alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 10808.

#### The Cincinnati, Georgetown & Portsmouth Railroad Co. *v.*Brunk, Admr.

Decided May 5, 1908.

Error to Circuit Court of Clermont county.

*Mr. F. F. Dinsmore*and *Messrs. Nichols & Nichols,*for plaintiff in error.

*Messrs. Mallon & Vordenberg*and *Messrs. Frasier & Hicks,*for defendant in error..

Judgment reversed and judgment for plaintiff in error.

Grounds stated in journal entry.

It is ordered and adjudged by this court, that the judgment of the said circuit court be, and the same hereby is, reversed, and this court proceeding to render the judgment which said circuit court should have rendered, it is considered and adjudged that upon the facts admitted in the record, and found by the jury in answer to special. interrogatories propounded to them, in original petition of said administrator, the defendant in error, be, and the same hereby is dismissed.

It is further considered that said plaintiff in error recover all its costs by it expended in the *421common pleas, the circuit court and this court, and that this cause be remanded to the court of common pleas of Clermont county for the execution of this judgment.

Price, C. J., Shauck, Crew, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

      We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-2938) of Horizon Health Corporation; the
Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-36953) of Horizon Health
Corporation; the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-91761) of Horizon
Health Corporation; and the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (no. 333-44690)
of our report on Horizon Health Corporation dated October 8, 2001 appearing on
Page F - 2 of this Form 10-K. We also consent to the incorporation by reference
of our report dated October 8, 2001 relating to the Financial Statement
Schedule, which appears on page S - 2 of this Form 10-K.

/s/ PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Dallas, Texas
November 13, 2001
FILED 

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT 

 March 27, 2006 

 THOMAS K. KAHN 

 CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 05-13759

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 98-00562-CR-FAM

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

versus 

AMADOR VALENTIN, 

a.k.a. Herminio Aviles, Jr., 

a.k.a. Herminio Aviles, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

_________________________

(March 27, 2006)

Before DUBINA, HULL and HILL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Amador Valentin appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to
2

recommend to the bureau of prisons that he serve his federal sentence at a state

facility, which he filed six years after his conviction became final. Miguel Caridad,

appointed counsel for Valentin, has filed a motion to withdraw on appeal supported

by a brief prepared pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396,

18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that

counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because

independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit,

counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court’s denial of

Valentin’s motion is AFFIRMED.
262 La. 316

#### James H. STURCKE v. Bessie S. CLARK and the Hanover Insurance Company.

No. 52582.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 22, 1972.

In re: Carver General Insurance Agency, Inc. applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Orleans. 261 So.2d 717.

Application not considered. Not timely filed. See Art. 7, Sec. 11, La.Const. 1921.
June 24, 2002




Office of the Chief Accountant
Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20549


Dear Sir/Madam:

     The  representations  made in this letter are based  solely on  discussions
with and  representations  from the engagement partner and manager on the audits
of the financial statements of Dobson/Sygnet  Communications Company for the two
most recent fiscal years.  Those  individuals are no longer with Arthur Andersen
LLP.

     We have read the Item 4 included in the Report on Form 8-K,  dated June 21,
2002 of Dobson/Sygnet  Communications  Company,  to be filed with the Securities
and  Exchange  Commission,  and have  found no basis for  disagreement  with the
statements contained therein.

