alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC.
                             Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                                    Twelve Months Ended
                                   (Thousands of Dollars)


                                                    JUNE                 JUNE
                                                    1998                 1997
                                               ----------           ---------

Earnings
 Net Income                                      $744,955             $662,302
 Federal Income Tax                               462,018              246,070
 Federal Income Tax Deferred                      (60,780)             129,590
 Investment Tax Credits Deferred                   (8,770)              (8,790)
                                               ----------           ----------

    Total Earnings Before Federal Income Tax    1,137,423            1,029,172

Fixed Charges*                                    355,319              348,015
                                               ----------           ----------

    Total Earnings Before Federal Income Tax
      and Fixed Charges                        $1,492,742           $1,377,187
                                               ==========           ==========




* Fixed Charges

 Interest on Long-Term Debt                      $303,379             $301,853
 Amort. of Debt Discount, Premium & Expense        12,878               11,436
 Interest on Component of Rentals                  18,367               18,175
 Other Interest                                    20,695               16,551
                                               ----------           ----------

    Total Fixed Charges                          $355,319             $348,015

                                               ==========           ==========



    Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges               4.20                 3.96
117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1975 

AN ACT 

To take certain land located in San Diego County, California, 

into trust for the benefit of the Pala Band of Mission 

Indians, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 1975 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Pala Band of Mission 

3 Indians Land Transfer Act of 2021’’. 

4 SEC. 2. TRANSFER OF LAND IN TRUST FOR THE PALA BAND 

5 OF MISSION INDIANS. 

6 (a) TRANSFER AND ADMINISTRATION.— 

7 (1) TRANSFER OF LANDS INTO TRUST.—If, not 

8 later than 180 days after the date of the enactment 

9 of this Act, the Tribe transfers title to the land re10 ferred to in subsection (b) to the United States, the 

11 Secretary, not later than 180 days after such trans12 fer, shall take that land into trust for the benefit of 

13 the Tribe. 

14 (2) ADMINISTRATION.—The land transferred 

15 under paragraph (1) shall be part of the Pala Indian 

16 Reservation and administered in accordance with the 

17 laws and regulations generally applicable to land 

18 held in trust by the United States for an Indian 

19 Tribe. 

20 (b) LAND DESCRIPTION.—The land referred to in 

21 subsection (a)(1) is the approximately 721.12 acres of 

22 land located in San Diego County, California, generally 

23 depicted as ‘‘Gregory Canyon Property Boundary’’ on the 

24 map titled ‘‘Pala Gregory Canyon Property Boundary and 

25 Parcels’’. 
3 

•HR 1975 EH

1 (c) RULES OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this Act 

2 shall— 

3 (1) enlarge, impair, or otherwise affect any 

4 right or claim of the Tribe to any land or interest 

5 in land that is in existence before the date of the en6 actment of this Act; 

7 (2) affect any water right of the Tribe in exist8 ence before the date of the enactment of this Act; 

9 or 

10 (3) terminate or limit any access in any way to 

11 any right-of-way or right-of-use issued, granted, or 

12 permitted before the date of the enactment of this 

13 Act. 

14 (d) RESTRICTED USE OF TRANSFERRED LANDS.— 

15 The Tribe may not conduct, on the land taken into trust 

16 for the Tribe pursuant to this Act, gaming activities— 

17 (1) as a matter of claimed inherent authority; 

18 or 

19 (2) under any Federal law, including the Indian 

20 Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.) 

21 and regulations promulgated by the Secretary or the 

22 National Indian Gaming Commission under that 

23 Act. 

24 (e) DEFINITIONS.—For the purposes of this section: 
4 

•HR 1975 EH

1 (1) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means 

2 the Secretary of the Interior. 

