alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FOREIGNTV.COM, INC. CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1999, AND THE
RELATED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER
30, 1999, AND THE ACCOMPANYING NOTES, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                       1,137,323
<SECURITIES>                                 4,482,422
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,719,242
<PP&E>                                         955,290
<DEPRECIATION>                                  58,127
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,784,226
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          283,354
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        99,784
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,401,088
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,784,226
<SALES>                                          5,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,380,353)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       681
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,381,034)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0




</TABLE>
#### Bernard Francis DeCASTRO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-1318.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 11, 1978.

*475Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Elliot H. Scherker, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

Before HAVERFIELD, C. J, PEARSON, J., and CRAWFORD, GRADY L. (Ret.), Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Bernard Francis DeCastro appeals his conviction of robbery of a convenience store with the use of a firearm.

DeCastro first urges as reversible error the failure of the trial court to instruct the jury that criminal intent (the intent to permanently deprive) is an element of the offense of robbery.

The point lacks merit because this court in *Bell v. State,*354 So.2d 1266 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978) held that as defined under Section 812.13, Florida Statutes (1975) robbery is a general intent offense and, therefore, specific intent is no longer a requisite element. In addition, the record reflects that defense counsel raised no objection to the instructions on robbery given by the court.

Appellant also argues that the trial court erred in refusing to have certain testimony read to the jury after it had retired and made a request therefor.

Three eyewitnesses, employees of the convenience store burglarized, testified that in addition to other characteristics they were able to identify appellant by virtue of his facial scars and/or pockmarks. After retiring to deliberate, the jury transmitted to the trial court a note in effect requesting the testimony of the three eyewitnesses given in response to defense counsel’s questions with respect to their description of the robber and his facial markings. The court informed the jury that it was not practical to read back only portions of the testimony and all of the testimony would have to be read back which would take too long. The jury deliberated further and returned a verdict of guilty.

Under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.410,1 it is within the trial court’s discretion to have the court reporter read back testimony of witnesses upon request of the jury. *Simmons v. State,*334 So.2d 265, 267 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). We agree that a reading back of all the eyewitness’ testimony in the instant case was impractical, as well as having the court reporter search the entire record and have only those portions of the eyewitness’ testimony containing the description of the robber read back to the jury. There being no abuse of discretion, we find no error. See *Simmons, supra,*and *Matire v. State,*232 So.2d 209, 211-12 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970).

Affirmed.

1

. “Rule 3.410. Jury Request to Review Evidence or for Additional Instructions

“After the jurors have retired to consider their verdict, if they request additional instructions or to have any testimony read to them they shall be conducted into the courtroom by the officer who has them in charge and the court may give them such additional instructions or may order such testimony read to them. Such instructions shall be given and such testimony read only after notice to the prosecuting attorney and to counsel for the defendant.” [Emphasis Supplied]
# Walla Walla River Basin Fish Screens Evaluations

Annual Report 2006 January 2007 DOE/BP-00000652-36This Document should be cited as follows:

Chamness, Mickie, Scott Abernethy, Cherylyn Tunnicliffe, "Walla Walla River Basin Fish Screens Evaluations", 2006 Annual Report, Project No. 199601100, 21 electronic pages, (BPA Report DOE/BP-00000652-36)

Bonneville Power Administration

P.O. Box 3621 Portland, OR 97208 This report was funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), U.S. Department of Energy, as part of BPA's program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife affected by the development and operation of hydroelectric facilities on the Columbia River and its tributaries. The views in this report are the author's and do not necessarily represent the views of BPA.
3000

