alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Kent SAXON et al. v. Hobson HARVEY et al.

No. 45919.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Oct. 19, 1970.

Kent Saxon & John Sessions, representing selves as appellants.

O. B. Triplett, Jr., O. G. Idom, Forest, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1996
<CASH>                                       1,079,531
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  676,033
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,500
<INVENTORY>                                     13,628
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,789,531
<PP&E>                                       2,152,416
<DEPRECIATION>                                 107,962
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,207,724
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          518,594
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        71,520
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,587,610
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,207,724
<SALES>                                      2,669,616
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,669,616
<CGS>                                          292,708
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,658,737
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (31,162)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              14,135
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                735,198
<INCOME-TAX>                                    44,829
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            610,740
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   610,740
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.09
        

</TABLE>
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

WHITBURN LLC, AS TRUSTEE ONLY )

UNDER THE HC14-17 LAND TRUST, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D19-3518

)

GREEN TREE SERVICING LLC; ERIC )

ELFTMAN; LAKE POINTE TOWNHOME )

HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.; )

PEBBLE CREEK HOMEOWNERS )

ASSOCIATION OF HILLSBOROUGH )

COUNTY, INC.; BANK OF AMERICA, )

N.A.; UNKNOWN TENANT I; UNKNOWN )

TENANT II; )

)

Appellees. )

)

Opinion filed September 16, 2020. 

Appeal from the Circuit Court for 

Hillsborough County; Emily A. Peacock, 

Judge.

Ivan D. Ivanov of Ivanov Wolf PLLC, 

Tampa, for Appellant.

William L. Noriega of Padgett Law 

Group, Tallahassee, for Appellee Green 

Tree Servicing LLC N/K/A Ditech Financial 

LLC.

Jonathan Jacobson of Aldridge | Pite, 

LLP, Delray Beach, for Appellee Bank of 

America, N.A. 
- 2 -

No appearance for remaining Appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

NORTHCUTT, MORRIS, and LUCAS, JJ., Concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                      2168500
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                      17800
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                          389300
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                        238700
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                  583700
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 3398000
<COMMON>                                           400
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      1033300
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                             566300
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 1600000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      22900
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                            661200
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                              124500
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                   18000
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                        0
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                  971400
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  3398000
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                       959900
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            103800
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      643200
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      747000
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         212900
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                               16400
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  229300
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         64300
<NET-INCOME>                                    165000
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        700
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   164300
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                         81900
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                        69200
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          317900
<EPS-BASIC>                                       3.99
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     3.99


</TABLE>
Filed 11/7/13 P. v. Hill CA6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. SCOTT ANTHONY HILL, Defendant and Appellant. F066688 (Super. Ct. No. CRF38799)

OPINION

THE COURT * APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tuolumne County. Eric L. DuTemple, Judge. Deborah Prucha, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

- ooOoo

-

* Before Kane, Acting P.J., P oochigian, J., and Peña, J.2 Appellant, Scott Anthony Hill, pled no contest to possession of a controlled substance in a jail faci lity (Pen. Code, § 4573.6) 1 and admitted allegations that he had a prior conviction within the me aning of the three strikes la w (§ 667, subds. (b)-(i)). Following independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, we affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROC EDURAL HISTORY On April 28, 2012, Officer Weiland was conducting a security check of dorm 62 at
the Sierra Conservation Center when he saw Hill, an inmate at the center, throw a small object into his locker. Af ter Hill complied with Weiland ’s command to step away,
Weiland searched the locker and found a small bindle containing .08 grams of marijuana. On September 5, 2012, the Tuolumne Co unty District Attorney filed a complaint charging Hill with possession of an illegal subs tance in a jail facility and having a prior conviction within the meaning of the three strikes law. Fo llowing a preliminary hearing on the same date, the court deemed the complaint to be an information. On December 5, 2012, pursuant to a ne gotiated plea, Hill pled guilty to the possession charge and admitted the three strike s allegation in exchange for a stipulated four-year prison term, the mitigated term of two years, doubled because of Hill’s prior
strike conviction. On January 7, 2013, pursuant to his plea agreement, the court sentenced Hill to the stipulated term of four years. Hill’s appellate counsel has filed a brief wh ich summarizes the facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record. ( People v. Wende , supra , 25 Cal.3d 436.) Hill has not resp onded to this court’s invitation to submit additional briefing.

