alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Jump To:  
-  Elder Abuse 
-  Services for Older Adults 
-  State and Local-Level Drivers and Trends 
-  State and Local Fiscal Projections 
-  Federal Borrowing 
-  Managing the Debt 
-  Summary of Funding Provisions 
-  Auditing the Government's Books 
-  Unpacking the Financial Report 
-  Highlights 
-  Recommendations 
-  Background 
-  About This Work 
-  About This Work 
-  Trends 
-  About the Center 
-  Why It's High Risk 
-  What Remains To Be Done 
-  Key Reports 
-  Newest COVID-Related Reports 
-  AI Use Cases 
-  Flood Insurance 
-  Past Pandemic-Related Reports 
-  CARES Act Oversight Reports 
-  All COVID-19 Reports 
-  Report Suspected Fraud 
-  Subjects 
-  How to Get Notified 
-  Past Reports 
-  Public Health Threats 
-  Explore the FY 2022 and 2023 Funds 
-  Lessons Learned 
-  Agency Reports 
-  Recent Reports 
-  Recommendations 
-  Supplemental Material 
-  Full Report 
-  Additional Data 
-  View Decision 
-  Downloads 
-  Previously Identified Actions 
-  Related Pages 
-  Associated Agencies 
-  Tough Choices and Opportunities Ahead 
-  Americas Fiscal Future Key Areas 
-  Retirement Security Key Areas 
-  Current List 
-  About The High Risk List 
-  Area Ratings 
-  Previous High Risk Products 
-  Search Federal Vacancies 
-  Past Federal Vacancies 
-  Violation Letters 
-  About the Yellow Book 
-  Advisory Council 
-  Related Resources 
-  Comment Letters 
-  Related Publications 
-  Contacts and Resources 
-  Major Issues Facing the Nation 
-  Meeting Strategic Challenges 
-  Additional Resources 
-  Resources 
-  GAO Contacts 
-  Mission Teams 
-  Operations and Staff Offices  
-  Organization Chart  
-  Why a Career at GAO? 
-  Am I Qualified? 
-  Company Culture 
-  Reasonable Accommodations 
-  Video Gallery 
-  Paid Internships 
-  Student Volunteers 
-  Professional Development Program 
-  Advancement 
-  Executive Candidate Program 
-  Summer Associates 
-  Externships 
-  Benefits 
-  Contacts 

## Boiler Statement

The Government Accountability Office, known as the investigative arm of Congress, is an independent, nonpartisan agency that exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities. GAO also works to improve the performance of the federal government and ensure its accountability to the American people. The agency examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO provides Congress with timely information that is objective, fact-based, nonideological, fair, and balanced. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.

## Photos of HQ

## Image

## Image

## Image

## Videos

#### GAO – The Congressional Watchdog

Transcript

#### GAO's History

Transcript

## Image

Chuck Young
youngc1@gao.gov

(202) 512-4800
# C o urt o f Appe a ls

o f t he S ta te o f G e org ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A2 4 I 0 1 16

. THE STATE v . MARQUAVI US MEADOW S.

Th e St at e ch ar g e d M arq u av i u s M ead o ws wi t h carry i n g a weap o n w i t h o u t a

v al i d li cen s e. M ead ows fi l ed a g en eral an d s p eci al dem u rrer, an d on J an u ary 5

, 2 0 2 4,

t h e t ri al co u rt d i s m i s s ed t h e ch arg e. A ft er o b t ai n in g a cert i fi cat e fo r i m m ed i at e

rev i ew, t h e St at e fi l ed t h i s i n terl o cu t o ry ap p l i cat i o n

.

Th e t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd er i s s u b ject t o d i rect ap p eal u n d er OCGA § 5 -7 -1 (a) (1 ),

wh i ch perm it s t h e St at e t o ap p eal “ an o rd er, d eci s i o n

, o r ju d g m en t set t in g as i d e o r

d i s m i s s i n g an y i n d ict m en t

, accu s at i o n

, o r a p et i t i o n a l l eg i n g t h at a ch i l d h as

co m m i t t ed a d el in q u en t act

, o r an y co un t t h ereo f.” See St a t e v. Men d o z a

, 1 9 0 Ga.