2950

2800

2950

3000

2800

2850

2950

2750

2850

3000

2750

3000

2800

2850

3000

2800

2950

2900

2850

2750

2850

2750

Z RD

RD Y

RD X

CO RD D

A RD

RD 27

19 MILE RD

RD 25

MARTENEY

AA RD RD 22

RD 26

16 MILE RD

RD U

ROAD W

./56

Z RD

RD Y

RD X

CO RD D

A RD

RD 27

19 MILE RD

RD 25

MARTENEY

AA RD RD 22

RD 26

16 MILE RD

RD U

ROAD W

./56

Cimarron River

O'Dea

Cemetery

O'Dea

Cemetery

41

26

41

27

41

28

41

29

41

30

41

31

41

32

41

33

41

34

41

35

41

36

41

37

41

25

41

38000mN

41

26

41

27

41

28

41

29

41

30

41

31

41

32

41

33

41

34

41

35

41

36

41

37

41

25000mN

41

38

3

13 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 3

12 322000m

E

3

13 314 315 316 3

17 318 3

19 320 321 3

12000mE 3

22

550 000FEET

580 000FEET

1 540000

1 570 000

FEET

FEET

17'30"

20'

17'30"

20'

5' 2'30"

101°07'30" 5' 2'30"

101°07'30"

37°22'30" 37°22'30"

101°00'

101°00'

37°15' 37°15'

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

ADJOINING 7.5' QUADRANGLES

QUADRANGLE LOCATION

MOSCOW SE, KS

2010

Interstate Route State Route

ROAD CLASSIFICATION

WX Interstate Route /. US Route H State Route

Ramp 4WD

US Route Local Road

MOSCOW SE QUADRANGLE

KANSAS

7.5-MINUTE SERIES

Zone 14S

Imagery.......................................................NAIP, July 2008

Roads.........................National Transportation Dataset, 2006

Names...............................................................GNIS, 2008

Hydrography.................National Hydrography Dataset, 2008

Contours............................National Elevation Dataset, 2006

North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)

World Geodetic System of 1984 (WGS84). Projection and

1 000-meter grid: Universal Transverse Mercator,

Produced by the United States Geological Survey

10 000-foot ticks: Kansas Coordinate System of 1983

(south zone)

1000 500 0 METERS 1000 2000

1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

FEET

This map was produced to conform with version 0.5.10 of the

draft USGS Standards for 7.5-Minute Quadrangle Maps.

A metadata file associated with this product is also draft version 0.5.10

SCALE 1:24 000

1 0.5 0 1

MILES

1 0.5 0 KILOMETERS 1 2

×

Ù

MN

GN

UTM GRID AND 2010 MAGNETIC NORTH DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET

1° 15 ́

22 MILS

6° 44 ́

120 MILS

U.S. National Grid

100,000-m Square ID

Grid Zone Designation

14S

LG

CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET

Liberal NW

Moscow

NW

Moscow SE

Ryus Satanta

Moscow Sublette SW

Woods NW Woods

KANSAS
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 204 (Wednesday, October 22, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 54889]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28129]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act, Pub. L. 94-409, that the Securities and 
Exchange Commission will hold the following meeting during the week of 
October 20, 1997.
    A closed meeting will be held on Tuesday, October 21, 1997, at 
10:00 a.m.
    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the 
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the closed meeting. 
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters may also be 
present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designees, has 
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth 
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c) (4), (8), (9)(A) and (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a) 
(4), (8), (9)(i) and (10), permit consideration of the scheduled 
matters at the closed meeting.
    Commissioner Hunt, as duty officer, voted to consider the items 
listed for the closed meeting in a closed session.
    The subject matter of the closed meeting scheduled for Tuesday, 
October 21, 1997, at 10:00 a.m., will be:

    Institution of injunctive actions.
    Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings of an 
enforcement nature.

    At time, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in 
the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to 
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, 
please contact: The Office of the Secretary at (202) 942-7070.

    Dated: October 15, 1997.
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-28129 Filed 10-20-97; 11:46 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-M
Federal Depository Library ProgramPersistent URL Home Page      

# Target for /GPO/gpo20812 lost

The target resource for this PURL can no longer be traced. The following is a list of the targets this PURL was previously assigned to.