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.3 Following an independent review of the record, we find that no reasonably arguable factual or legal issues exist.
DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed.
#### Oscar GUTIERREZ, Appellant, v. TWO BROTHERS CATERING CORP., Appellee.

No. 70-330.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 9, 1970.

Rehearing Denied June 25, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH,

Appellant,

v.

MATTHEW LADD,

Appellee.

No. 4D17-3597

[January 17, 2019]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Edward A. Garrison, Judge; L.T. Case No. 50-2015-CA002487-XXXX-MBAA.

Anthony Stella and Zoë Panarites, Assistant City Attorneys, City 

Attorney Office, City of West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Isidro M. Garcia of Garcia Law Firm, P.A., West Palm Beach, for 

appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GROSS, MAY and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7184 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7184

  To prohibit importation of commercially produced fresh citrus fruit 
            originating from the People's Republic of China.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 11, 2020

  Mr. Steube introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To prohibit importation of commercially produced fresh citrus fruit 
            originating from the People's Republic of China.

    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 ``U.S. Citrus Protection Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON IMPORTATION OF COMMERCIALLY PRODUCED FRESH 
              CITRUS FRUIT ORIGINATING FROM THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF 
              CHINA.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
articles of commercially produced fresh citrus fruit originating from 
the People's Republic of China may not be imported into the United 
States.
    (b) Effective Date.--This Act shall take effect on the date that is 
90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### James Eugene SMITH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. FF-444.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Sept. 13, 1977.

Michael J. Minerva, Public Defender, and Louis G. Carres, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Patti Englander, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to the opinion of the Supreme Court of Florida in *Dorfman v. State,*Case No. 50,026, Opinion filed July 28, 1977, not yet reported, the general sentence imposed by the trial court is hereby set aside with directions that the trial judge enter an appropriate sentence in accordance with said opinion. Further, pursuant to this court’s opinion in *Kurlin v. State,*302 So.2d 147 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974), the trial court is directed to give specific credit for the exact number of days that appellant spent in jail prior to imposition of sentence. It will not be necessary for appellant to be present for re-sentencing.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

RAWLS, Acting C. J., and SMITH and ERVIN, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 1 (Friday, January 2, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 122]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-34162]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee Meeting on Aircraft 
Certification Procedures Issues

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a 
meeting of the Federal Aviation Administration Aviation Rulemaking 
Advisory Committee to discuss Aircraft Certification Procedures Issues.

DATES: The meeting will be held on January 22, 1998 from 9:00 a.m. to 
12:00 noon.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the General Aviation 
Manufacturers Association, 1400 K Street, NW, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ms. Angela O. Anderson, (202) 267-9681, Office of Rulemaking (ARM-200), 
800 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20591.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463; 5 U.S.C. App. II), notice is 
hereby given of a meeting of the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee 
(ARAC) to discuss aircraft certification procedures issues. This 
meeting will be held January 22, 1998, at 9:00 a.m., at the General 
Aviation Manufacturers Association. The agenda for this meeting will 
include progress reports from the Production Certification and Parts 
Manufacturing Working Group, the Delegation Working Group and the ICPTF 
Working Group.
    Attendance is open to the interested public but may be limited to 
the space available. The public must make arrangements in advance to 
present oral statements at the meeting or may present statements to the 
committee at any time. In addition, sign and oral interpretation can be 
made available at the meeting, as well as an assistive listening 
device, if requested 10 calendar days before the meeting. Arrangements 
may be made by contacting the person listed under the heading FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 22, 1997.
Brian Yanez,
Assistant Executive Director for Aircraft Certification Procedures 
Issues, Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 97-34162 Filed 12-31-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
#### Rosa Trujillo, Respondent, v ATA Housing Corporation, Appellant, et al., Defendant.