                                Very truly yours,


                                /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP
<PAGE>   1
                                   EXHIBIT 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in (i) the Registration Statement
on Form S-8 of U.S. Trust Corporation (Registration No. 33-63899) pertaining to
the 1995 Stock Option Plan of U.S. Trust Corporation, (ii) the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 of U.S. Trust Corporation (Registration No. 33-62371)
pertaining to the 401(k) Plan and ESOP of United States Trust Company of New
York and Affiliated Companies, (iii) the Registration Statement on Form S-8 of
U.S. Trust Corporation (Registration No. 333-68589) pertaining to the U.S. Trust
Corporation Employee Stock Purchase Plan, (iv) the Registration Statements on
Form S-3 of U.S. Trust Corporation (Registration Nos. 333-61903, 333-63683,
333-16607, 333-72125, 333-88489) pertaining to the resale of 872,564 shares by
certain selling shareholders, of our report dated January 31, 2000, on our
audits of the consolidated financial statements of U.S. Trust Corporation and
Subsidiaries as of December 31, 1999 and 1998, and for each of the three years
in the period ended December 31, 1999, which report is included in the Current
Report on Form 8-K, dated February 22, 2000, which is incorporated into this
Annual Report on Form 10-K.

                                                /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
                                                ------------------------------
                                                    PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP



New York, New York
March 15, 2000
# Official Journal L 189/2009

| | ISSN 1725-2555
  doi:10.3000/17252555.L_2009.189.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 189 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5221 July 2009 |

ISSN 1725-2555

doi:10.3000/17252555.L_2009.189.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 189

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5221 July 2009

---

| Contents | | I   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | | Commission Regulation (EC) No 632/2009 of 20 July 2009 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables | 1 |

Contents

I   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is obligatory

page

REGULATIONS

Commission Regulation (EC) No 632/2009 of 20 July 2009 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

| | | II   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is not obligatory |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | | Commission |
| | | 2009/554/EC |
| | * | Commission Decision of 21 October 2008 on a State aid scheme implemented by Italy to remunerate Poste Italiane for distributing postal savings certificates (C 49/06 (ex NN 65/06))
  (notified under document number C(2008) 5585)

   (1) | 3 |

II   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is not obligatory

DECISIONS

Commission

2009/554/EC

*

Commission Decision of 21 October 2008 on a State aid scheme implemented by Italy to remunerate Poste Italiane for distributing postal savings certificates (C 49/06 (ex NN 65/06))
  (notified under document number C(2008) 5585)

   (1)

(notified under document number C(2008) 5585)

3

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
# Official Journal C 98/2017

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 98 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6029 March 2017 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 98

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6029 March 2017

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2017/C 98/01 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8373 — Europa Capital/Rezidor/PHD Polska) (
  1
  ) | 1 |
| 2017/C 98/02 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8342 — Mitsubishi Chemical Group/PTT Public Company Group/JV) (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2017/C 98/01

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8373 — Europa Capital/Rezidor/PHD Polska) (
  1
  )

1

1

2017/C 98/02

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8342 — Mitsubishi Chemical Group/PTT Public Company Group/JV) (
  1
  )

1

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2017/C 98/03 | Euro exchange rates | 2 |
| | NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES |
| 2017/C 98/04 | Communication from the Commission pursuant to Article 9(3) of Council Directive 96/67/EC on access to the ground-handling market at Community airports — Notification by the Republic of Estonia of application of Article 9(1)(b) of Council Directive 96/67/EC on access to the ground-handling market at Community airports to Tallinn International Airport (
  1
  ) | 3 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2017/C 98/03

Euro exchange rates

2

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

2017/C 98/04

Communication from the Commission pursuant to Article 9(3) of Council Directive 96/67/EC on access to the ground-handling market at Community airports — Notification by the Republic of Estonia of application of Article 9(1)(b) of Council Directive 96/67/EC on access to the ground-handling market at Community airports to Tallinn International Airport (
  1
  )

1

3

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
# Official Journal C 21/2007

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 21 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5030 January 2007 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 21

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5030 January 2007

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES |
| | Commission |
| 2007/C 021/01 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4417 — Telecom Italia/AOL German Access Business) (1) | 1 |
| 2007/C 021/02 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4442 — Carphone Warehouse/AOL UK) (1) | 1 |
| 2007/C 021/03 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (1) | 2 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Commission

2007/C 021/01

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4417 — Telecom Italia/AOL German Access Business) (1)

1

2007/C 021/02

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4442 — Carphone Warehouse/AOL UK) (1)

