such spouse'' after ``the spouse of such 
individual''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to amounts paid after December 31, 2023.
                                 <all>
```
SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY CONVERSION

INJURY CODE CONVERSION DEFINITIONS / INSTRUCTIONS / NOTES SOURCE LOCATION

Suspected Serious Injury 2011 - Present There is no supplement for non-motorists, but Unit can be designated as Pedestrian/Cyclist. 

Only then would spaces 50 or 101 be used. PR Police Department Collision Report 2011

3 Suspected Serious Injury A Type of Injury (50. TL, 101. TL) codes found on Report Form pg1

PEDESTRIAN AND PEDALCYCLIST (NON-MOTORIZED) CONVERSION

PERSON TYPE CODE STATE DEFINITIONS / INSTRUCTIONS / NOTES SOURCE LOCATION

Pedestrian 2011 - Present PR Police Department Collision Report 2011

Pedestrian/Cyclist Check box* Analyst uses ANSi and FARS Manual definitions 17 Type code found on Report Form pg1.

Pedalcyclist 2011 - Present

Pedestrian/Cyclist Check box* Analyst uses ANSi and FARS Manual definitions 17 Type code found on Report Form pg1.

* Police Accident Report includes a check box for Pedestrian/Cyclist - please refer to your Data Dictionary for corresponding database value

Puerto Rico
Policy Statement on Employment and Advancement of 

Persons with Disabilities 

The U.S. Department of Transportation is committed to providing fair and equitable employment 

to people with disabilities. As Secretary, I will strive to make the Department a model employer 

of persons with disabilities, especially those with severe disabilities—referred to as “targeted 

disabilities”—by affording them hiring, placement, and advancement opportunities. I expect all 

managers, supervisors, and employees to contribute to making this commitment a reality. 

The Department complies with Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 

which prohibits Federal agencies from discriminating against individuals with disabilities. 

Violations of this law will result in swift and appropriate disciplinary actions against the 

offenders, up to and including dismissal. 

The Department will continue to identify and remove barriers to hiring, retaining, and promoting 

persons with disabilities. In accordance with Executive Order 13548, “Increasing Federal 

Employment of Individuals with Disabilities,” and the respective Departmental Plan to Increase 

Employment of People with Disabilities, all departmental organizations will work with their 

Offices of Human Resources in outreach efforts to provide internship, employment, and 

advancement opportunities to persons with disabilities, especially those with targeted disabilities. 

The Department also will ensure that employees and applicants with disabilities have access to 

reasonable accommodations. Guidance on how to handle requests for reasonable 

accommodation by employees and employment applicants is contained in the DOT Order 

entitled “Procedures for Processing Reasonable Accommodation Requests from DOT Job 

Applicants and Employees with Disabilities” (available on the Department’s website at 

https://www.transportation.gov/civil-rights). Additional guidance is available from our 

Departmental Office of Civil Rights. 

Pete Buttigieg 

June 9, 2022
#### VOYAGER LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. Julian D. COCHRAN.

No. 50215.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

April 12, 1978.

A. M. Murphy, Lucedale, Watkins, Pyle, Ludlam, Winter & Stennis, Walker W. Jones, III, Jackson, for appellant.

Hurt & Dickerson, Gerald A. Dickerson, Lucedale, for appellee.

Before SMITH, P. J., and LEE, BOWLING and COFER, JJ.

AFFIRMED.

PATTERSON, C. J, ROBERTSON, P. J., and SUGG, WALKER and BROOM, JJ., concurring.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-51121

Summary Calendar

BENANCIO RODRIGUEZ, doing business as Big Ben and Son Trucking,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS, INC.; LABOR READY, INC.;

JESUS HERNANDEZ,

Defendants-Appellants

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 5:08-CV-419

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and WIENER and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

The court has carefully considered appellants’ twin arguments —

(1) whether defendants’ negligence proximately caused the torn rotator cuff

injury asserted by Appellee Rodriguez although he had had a torn rotator cuff

previously; and (2) whether the trial court’s separate monetary awards for

physical impairment and pain and mental anguish impermissibly overlap. Even

if these issues were properly preserved, they are founded on the interpretation

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 4, 2010

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

Case: 09-51121 Document: 00511193726 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/04/2010
No. 09-51121

of evidence before the trial court, which rendered clear and comprehensive

findings in support of its legal conclusions following the bench trial. The court’s

findings on these issues manifest neither clear error nor manifest miscarriage

of justice.

Consequently, the judgment is AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 09-51121 Document: 00511193726 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/04/2010
STUDY BACKGROUND

The practice of printing, collecting, maintaining, and retaining paper 

tickets is cumbersome, less safe, outdated, more expensive, less 

efficient, and less sustainable than electronic ticketing (e-Ticketing). 

The adoption of electronic construction (e-Construction) technologies 

in highway construction administration and delivery has provided 

solutions to overcome traditional ticketing inefficiencies.

e-Ticketing is a digital innovation that automates the recording and 

transferring of information in realtime for materials as they are moved 

from the production plant to the construction site and incorporated into 

the project. Since the first pilot was launched in 2015, e-Ticketing has been 

used or planned for use by at least 45 State departments of transportation.