Ap p

. 8 3 1

, 8 3 1 (1 ) (3 8 0 SE2 d 3 5 7 ) (1 9 8 9 ). Mo reo ver, p urs u an t t o OCGA § 5 -7 -2 (b )

(2 ), t h e St at e was n o t req u i red t o o b t ai n a cert i fi cat e o f i m m ed i at e rev i ew.

Th i s Co u rt wi l l g ran t an o t h erwi s e t i m el y ap p l i cat i o n fo r i n t erl o cu t o ry ap p eal

i f t h e l ower co urt ’ s o rd er i s s u b j ect t o d i rect ap peal

. S

p i vey v. H

emb r ee

, 2 6 8 Ga. Ap p.

4 8 5 , 4 8 6 , n . 1 (6 0 2 SE2 d 2 4 6 ) (2 0 0 4 ). Acco rd i n g l y

, t h is ap p l i cat i o n i s h ereb y

GRANTED. Th e St at e s h al l h av e ten d ay s fro m t h e dat e o f t h i s o rd er t o fi l e a n o t i ce

o f ap p eal wi t h t h e t ri al co u r t i f i t h as n o t al read y d on e s o

. See O CGA § 5 -6 -3 4 (b ).

C o u r t o f A p p e a ls o f t h e S t a t e o f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O ffic e

, A t la n t a

,

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

I c e r t ify t ha t t h e a b o v e is a t

r u e e x t r a c t fr o m

t h e m in u t e s o f t h e C o u r t o f A pp e a ls o f G e o r g ia

.

W it n e s s m y s ig n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o f s a id c o u r t

h e r e t o a ffix e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r la s t a b o v e w r

it t e n

.

, C le r

k

. February 06, 2024

02/06/2024
261 La. 1062

#### PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE v. Elmira Harelson HARRISON et al.

No. 52448.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 25, 1972.

In re: Elmira Harelson Harrison, Holt B. Harrison and Elmira Ann Harrison Parnell applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 260 So.2d 106.

Writ denied. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal, we find no error of law in the judgment complained of.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

COY RUCKER, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D19-2989

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed September 30, 2020. 

Appeal from the Circuit Court for 

Hardee County; Michael E. Raiden,

Judge.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public 

Defender, and Julius J. Aulisio, 

Assistant Public Defender, Bartow,

for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, and Blain A. Goff,

Assistant Attorney General, Tampa,

for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

MORRIS, LUCAS, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
#### Glenn J. DANOS v. Nelvin FORET, Jr., et al.

No. 61821.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 31, 1978.

In re: William J. Guste, Jr., Attorney General, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of Terrebonne. 354 So.2d 667.

Writ denied. As to Assignment of Error 1 to 3, Court of Appeal taxed costs against the State of La. “to the extent permitted by law”.
Program 3423-S Page 1 of 1

2 PROGRAM 3423-S Term: Date of Award Thru March 31, 2018

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

ITEM Basis of

NUMBER ITEM DESCRIPTION AWARD UNIT RATE COST UNIT RATE COST UNIT RATE COST UNIT RATE COST UNIT RATE COST

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

I. COMPLETE PRODUCT

 1. Hardback Certificate/Award Holder, landscape only:

 (a) To accommodate 11 x 8 1/2" certificate - each 1,400 5.25 7,350.00 5.88 8,232.00 6.25 8,750.00 6.03 8,442.00 5.38 7,532.00

 (b)

Constructing the inside front panel to accommodate a 

second document each 1,400 0.90 1,260.00 1.00 1,400.00 0.50 700.00 1.00 1,400.00 0.95 1,330.00

 2.