1

2007/C 021/03

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (1)

2

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES |
| | Commission |
| 2007/C 021/04 | Euro exchange rates | 4 |
| 2007/C 021/05 | Notification according to Article 95(4) of the EC Treaty — Request for an authorisation to extend the application of national legislation derogating from the provisions of a Community Harmonisation Measure (1) | 5 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Commission

2007/C 021/04

Euro exchange rates

4

2007/C 021/05

Notification according to Article 95(4) of the EC Treaty — Request for an authorisation to extend the application of national legislation derogating from the provisions of a Community Harmonisation Measure (1)

5

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | Commission |
| 2007/C 021/06 | Call for Proposals 2007 on the Prevention of and Response to Violent Radicalisation | 6 |

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

Commission

2007/C 021/06

Call for Proposals 2007 on the Prevention of and Response to Violent Radicalisation

6

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Metropolitan Area,Reports per 100K Population"Las Vegas-Henderson-Paradise, NV Metropolitan Statistical Area",657"Reno, NV Metropolitan Statistical Area",541,"This chart identifies Metropolitan Areas (Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas) with a population of 100,000 or more.  Metropolitan areas are defined by Office of Management and Budget Bulletin No. 15-01, ""Revised Delineations of Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Micropolitan Statistical Areas, and Combined Statistical Areas, and Guidance on Uses of the Delineations of These Areas"" (July 15, 2015).  This chart excludes reports provided by the Nevada Attorney General.",
Jeff Miller 

Testimony on behalf of IBEW LU#S 

August 1, 2014 

2:45pm 

My name is Jeffrey Miller. I am an Assistant 

Business Manager with IBEW Local Union #5 and am 

here speaking on behalf of its some 3500 members. 

I, as well as many others am here today because our 

members are concerned about the loss of their jobs 

due to EPA's proposed Clean Power Plan. 

I know that over the last few days you have 

heard repeated testimony on how the EPA's Clean 

Power Plan will undoubtedly attempt to clean toxins 

from our atmosphere while at the same time deal a 

crippling blow to our nation's economy by eliminating 

jobs that are directly intertwined with the production 

and use of coal. I do not wish to repeat these national 

statistics for you again but I do want to relay how this 

plan will affect our members directly. 

IBEW Local Union # 5 has a jurisdiction that 

covers 22 counties in Western Pennsylvania, 

approximately 1/3 of the Commonwealth. The 6 

counties that I represent have approximately 300 

journeypersons and apprentices living within its 

boundaries. These are IBEW workers with good 
paying jobs but more importantly they are IBEW 

workers with families. And mortgages. And car 

payments. And kids in school and college. 

Also within this 6 county, primarily rural, area are 

4 active coal fired electrical generation facilities. 

Combined these plants produce 4,893 Mega Watts, 

nearly 5 Giga watts of electricity, supplying energy to 

tens of thousands of homes. This is just a small 

percentage of the power generated in the Eastern 

Appalachian Region and an even smaller percentage 

in the United States using coal as the fuel source. 

Within this 6 county area IBEW Local #5 

currently has over 125 of its members working on 

construction projects at several of these coal fired 

facilities. These projects include an SCR on two units 

and a Scrubber on another two units. Both projects 

involve work on the back pass of these units, in other 

words they are designed to clean emissions thus 

making these plants burn cleaner and more 

efficiently. It will create electricity that is 

environmentally cleaner than before. These projects 

are capital projects and are only part of the picture 

that our members play building them, there are also 

the many manhours created in maintaining these 
plants with both scheduled and forced outages. The 

loss of jobs created by the closure of one or all of the 

stations due to more stringent coal regulations would 

be devastating to the workforce of the IBEW. 