Powered by the Federal Depository Library Program.                A service of the U.S. Government Publishing Office.
exv10w04



 



Exhibit 10.4



Summary of U.S. Bancorp 1991 Executive Stock Incentive Plan



The 1991 Executive Stock Incentive Plan (the “1991 Plan”) adopted by Star Banc
Corporation, a predecessor company to U.S. Bancorp, was amended in 1998 so that
the terms and conditions of that plan exactly match the terms and conditions of
the U.S. Bancorp 1998 Executive Stock Incentive Plan (the “1998 Plan”), with
the exception that the number of shares authorized for issuance under the 1991
Plan and the termination date of the plan (January 7, 2001) remained unchanged.
The 1998 Plan is filed as Exhibit 10.3 to U.S. Bancorp’s Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002. As of December 31, 2002, options to
purchase 6,344,857 shares of U.S. Bancorp common stock remained outstanding
under the 1991 Plan. No additional awards may be granted under the 1991 Plan.
#### GULF ATLANTIC INNS, INC., d/b/a Holiday Inn of Jacksonville Beach, a corporation, Appellant, v. Carl L. BEARD, Appellee.

No. S-126.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 10, 1973.

T. Malcolm Kirby, Jacksonville, and Edna L. Caruso, of Howell, Kirby, Montgomery, D’Aiuto, Dean & Hallowes, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Carl K. Staas, of Boyd, Jenerette, Leem-is & Staas, Jacksonville, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The briefs and the record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court hereby appealed is affirmed. F.S. § 501.111, F.S.A.; Garner v. Margery Lane, Inc. (Fla.App.1971), 242 So.2d 776; Safety Harbor Spa, Inc. v. High (Fla.App.1962), 137 So.2d 248.

RAWLS, C. J., and WIGGINTON and CARROLL, DONALD K., JJ., concur.
#### CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH, Petitioner, v. Wirt HOLADAY, Respondent.

No. 39685.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 7, 1970.

James W. Vance, Tallahassee and Tunney S. Robison, West Palm Beach, for petitioner. \

Levy, Plisco & Zalla, West Palm Beach, and Feldman & Abramson, Miami, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, having certified to us that its decision in the case of City of West Palm Beach v. Holaday, 234 So.2d 24 (4th D.C.A. Fla.1970), passes upon a question of great public interest, we accepted jurisdiction for review pursuant to Article V, Section 4(2), Florida Constitution, F.S.A.

After hearing oral arguments and carefully reviewing the briefs and the record arising from this cause, we have come to the conclusion that the decision of the District Court is correct, and we adopt it as the decision of this Court. Therefore, the Writ is hereby discharged.

It is so ordered.

ERVIN, C. J., and THORNAL, CARLTON, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Sal Perisano, certify that:

 

1.                         Ihave reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of iParty Corp.;

 

2.                         Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.                         Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.                         Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a) Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b) Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

c) Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.                         Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

a) Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

b) Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date:  November 12, 2003 | /s/ SAL  PERISANO        |   |
|-------------------------------|--------------------------|--------|
|                          | Sal Perisano             |
|                          | Chief  Executive Officer |

 

 

----
UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20549

 

FORM N-CSR

 

| Investment Company Act file number | 811-06073 |
|------------------------------------|-----------|

 

Cash Management Portfolio

 (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Charter)

 

345 Park Avenue

New York, NY 10154-0004

 (Address of principal executive offices)             (Zip code)

 

Registrant’s Telephone Number, including Area Code: (212) 454-7190

 

Paul Schubert

345 Park Avenue

New York, NY 10154-0004

(Name and Address of Agent for Service)

 

| Date of fiscal year end: | 12/31 |
|--------------------------|-------|

 

| Date of reporting period: | 12/31/08 |
|---------------------------|----------|

 

 

**ITEM 1.**           **REPORT TO STOCKHOLDERS**

 

----
#### Charlie James NICHOLSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 2175.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Oct. 17, 1969.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### Kenneth McINTYRE, Appellant, v. Mary Jane CAPE, individually and as administratrix of the estate of James T. CAPE, Deceased, et al., Appellees.