[722 NYS2d 62]

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant ATA Housing Corporation appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Cutrona, J.), dated May 1, 2000, which *539denied its motion pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1) and 317 to vacate a prior order of the same court, dated June 8, 1998, granting the plaintiffs motion for leave to enter judgment against it upon its default in answering the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the order dated June 8, 1998, is vacated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings in accordance herewith.

The appellant, ATA Housing Corporation (hereinafter ATA), demonstrated that it was not served with the summons and complaint. Service was made only through the Secretary of State, and because of an oversight by ATA an incorrect address was on file with that agency and listed on ATA’s certificate of incorporation.

Although the Supreme Court properly determined that this did not constitute a reasonable excuse sufficient to vacate its default pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) *(see, Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v Dutton Lbr. Co.,*67 NY2d 138, 141; *Santiago v Sansue Realty Corp.,*243 AD2d 622), another branch of the motion was based on CPLR 317, which does not require a defendant to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for its default *(see, Di Lorenzo, Inc. v Dutton Lbr. Co., supra,*at 142; *Kavourias v Big Six Pharmacy,*262 AD2d 456; *Rivera v 999 Realty Mgt.,*246 AD2d 637). Pursuant to CPLR 317, ATA was required to establish that it did not personally receive notice of the summons in time to defend and that it had a meritorious defense *(see, Di Lorenzo, Inc. v Dutton Lbr. Co., supra; Kavourias v Big Six Pharmacy, supra; Rivera v 999 Realty Mgt., supra).*

Here, the evidence clearly demonstrated that ATA did not personally receive notice of the summons in time to defend, and that it timely moved to vacate its default *(see,*CPLR 317). It also appears that the plaintiff was familiar with ATA’s actual place of business in White Plains, but failed to serve the summons at that business address. As a result, and in light of ATA’s meritorious defense, ATA was entitled to relief pursuant to CPLR 317 *(see, Kavourias v Big Six Pharmacy, supra; Tonawanda Tank Transp. Serv. v Envirosure Mgt. Corp.,*179 AD2d 1014; *Brac Constr. Corp. v Di-Com Corp.,*51 AD2d 740). Bracken, P. J., S. Miller, McGinity and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 24, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 67367]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-33578]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[DA 97-2624]


Emergency Alert System National Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice of Advisory Committee Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Public Law 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2) announcement is 
made of the following advisory committee meeting:

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Committee.
    Subject: Emergency Alert System.
    Date of Meeting: January 27, 1998.
    Time of Meeting: 9 am.
    Place: National Association of Broadcasters, 1771 N Street, NW., 
Washington, DC 20036-2891.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Bonnie Gay, Emergency Alert System 
Staff, Stop Code 1500B1, Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M 
Street, NW, Washington, DC 20554 (phone: 202-418-1228)(fax: 202-418-
2817).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1994, the Federal Communications 
Commission (FCC) established the Emergency Alert System (EAS) to 
replace the Emergency Broadcast System (EBS). EAS uses various 
communications technologies, such as broadcast stations and cable 
systems, to alert the public regarding national, state and local 
emergencies. At the same time, the FCC added a new part 11 to its rules 
containing EAS regulations. 47 CFR part 11. The National Advisory 
Committee (NAC) was established to assist the FCC administer EAS. Its 
first meeting will be held on January 27, 1998, in Washington, DC, and 
the general topic will be emergency communication matters relating to 
EAS.

Summary of Proposed Agenda

--Orientation.
--Remarks by FCC Chairman and/or FCC Defense Commissioner.
--Presentations by the National Weather Service and Federal Emergency 
Management Agency.
--Review of issues and FCC actions/items concerning EAS.
--Updates on state and local EAS plans.
--EAS working groups.
--Future EAS requirements and NAC recommendations to FCC.
--Other Business.
--Adjournment.