The examples I have just given are examples of the 

direct impact that closures of coal fired facilities would 

create. Ironically the livelihoods of our members, 

members belonging to the International Brotherhood 

of "Electrical" Workers completely revolve around the 

generation of electricity. In this great country, the 

United States of America. In the year 2014. We most 

assuredly have the intelligence and the technology to 

continue the use of, and even expand the use of 

COAL as a chief source of our power generation. 

o Thank you
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification Pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350,


as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906


of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


Not Filed Pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Friedman Industries,
Incorporated (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
period ending September 30, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Jack Friedman, Chairman of the Board 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:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirement of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

Dated: November 15, 2004



| |                     
| | --------------------
| | By /s/ JACK FRIEDMAN
| |                     
| | Name: Jack Friedman 

| |        |                                                  
| | ------ | -------------------------------------------------
| | Title: | Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit  21.1


                           SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY

Atlanta Motor Speedway, Inc., a Georgia corporation.

Bristol Motor Speedway, Inc., a Tennessee corporation.

Charlotte Motor Speedway LLC a/k/a Lowe's Motor Speedway at Charlotte ("CMS"), a
Delaware limited liability company.

Nevada Speedway LLC d/b/a Las Vegas Motor Speedway, a Delaware limited liability
company.

Sears Point Raceway LLC, a Delaware limited liability company.

Texas Motor Speedway, Inc., a Texas corporation.

Speedway Systems LLC d/b/a Finish Line Events ("FLE"), a North Carolina limited
liability company.

600 Racing, Inc. (a wholly owned subsidiary of CMS), a North Carolina
corporation.

IMS Systems LP, a North Carolina limited partnership.

INEX Corporation (a wholly owned subsidiary of CMS), a North Carolina
corporation.

Motorsports by Mail LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of FLE), a North Carolina
limited liability company.

Oil-Chem Research Corporation, an Illinois corporation.

Speedway Funding LLC, a Delaware limited liability company.

Speedway Holdings, Inc., a Nevada corporation.

Speedway Media LLC d/b/a Racing Country USA, a North Carolina limited liability
company.

Speedway Properties Company LLC, a Delaware limited liability company.

SMI Systems LLC, a Nevada limited liability company.

SoldUSA, Inc., a Delaware corporation.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Robert Noel, Respondent, v Owens-Brockway, Appellant. Workers’ Compensation Board, Respondent.

[736 NYS2d 753]

Cardona, P.J.

Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed March 15, 2000, which ruled, inter alia, that the employer’s application for review was untimely.

After a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge (hereinafter WCLJ) issued a decision amending a claim for workers’ compensation benefits to include additional injuries, the self-insured employer filed an application for review. In response, claimant argued that the appeal was not filed within the 30-day period established by Workers’ Compensation Law § 23 and maintained that the underlying decision was supported by credible medical evidence in the record. The Workers’ Compensation Board reviewed the record and adopted the WCLJ’s findings of fact and opinion on the merits as “fully supported by the record,” thus affirming his decision. The Board additionally noted that the appeal was late “and should be denied.” On appeal to this Court, the employer argues that the Board erred in finding its application for review untimely.

An untimely application for Board review of a WCLJ’s decision is not a jurisdictional defect since the Board has discretionary authority to consider an application beyond the 30-day period *(see, Matter of Chaousy v Marine Midland Bank,*269 AD2d 625). Accordingly, regardless of whether the employer’s ap*740plication for review was timely, the Board had the authority to consider the merits of the employer’s appeal which it clearly did by reviewing the record, adopting the WCLJ’s findings and affirming his decision. In effect, the Board adopted alternative grounds for resolving the appeal, one based on untimeliness and the other on the merits. On appeal to this Court, the employer argues the timeliness issue only and does not address the merits. Inasmuch as the Board was authorized to and did in fact determine the merits of the application for review, resolution of the only issue raised on this appeal in favor of the employer will not entitle the employer to any relief because the Board’s alternative resolution of the application on the merits remains unchallenged. Accordingly, we find no reason to disturb the Board’s decision.

Peters, Mugglin, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.