3 (2) TRIBE.—The term ‘‘Tribe’’ means the Pala 

4 Band of Mission Indians. 

Passed the House of Representatives November 2, 

2021. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1975 

AN ACT 

To take certain land located in San Diego County, 

Band of Mission Indians, and for other purposes. California, into trust for the benefit of the Pala
* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 9, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-50317

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ALICIA CHAVEZ-CAMPOS, also known as Sandra Maria

Hernandez-Hernandez,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas 

USDC No. 3:05-CR-2288

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

Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Alicia ChavezCampos raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres

v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate

criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance

is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 7004** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

– Appellee ,
v. JONATHAN SANDERS , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria
. Leonie M. Brinkema , District Judge. ( 1:13

- cr - 00449

- LMB

- 1; 1:15

- cv - 00246

- LMB )

Submitted : November 30, 2015 Decided: December 30, 2015

Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Jonathan Sanders, Appellant Pro Se. Karen Ledbetter Taylor, Assistant United States Attorney, Jennifer Anne Clarke, Sean Phillip Tonolli, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions ar e not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Jonathan Demetrio Sanders seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 ( 2012 ) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifi cate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (B) (20 12 ). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (20 12 ). When the district court denies relief on the m erits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutiona l right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Sanders has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability , deny Sanders’ motion to appoint counsel, and dismiss the ap peal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately3 presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection withthe Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Countrywide Financial Corporation (the “Company”)for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Eric P. Sieracki,Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

1.               The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

2.               Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| /s/ ERIC P. SIERACKI |   |
|-------------------------------------|--------|
| Eric P. Sieracki                    |
| Chief Financial Officer             |
| November 6, 2006                    |

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwiseadopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic versionof this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided toCountrywide Financial Corporation and will be retained by Countrywide FinancialCorporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

----
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

E R R A T A

February 3, 2006 

Appeal No. 03-1341,-1366, 

Precedential Majority Opinion, nCube Corporation v Seachange International

Decided January 9, 2006 

Page 13, last line: delete “nCube’s” and replace with “SeaChange’s”
Memo

Financing Marketable All Other Change in End-Of-Quarter SOMA

Need Borrowing Sources Total Cash Balance Cash Balance Redemptions

Quarter Announcement Date (1) (2) (3) (4) = (2) + (3) (5) = (4) - (1) (6) (7)

Oct - Dec

2018 Actual 291 426 (117) 309 17 402 (91)

Jan - Mar

2019 Actual 375 374 (67) 306 (68) 334 (46)

Apr - Jun

2019 Actual 13 40 (97) (57) (70) 264 (67)

Jul - Sep

2019 Actual 281 440 (40) 400 119 382 (30)

Oct - Dec

2019 Actual 313 330 7 337 24 404 0

Jan - Mar

2020 Actual 365 477 (1) 476 111 515 0

Apr - Jun

2020 Actual 1,526 2,753 (20) 2,733 1207 1722 0

Jul - Sep

2020 Actual 401 454 7 461 60 1782 0

Oct - Dec

2020 Actual 648 597 (3) 595 (53) 1729 0

Jan - Mar

2021 Actual 1008 401 1 402 607 1122 0

Apr - Jun

2021 Actual 591 319 2 321 (270) 852 0

Jul - Sep

2021 Actual 751 103 11 115 (637) 215 0

Oct - Dec

2021 Actual 480 689 (18) 670 191 406 0

Jan - Mar

2022 Actual 423 668 1 669 245 652 0

Apr - Jun

2022 Actual (180) 7 (55) (49) 131 782 (30)

Jul - Sep

2022 Actual 453 457 (151) 307 (146) 636 (120)

Oct - Dec

2022 Actual 368 373 (194) 179 (189) 447 (139)

Jan - Mar

2023 Actual 656 657 (270) 387 (269) 178 (221)

Apr - Jun May 1, 2023 112 726 (242) 485 372 550 (180)

2023 Actual 181 657 (251) 406 225 402 (180)

Forecast Revisions 69 (70) (9) (79) (148) (148) 0

Jul - Sep May 1, 2023 438 733 (244) 488 50 600 (158)