No. 69-303.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

Dec. 30, 1969.

Appeal dismissed.
Exhibit
10.2





iParty
Corp.





Written
Summary of Renewed One-Year Part-time Consulting Arrangement with


Mr.
Vassalluzzo





June
4, 2008











iParty
Corp. shall renew its engagement of Joseph Vassalluzzo to provide consulting
services on a part-time basis over a one-year period beginning on June 4, 2008
(the date of termination of the prior year's arrangement) to iParty's senior
management, in particular iParty's Chairman and CEO, Sal Perisano, with respect
to various retail, operational, strategic, real estate and store location
issues, as may from time to time be necessary and appropriate. Such services
shall on occasion require Mr. Vassalluzzo's presence at iParty's corporate
headquarters in Dedham, Massachusetts and/or current or proposed store location
sites, principally in New England and Florida. On or before the end of the
one-year period commencing on June 4, 2008, iParty Corp. shall pay Mr.
Vassalluzzo one or more payments not to exceed $60,000 cash for services
rendered over the one-year period beginning on June 4, 2008, with such services
to be earned at a rate of $5,000 per month.
January 22, 2001

No. 00-307.

#### Alameda Gateway, Ltd. *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari dismissed under this Court’s Rule 46.1.
#### Perry GABLE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. N-492.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Oct. 22, 1970.

Louis O. Frost, Jr., Public Defender, and Gerald Sohn, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Thomas A. Calhoun, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The briefs and the record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and the appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the order of the lower court is affirmed. See Morasso v. State, 74 Fla. 269, 76 So. 777 (1917) and Matthews v. State, 130 Fla. 53, 177 So. 321 (1937).

JOHNSON, C. J„ and CARROLL, DONALD K., and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 195 (Wednesday, October 8, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 52530]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-26598]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP97-171-010]

ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of Proposed Changes In FERC Gas 
Tariff

October 2, 1997.
    Take notice that, on September 30, 1997, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR) 
tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised 
Volume No. 1, tariff sheets in compliance with the Commission's June 
26, 1997 order accepting subject to certain modifications to ANR's May 
1, 1997 filing to comply with the GISB standards adopted in Order No. 
587-C.
    ANR states that copies of the filing have been mailed to all 
affected customers and state regulatory commissions.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commissions Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed as 
provided in 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. 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. 97-26598 Filed 10-7-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

LEONARD C. JEFFERSON, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) Civil Action No. 04-44 Erie

v. )

)

WILLIAM WOLFE, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

This civil rights action was received by the Clerk of Court on February 17, 2004,

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. 81], filed on May

15, 2006, recommended that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Third Amended

Complaint [Doc. No. 67] be granted in part and denied in part. 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. Objections were filed by Plaintiff on May

25, 2006 [Doc. No. 83]. After de novo review of the motion and documents in the case,

together with the Report and Recommendation and Objections thereto, the following

order is entered:

AND NOW, this 11th day of July, 2006;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s

Third Amended Complaint [Doc. No. 67] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. 

The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 81] of Magistrate

Judge Baxter, filed on May 15, 2006 as the opinion of the Court, with the following

clarification: We find, contrary to the Magistrate Judge, that the prescriptive programs at

issue in this case, do advance “valid penological objectives” given their rehabilitative

nature. We further find that there are issues of fact as to the remaining factors under

the reasonableness test of Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 89 (1987). 

Case 1:04-cv-00044-SPB Document 85 Filed 07/11/06 Page 1 of 2
2

 s/ Sean J. McLaughlin

United States District Judge

cm: All parties of record

Susan Paradise Baxter, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 1:04-cv-00044-SPB Document 85 Filed 07/11/06 Page 2 of 2