Administrative Matters

    Attendance at the NAC meeting is open to the interested public, but 
limited to space availability. Members of the general public may file a 
written statement with the FCC at the above contact address before or 
after the meeting. Members of the public wishing to make an oral 
statement during the meeting must consult with the NAC at the above FCC 
contact address prior to the meeting. Minutes of the meeting will be 
available after the meeting at the above contact address.

Federal Communications Commission.
Magalie Roman Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-33578 Filed 12-23-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
#### WESLEY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, Petitioner, v. BISCAYNE CONSTRUCTION, INC., Respondent.

No. 44053.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 12, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 276 So.2d 524.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
#### Frank ALTOBELLO, Petitioner, v. James E. HODGES, Respondent.

No. 43781.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Nov. 19, 1973.

Certiorari dismissed. 274 So.2d 892.

ERVIN, Acting C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

McCAIN, J., dissents.
<PAGE> 23

                                                                  Exhibit 12


              AMERICAN GENERAL FINANCE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
             Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                                (Unaudited)




                                                        Nine Months Ended
                                                          September 30,
                                                        2001          2000
                                                      (dollars in thousands)

Earnings:
  Income before provision for income
    taxes                                             $248,820      $232,957
  Interest expense                                     491,003       513,917
  Implicit interest in rents                            12,312        11,977

Total earnings                                        $752,135      $758,851


Fixed charges:
  Interest expense                                    $491,003      $513,917
  Implicit interest in rents                            12,312        11,977

Total fixed charges                                   $503,315      $525,894


Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                        1.49          1.44
FOIA - Freedom of Information Act 

Request Details 

Submitted Evaluation 

Tracking Number : TREAS-2013-000149 

Requester: Mr. Michael B. Daley 

Organization : N/A 

Requester Has Account : No 

Email Address : 

Phone Number : 

Fax Number: N/A 

Address: 

City: Harrisburg 

State/Province : PA 

Zip Code/Postal Code: 17109 

Assignment 

Page 1 of2 

Status : Initial Evaluation Due Date : /1 

0 (Never StartE 

Processing Closed 

Request Type : FOIA 

Request Track : TBD 

Submitted Date : 04/10/2013 

Due Date: N/A 

Assigned To : Departmental Offices 

last Assigned Date : 04/10/2013 

Last Assigned By : N/A 

Fee Limit: $25.00 

Submission Details Case File Admin Cost Assigned Tasks Comments Revie>" 

r 

Request Handling 

Requester Info No 

Available to the Public : 

Request Track : Simple 

Request Perfected : No 

Acknowledgement Sent 

Date: 

https://foiaonline.regulations.gov/foialactionlagency/request/detail?requestld=FuL 7oCGCHhMhAm6YkanNd3b5PEeGJOf9 4/1112013 

(b)(6) (b)(6)
FOIA - Freedom oflnformation Act 

Fee Category : Other 

Fee Waiver Requested: No 

Fee Waiver Status: N/A 

Expedited Processing No 

Requested: 

Expedited Processing N/A 

Status: 

[:J Unusual No 

Circumstances ? : 

5 Day Notifications: r 

Litigation : No 

Page 2 of2 

Request Description--------------------------

Short Description : 

I am placing a Freedom on Information request on who in Treasury approved the trip to Cuba by Jay-Z and Beyonce. I 

would like to know what group they were a part of and how many people were in their party. I would like to know 

their itinery that they presented to Treasury. 

Description Available to the Public : No 0 Has Request Been Modified? r 

~achedSuppo~ingFHes----------------------~ 

No supporting files have been added. 

r Upload Supportinll Files 

No attachments have been added. 

SAVE CHANGES CA."'JCEL 

https:/ /foiaonline.regulations.gov/foia/action/agency/request/detail?requestld=FuL 7oCGCHhMhAm6YkanNd3b5PEeGJOf9 4/1112013