2023 July 31, 2023 521 1007 (238) 769 248 650 (158)

Forecast Revisions 83 274 6 281 198 50 0

Oct - Dec

2023 July 31, 2023 487 852 (265) 587 100 750 (171)

Sources and Uses Reconciliation Table

Financing
The State of TexasAppellee

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 21, 2014

No. 04-13-00487-CR

Elbert Lee SANDERS,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 54th District Court, McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012-327-C2

Matt Johnson, Judge Presiding

ORDER

We grant appellant’s motion for extension of time to file his brief. We order appellant’s 

brief due January 31, 2014 (sixty-five days after the original due date). No further extensions of 

time will be granted absent a showing of extraordinary circumstances beyond those attendant a 

busy docket. If the brief is not filed by the date ordered, the court may abate this appeal and 

remand the case to the trial court for a hearing to determine whether appellant or counsel has 

abandoned the appeal.

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 21st day of January, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
#### Gary MORRISON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-591.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Jan. 25, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 27 (Monday, February 10, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 5991]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-3174]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Health Resources and Services Administration


Statement of Organization, Functions and Delegations of Authority

    Notice is hereby given that I have delegated to the Administrator, 
Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) the authorities to 
conduct maternal and child health studies under Section 606 (Newborns' 
and Mothers' Health Protection Act) of Public Law 104-204, the 1997 
Veterans Administration--Housing and Urban Development Appropriations 
Act (the Act), as amended.
    I have designated the Advisory Committee on Infant Mortality to 
carry out the responsibilities of an advisory panel, as required under 
Section 606(b) of the Act.
    This delegation excludes the authority to submit reports to 
Congress. In addition, I have affirmed and ratified any actions taken 
by the HRSA Administrator, or his subordinates, that involved the 
exercise of the authorities delegated herein prior to the effective 
date of the delegation.

    Dated: January 28, 1997.
Donna E. Shalala,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-3174 Filed 2-7-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-15-M
**EXHIBIT10.143**

**FIRSTAMENDMENT****TO THE****2006 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN****OF****COUNTRYWIDE FINANCIAL CORPORATION**

**WHEREAS**, the CompensationCommittee of the Board of Directors of Countrywide Financial Corporation (the “**Company**”) has determined that it is in thebest interest of the Company to amend the Countrywide Financial Corporation2006 Equity Incentive Plan (the “**2006 Plan**”)to amend the definition of “Fair Market Value” to conform to certain revisedrules of the Securities and Exchange Commission;

**NOW THEREFORE**, the 2006 Plan isamended effective as of January 1, 2007 in the following particulars:

# 1.             Section 8.1(m) is hereby deleted in its entirety and newSection 8.1(m) is inserted in its place as follows (with the revised languagereflected below in italics):

### “(m)**       **“**Fair Market Value**”shall, on any date, mean *the officially-quotedclosing selling price of the shares on such date on the principal nationalsecurities exchange on which such shares are listed or admitted to trading(including the New York Stock Exchange, Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. or such othermarket or exchange in which such prices are regularly quoted)*or, ifthere have been no *sales* withrespect to shares on such date, the Fair Market Value shall be the valueestablished by the Board in good faith and in accordance with Code Section 422.”

**INWITNESS WHEREOF,** the Company has caused this First Amendmentto be executed by its duly authorized officer this 30th day of November, 2006.
|        | Countrywide Financial Corporation |
|--------|-----------------------------------|
|   |                              |   |
|   |                              |   |
|   | By:                               | /s/ Marshall M. Gates |
|   |                              | Marshall Gates |
|   |                              | Senior Managing Director, |
|   |                              | Chief Administrative Officer |

 

----
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
WASHINGTON, D.C.
SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY

November 16, 2021

The Honorable Nancy Pelosi
Speaker

U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Madam Speaker:

I am writing to provide an update regarding the Treasury Department's ability to continue to
finance the operations of the federal government under the constraints of the debt limit.

In my October 18 letter to you, I noted that the recent $480 billion increase in the debt limit
provided a high degree of confidence that Treasury would be able to finance the U.S.
government through December 3, 2021. Based on our most recent information, I am now able to
further refine that projection.