The study documents the state of the knowledge through a 

series of questions and interviews, and presents information for 

implementation planning.

WEBINAR DETAILS

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) will present a 2-h webinar 

to introduce the study findings and e-Ticketing effective practices. The 

work was completed under FHWA Contract No. 693JJ319D000030/ 

693JJ320F000474.

RESEARCH SYNOPSIS OF DOCUMENTING EFFECTIVE E-TICKETING 

IMPLEMENTATION: The study documents the state of the knowledge 

of e-Ticketing through questionnaires, interviews, and case studies, 

and discusses the overall practice of e-Ticketing, benefits and costs, 

readiness factors, implementation challenges, and future plans 

of State highway agencies. The study also documents the piloting 

experiences of nine State highway agencies; and it presents a 

business case for e-Ticketing, an illustration of benefits estimation, 

and implementation planning.

Documenting Effective e-Ticketing Implementation Webinar

DATE AND TIME

December 15, 2022

1 p.m.–3 p.m. EST

PRESENTERS

Matthew Corrigan, FHWA

Dr. Suri Sadasivam, WSP USA

Dr. Roy Sturgill, Iowa State University

Dr. Gabe Dadi, University of Kentucky

REGISTRATION

Cost: Free and open to the public. 

Advanced registration is required.

Registration Link: https://usdot.

zoomgov.com/webinar/register/WN_

mkjInJzATv2_gaHu5n48DA

CONTACT

Matthew Corrigan, FHWA

202-493-3365

matthew.corrigan@dot.gov

FHWA is committed to providing equal 

access to this meeting (or event) for 

all participants. If you need alternative 

formats or services because of a 

disability, please contact Mr. Corrigan 

with your request by close of business 

on December 8, 2022.

FHWA-HRT-23-016

HRDI-20/12-22(WEB)E

Recommended citation: Federal Highway Administration, 

Documenting Effective e-Ticketing Implementation Webinar

(Washington, DC: 2022) https://doi.org/10.21949/1521959

© 2020 Alabama Department of Transportation (DOT).

© 2020 Iowa DOT. © 2020 Utah DOT.
#### Charles Curry COOK, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 39633.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June 24, 1970.

Certiorari dismissed. 233 So.2d 140.

ERVIN, C. J., and ROBERTS, DREW, THORNAL and ADKINS, JJ., concur.
S. 30 

One Hundred Eighteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twenty three 

An Act 

To authorize major medical facility projects for the Department of Veterans Affairs 

for fiscal year 2023, and for other purposes. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Fiscal Year 2023 Veterans Affairs 

Major Medical Facility Authorization Act’’. 

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF MAJOR MEDICAL FACILITY PROJECTS OF 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS FOR FISCAL YEAR 

2023. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Veterans Affairs may carry 

out the following major medical facility projects in fiscal year 2023 

at the locations specified and in an amount for each project not 

to exceed the amount specified for such location: 

(1) Construction of a community-based outpatient clinic 

and national cemetery in Alameda, California, in an amount 

not to exceed $395,000,000. 

(2) Construction of a community living center and renovation of domiciliary and outpatient facilities in Canandaigua, 

New York, in an amount not to exceed $506,400,000. 

(3) Construction of a new health care center in El Paso, 

Texas, in an amount not to exceed $700,000,000. 

(4) Seismic upgrade and specialty care improvements in 

Fort Harrison, Montana, in an amount not to exceed 

$88,600,000. 

(5) Realignment and closure of the Livermore campus in 

Livermore, California, in an amount not to exceed $490,000,000. 

(6) Construction of a new medical facility in Louisville, 

Kentucky, in an amount not to exceed $1,013,000,000. 

(7) Seismic retrofit and renovation, roadway and site 

improvements, construction of a new specialty care facility, 

demolition, and expansion of parking facilities in Portland, 

Oregon, in an amount not to exceed $523,000,000. 

(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 
S. 30—2 

to be appropriated to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs for fiscal 

year 2023 or the year in which funds are appropriated for the 

Construction, Major Projects account, $3,716,000,000 for the 

projects authorized in subsection (a). 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
#### SKAF JEWELERS, INC., and George J. Skaf, Appellants, v. H. J. TOEPFER, Appellee.

No. 70-73.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Feb. 5, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of CEO and CFO 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 NTL Incorporated (the "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Simon P. Duffy, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Scott E. Schubert, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, that:

|Date: March 11, 2004 |  |  | /s/SIMON P. DUFFYName: Simon P. Duffy
Title: Chief Executive Officer, President and Director
|-------------------- |  |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: March 11, 2004 |  |  | /s/SCOTT E. SCHUBERTName: Scott E. Schubert
Title: Chief Financial Officer                  

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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 accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

---

QuickLinks
EXHIBIT 32.1



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)



In connection with the Annual Report of Rural/Metro Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended
June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jack E. Brucker, President and Chief Executive Officer 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, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: September 22, 2006



|                                                     
|-----------------------------------------------------
|                                                     
|/S/    JACK E.
BRUCKER                               
|Jack E. Brucker President and Chief Executive Officer