Flexible Certificate/Award Holder - Portrait or 

Landscape Style:

 (a)

To accommodate 11 x 8-1/2" certificate (2000 copies 

or fewer) - each 4,855 2.70 13,108.50 2.85 13,836.75 3.15 15,293.25 3.09 15,001.95 2.80 13,594.00

 (b)

To accommodate 11 x 8-1/2" certificate (Over 2000 

copies) - each 35,000 2.60 91,000.00 2.64 92,400.00 3.15 110,250.00 2.83 99,050.00 2.64 92,400.00

 (c)

Constructing the inside front panel to accommodate a 

second document 105 0.65 68.25 1.35 141.75 0.75 78.75 2.25 236.25 1.25 131.25

 3. Producing Stamping Dies:

 (a) Per square inch................................ 10 8.00 80.00 14.00 140.00 5.00 50.00 9.00 90.00 10.00 100.00

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

TOTAL 112,866.75 116,150.50 135,122.00 124,220.20 115,087.25

DISCOUNT 2.00% 2,257.34 0.50% 580.75 1.00% 1,351.22 0.50% 621.10 0.00% 0.00

NET TOTAL 110,609.41 115,569.75 133,770.78 123,599.10 115,087.25

AWARDED

GPO ESTIMATE

Duke Printing Previous Contractor

Rockville, MD

Sellco Industries, Inc.

Courtland, NY

Unified Packaging, Inc.

Denver, CO

Seagull Printing Serv, Inc.

Midvale, UT
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 785

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to undertake the necessary feasibility

studies regarding the establishment of certain new units of the National

Park System in the State of Hawaii.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 3, 1993

Mr. MINK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Natural Resources

A BILL

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to undertake the

necessary feasibility studies regarding the establishment

of certain new units of the National Park System in

the State of Hawaii.

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

3 SECTION 1. STUDIES OF POTENTIAL NATIONAL PARK SYS4 TEM UNITS IN HAWAII.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Interior, act6 ing through the Director of the National Park Service,

7 shall undertake feasibility studies regarding the establish-
2

•HR 785 IH

1 ment of National Park System units in the following areas

2 in the State of Hawaii:

3 (1) Island of Maui: The shoreline area known

4 as ‘‘North Beach’’, immediately north of the present

5 resort hotels at Kaanapali Beach, in the Lahaina

6 district in the area extending from the beach inland

7 to the main highway.

8 (2) Island of Lanai: The mountaintop area

9 known as ‘‘Hale’’ in the central part of the island.

10 (3) Island of Kauai: The shoreline area from

11 ‘‘Anini Beach’’ to ‘‘Makua Tunnels’’ on the north

12 coast of this island.

13 (4) Island of Molokai: The ‘‘Halawa Valley’’ on

14 the eastern end of the island, including its shoreline,

15 cove and lookout/access roadway.

16 (b) KALAUPAPA SETTLEMENT BOUNDARIES.—The

17 studies conducted under this section shall include a study

18 of the feasibility of extending the present National His19 toric Park boundaries at Kalaupapa Settlement eastward

20 to Halawa Valley along the island’s north shore.

21 (c) REPORT.—A report containing the results of the

22 studies under this section shall be submitted to the Con23 gress promptly upon completion.

Æ
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-15-00161-CV 

HARRIS HUGHEY APPELLANT

V.

JAY W. HAND AND DONALD 

SHIELDS

APPELLEES 

----------

FROM THE 367TH DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY

TRIAL COURT NO. 14-08039-367

----------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

----------

Appellant Harris Hughey filed a notice of appeal on May 8, 2015, appealing 

from the trial court’s dismissal of his claims against appellees Jay W. Hand and 

Donald Shields. This court was informed by the trial court clerk that the trial 

judge had not signed an order in this case. On May 14, 2015, we notified the 

parties of our concern that we lacked jurisdiction over this appeal because there 

appeared to be no final order. On May 19, 2015, we received a copy of the trial 

 1

See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

court’s order granting the appellees’ motion to dismiss that had been filed on 

May 18, 2015. 