Yesterday, the President signed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which appropriates
$118 billion for the Highway Trust Fund. Under 26 U.S.C. § 9601, these funds must be
transferred into the Highway Trust Fund within one month after the enactment of the legislation,
and the transfer will be completed on December 15. Promptly thereafter, the funds will be
invested in nonmarketable Treasury securities subject to the debt limit. While I have a high
degree of confidence that Treasury will be able to finance the U.S. government through
December 15 and complete the Highway Trust Fund investment, there are scenarios in which
Treasury would be left with insufficient remaining resources to continue to finance the
operations of the U.S. government beyond this date. As the federal government’s cash flow is
subject to unavoidable variability, I will continue to update Congress as more information
becomes available.

To ensure the full faith and credit of the United States, it is critical that Congress raise or suspend
the debt limit as soon as possible.

Sincerely,

fence fla

Janet L. Yellen


Identical letter sent to:

cc:

The Honorable Kevin McCarthy, House Republican Leader
The Honorable Charles E. Schumer, Senate Majority Leader
The Honorable Mitch McConnell, Senate Republican Leader

The Honorable Richard E. Neal, Chairman, House Committee on Ways and Means
The Honorable Kevin Brady, Ranking Member, House Committee on Ways and Means
The Honorable Ron Wyden, Chairman, Senate Committee on Finance

The Honorable Mike Crapo, Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Finance
US TREASURY FINANCING SCHEDULE FOR 4th QUARTER 2013