A motion for an award of damages and costs was still pending when the 

order on the motion to dismiss was signed. So on May 21, 2015, we notified the 

parties of our concern that we lacked jurisdiction over this appeal because the 

order on the motion to dismiss did not appear to be a final judgment or an 

appealable interlocutory order. 

Subsequently, the trial court considered Hughey’s motion for new trial and 

request for reconsideration and, upon reconsideration, denied the appellees’ 

motion to dismiss. Hand then filed a notice of appeal under cause no. 02-15-

00239-CV. On July 9, 2015, we notified the parties that it appeared that this 

appeal was now moot. 

On July 27, 2015, Hughey filed a motion to dismiss for mootness. On 

July 30, 2015, Hand filed a response to Hughey’s motion. Hand stated that 

although he did not oppose dismissal of this appeal, he requested that this 

appeal be consolidated with his appeal. Because, as Hand concedes, the appeal 

under cause no. 02-15-00239-CV will address the parties’ issues, we are of the 

opinion that the motion to dismiss should be granted. Accordingly, we dismiss 

this appeal as moot. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f). 

PER CURIAM

PANEL: GABRIEL, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and SUDDERTH, J.

DELIVERED: August 13, 2015
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 813 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 813

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that charitable 
contributions of appreciated property will not be treated as an item of 
                            tax preference.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 4, 1993

Mr. Andrews of Texas (for himself, Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Bacchus of Florida, 
 Mr. King, Mr. McCollum, Mr. Gallegly, Mr. Solomon, Mr. Sundquist, Mr. 
Gingrich, Mrs. Schroeder, Mr. Gillmor, Mr. Hochbrueckner, Mr. Bateman, 
Mr. Pickett, Mr. Thomas of Wyoming, Mr. Sensenbrenner, Mr. Porter, Mr. 
  Smith of New Jersey, Mr. Torkildsen, Mr. Blute, Mrs. Kennelly, Mr. 
      Hinchey, Mr. Saxton, Mr. Spratt, Mr. Upton, Mrs. Johnson of 
Connecticut, Mr. Emerson, Mr. Machtley, Mr. Neal of Massachusetts, Mr. 
Lewis of Florida, Mr. Frost, Mr. Matsui, Mr. Walsh, Mr. Towns, Mr. Sam 
Johnson of Texas, and Mr. Jacobs) introduced the following bill; which 
            was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that charitable 
contributions of appreciated property will not be treated as an item of 
                            tax preference.

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

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF TREATMENT OF CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS OF 
              APPRECIATED PROPERTY AS ITEM OF TAX PREFERENCE.

    (a) In General.--Subsection (a) of section 57 of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to items of tax preference) is amended 
by striking paragraph (6) and by redesignating paragraph (7) as 
paragraph (6).
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1991.

                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit
      23.2**





**Apollo
      Gold Corporation**


**Annual
      Report on Form 10-K**


**for
      the**


**Year
      Ended December 31, 2005**


**____________________**





**CONSENT
      OF MINE DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES**


**____________________**





We
      hereby
      consent to the incorporation by reference of any reserves and other analyses
      performed by us in our capacity as an independent consultant to Apollo Gold
      Corporation (the “Company”), which are set forth in the Company’s Annual Report
      on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005, in the Company’s Registration
      Statements on Form S-8 No. 333-113889, S-3 No. 333-119198, S-3 No. 333-131876,
      S-3 No. 333-121004, S-3 No. 333-122433, S-3 No. 333-109511, and S-3 No.
      333-122693; any registration statements or prospectuses to be filed in
      connection with the sale or resale from time to time of securities of the
      Company, or amendments or supplements thereto; and in any amendment to any
      of
      the foregoing. We also consent to the reference to us under the heading
“Experts” in any of the aforementioned documents.




MINE
              DEVELOPMENT
              ASSOCIATESBy:
            /s/ NEIL
              B.
              PRENNName:Neil
              B. PrennTitle:PresidentDate: March 30,
              2006
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 847 Engrossed in House (EH)]

103d CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 847

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To provide for planning and design of a National Air and Space Museum 
         extension at Washington Dulles International Airport.
103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 847

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To provide for planning and design of a National Air and Space Museum 
         extension at Washington Dulles International Airport.

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

SECTION 1. PLAN FOR NATIONAL AIR AND SPACE MUSEUM EXTENSION.

    The Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution shall have 
authority to plan and design an extension of the National Air and Space 
Museum at Washington Dulles International Airport.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    There is authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years beginning 
after September 30, 1993, a total of $8,000,000 to carry out this Act.

            Passed the House of Representatives June 29 (legislative 
      day, June 28), 1993.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
UNITED STATES


SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Washington, D.C. 20549





FORM 8-K





CURRENT REPORT


PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE


SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934





(Date of report)January 7, 2015(Date of earliest event reported)January 6, 2015





ONEOK PARTNERS, L.P.


(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)





Delaware1-1220293-1120873(State or other jurisdiction(Commission(IRS Employerof incorporation)File Number)Identification No.)





100 West Fifth Street; Tulsa, OK


(Address of principal executive offices)





74103


(Zip code)





(918) 588-7000


(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)





Not Applicable


(Former name or former address, if changed since last report)





Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:





[] Written communication pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)





[] Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)





[] Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))





[] Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))




---




Item 7.01Regulation FD DisclosureOn January 6, 2015, we and ONEOK, Inc. (ONEOK) announced we will participate in the Goldman Sachs Global Energy Conference in Miami, Florida, on January 8, 2015.  A copy of the news release is attached as Exhibit 99.1 and is incorporated herein by reference.The materials used at the conference will be accessible on the ONEOK and ONEOK Partners websites,www.oneok.comandwww.oneokpartners.com, on Thursday, January 8, beginning at 8 a.m. Eastern Standard Time (7 a.m. Central Standard Time).The information disclosed in this Item 7.01, including Exhibit 99.1 hereto, is being furnished and shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act), or otherwise subject to the liabilities under that section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act except as expressly set forth by specific reference in such filing.Item 9.01Financial Statements and Exhibits(d)ExhibitsExhibitNumberDescription99.1News release issued by ONEOK, Inc. and ONEOK Partners, L.P. dated January 6, 2015.





2


---




SIGNATURE





Pursuant to the requirements of the Exchange Act, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, hereunto duly authorized.





ONEOK Partners, L.P.By:  ONEOK Partners GP, L.L.C.,General PartnerDate:January 7, 2015By:/s/ Derek S. ReinersDerek S. ReinersSenior Vice President,Chief Financial Officer andTreasurer





3


---




EXHIBIT INDEX








ExhibitNumberDescription99.1News release issued by ONEOK, Inc. and ONEOK Partners, L.P. dated January 6, 2015.








4
#### Bonnie JONES and Larry Jones, her husband, Appellants, v. Roy Eugene BELL et al., Appellees.

No. 72-345.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Feb. 26, 1973.

Rehearing Denied March 20, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
257 La. 168

#### John A. SPANO v. EMMCO INSURANCE COMPANY.

No. 50975.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 14, 1970.

In re: Emmco Insurance Company applying for certiorari, or writ of review to the Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Jefferson. 239 So.2d 434.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal there appears no error of law in the ruling complained of.
EXHIBIT 32.2


                       PAINEWEBBER R&D PARTNERS III, L.P.


                             CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of PaineWebber R&D Partners III, L.P. (the
"Partnership") on Form 10-K for the Period ended December 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Robert J. Chersi, Principal Financial Officer of PaineWebber Development Corp.,
as General Partner of the Partnership, 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 requirements 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 Partnership.


/s/ Robert J. Chersi
--------------------
Robert J. Chersi
Chief Financial Officer
March 30, 2004