BILLIONS OF DOLLARS

ANNOUNCEMENT AUCTION SETTLEMENT OFFERED MATURING NEW

ISSUE DATE DATE DATE AMOUNT AMOUNT MONEY

4-WK 3-MO 6-MO 12-MO

4-WEEK AND 9/26 9/30 10/3 35.00 25.00 25.00 110.00 -25.00

3&6&12 MO BILLS 10/3 10/7 10/10 30.00 35.00 30.00 95.00 0.00

10/10 10/14 10/17 20.00 35.00 30.00 22.00 120.00 -13.00

10/17 10/21 10/24 35.00 35.00 30.00 93.00 7.00

10/24 10/28 10/31 45.00 34.00 30.00 89.00 20.00

10/31 11/4 11/7 45.00 34.00 30.00 84.00 25.00

11/7 11/12 11/14 40.00 34.00 30.00 22.00 99.00 27.00

11/14 11/18 11/21 40.00 33.00 28.00 90.00 11.00

11/21 11/25 11/26 35.00 32.00 28.00 100.00 -5.00

11/26 12/2 12/5 35.00 31.00 28.00 100.00 -6.00

12/5 12/9 12/12 35.00 31.00 28.00 20.00 120.00 -6.00

12/12 12/16 12/19 35.00 31.00 28.00 95.00 -1.00

12/19 12/23 12/26 35.00 31.00 28.00 90.00 4.00

1323.00 1285.00 38.00

CASH MANAGEMENT BILLS

7-DAY BILL 9/30 10/2 10/3 20.00 20.00 0.00

MATURES 10/10/13

5-DAY BILL 10/8 10/9 10/10 35.00 35.00 0.00

MATURES 10/10/13

189-DAY BILL 10/15 10/16 10/17 26.00 26.00

MATURES 4/24/14

CMB Funds: 26.00

COUPONS

CHANGE

3-year Note 10/3 10/8 10/15 30.00 -1.00

10-year Note ® 10/3 10/9 10/15 21.00 0.00

30-year Bond ® 10/3 10/10 10/15 13.00 0.00 32.28 31.72

30-year TIPS ® 10/10 10/17 10/31 7.00 0.00

2-year note 10/17 10/22 10/31 32.00 -1.00

5-year note 10/17 10/23 10/31 35.00 0.00

7-year note 10/17 10/24 10/31 29.00 0.00 61.40 41.61

3-year Note 11/6 11/12 11/15 30.00 0.00

10-year Note 11/6 11/13 11/15 24.00 0.00

30-year Bond 11/6 11/14 11/15 16.00 0.00 63.49 6.51

10-year TIPS ® 11/7 11/14 11/29 13.00 0.00

2-year note 11/14 11/19 12/2 32.00 0.00

5-year note 11/14 11/20 12/2 35.00 0.00

7-year note 11/14 11/21 12/2 29.00 0.00 64.41 44.60

3-year Note 12/5 12/10 12/16 30.00 0.00

10-year Note ® 12/5 12/11 12/16 21.00 0.00

30-year Bond ® 12/5 12/12 12/16 13.00 0.00 32.47 31.53

2-year note 12/12 12/16 12/31 32.00 0.00

5-year note 12/12 12/17 12/31 35.00 0.00

7-year note 12/12 12/18 12/31 29.00 0.00

5-year TIPS ® 12/12 12/19 12/31 16.00 0.00 66.18 45.82

522.00 320.21 201.79

Estimates are italicized. R = Reopening

NET CASH RAISED THIS QUARTER: 266
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2108 

To prohibit the use of Federal funds in contravention of the War Powers 

Resolution. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 19, 2021 

Mr. SHERMAN (for himself, Ms. TITUS, Mr. KHANNA, Ms. NORTON, Ms. 

OMAR, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. BROWN, Mr. WELCH, Mr. CASTRO of Texas, Ms. 

VELA ́ZQUEZ, Mr. CICILLINE, Mrs. NAPOLITANO, Ms. LEE of California, 

Ms. JACOBS of California, Mr. GARCI ́A of Illinois, Mr. ESPAILLAT, Mrs. 

CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York, Mr. GRIJALVA, Ms. SHERRILL, Ms. 

TLAIB, Mr. NADLER, Mr. KAHELE, Mr. POCAN, Mr. GARAMENDI, Ms. 

WILD, Ms. JAYAPAL, and Ms. BASS) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To prohibit the use of Federal funds in contravention of 

the War Powers Resolution. 

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 ‘‘War Powers Act En5 forcement Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2108 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION. 

2 No Federal funds may be used in contravention of 

3 the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1541 et seq.). 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### Lewis Bernard KROUSE, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PARNELL, INCORPORATED, et al., Defendants-Appellants.

No. 11622.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit.

June 22, 1971.

*431Mayer & Smith by Caldwell Roberts, Shreveport, for James Gandy Cable Tool Contractor and United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., defendants-appellants.

C. P. Brocato, Shreveport, for defendant-appellant Parnell, Inc.

Wilkinson, Woods, Carmody & Hall by Arthur R. Carmody, Jr., Shreveport, for third party defendant-appellant McGee & Sons, Inc.

Paul A. Newell, for plaintiff-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

In application for rehearing third party plaintiffs, James Gandy Cable Tool Contractor and United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company, have directed our attention to the failure of our judgment to provide legal interest on the amount to which they were held entitled as contribution from third party defendant, Parnell, Inc.

Pertinent to this question are the following codal articles:

La.C.C. Art. 1938:

> “All debts shall bear interest at the rate of five per centum per annum from the time they become due, unless otherwise stipulated.”

La.C.C.P. Art. 1921:

> “The court shall award interest in the judgment as prayed for or as provided by law.”

La.C.C. Art. 2924:

> “Interest is either legal or conventional. Legal interest is fixed at the following rates, to wit:

> At five per cent on all sums which are the object of a judicial demand. Whence this is called judicial interest; * *

Inasmuch as interest and the rate thereof are provided by law, we conclude that third party plaintiffs should have been awarded interest in our judgment.

The judgment appealed from is corrected to award third party plaintiffs interest at 5% from the date of judicial demand until paid on the sum of $1065.78 [being one-half of the total amount paid by third party plaintiffs prior to judicial demand], and 5% interest on one-half of each compensation payment made after judicial demand from the date of the payment by third party plaintiffs until paid by Parnell, Inc.

The application for rehearing is denied.

HALL, J., recused.