alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Robert KNOWLES, d/b/a Knowles Animal Hospital, Appellant, v. Sandra SILASAVAGE, f/k/a Sandra Freeman, Appellee.

No. 72-72.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Aug. 8, 1972.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 18, 1972.

Adams, George & Wood, Jeanne Hey-ward, Miami, for appellant.

Nachwalter & Falk, Miami, for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, C. J., and PEARSON and HENDRY, JJ.

*68PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from a judgment entered pursuant to a jury verdict for the plaintiff in the sum of $12,500.00 for personal injuries sustained as a result of a fall in defendant’s parking lot.

The first point on appeal as stated by defendant is that: “the court erred in failing to grant defendant’s motions for directed verdict and post trial motions and entering a final judgment in favor of plaintiff where plaintiff failed to prove that she was a business invitee when she fell in defendant’s parking lot and failed to prove that defendant breached any duty owed to her proximately causing her injury”. Defendant’s remaining point is “that the court erred in allowing plaintiff’s counsel to voir dire the jury on the subject of insurance and denying defendant’s motions for mistrial and new trial

We have considered each of the contentions in light of the record on appeal, briefs and arguments of counsel and have found them to be without substantial merit. Smith v. Montgomery Ward & Co., Fla.App.1970, 232 So.2d 195; Stecher v. Pomeroy, Fla.1971, 253 So.2d 421.

No prejudicial or reversible error having been made to appear, the judgment appealed is affirmed.

Affirmed.

BARKDULL, Chief Judge

(dissenting).

I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion in this case. Prior to the trial of this cause, the parties had secured an agreed order from the court, which reads as follows:

> * * * * * *

> “ * * * that the Defendant, TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, shall have a separate trial as to liability and damages and that the matter of insurance coverage shall not be disclosed to the jury during the trial of this cause.”

> # 5}i *%*>|c >|< ‡

It is apparent that notwithstanding this order the trial judge permitted the matter of insurance to be brought to the attention of the jury and, in fact, tried the insurance company and its witnesses. I think it is apparent from the record it had a prejudicial effect on the jury and I would reverse and grant a new trial.
#### Bazal Rayburn BABCOCK, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 44010.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Nov. 6, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 278 So.2d 348.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, ADKINS and DEKLE, JJ, concur.
[Cite as Warren Cty. Bar Assn. v. Vardiman, 2016-Ohio-5659.]

WARREN COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION. v. VARDIMAN. 

CINCINNATI BAR ASSOCIATION. v. VARDIMAN. 

[Cite as Warren Cty. Bar Assn. v. Vardiman, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 

2016-Ohio-5659.] 

(No. 2015-0589—Submitted August 31, 2016—Decided September 6, 2016.) 

ON APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT. 

____________________ 

{¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an 

application for reinstatement by respondent, Edwin Lowe Vardiman Jr., Attorney 

Registration No. 0070574, last known business address in Cincinnati, Ohio. 

{¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of February 3, 2016, 

wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(12)(A)(3), suspended respondent for 

a period of one year, with the final six months stayed on conditions, finds that 

respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of 

Gov.Bar R. V(24). 

{¶ 3} Therefore, it is ordered by this court that respondent is reinstated to 

the practice of law in the state of Ohio. 

{¶ 4} It is further ordered that the clerk of this court issue certified copies 

of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(17)(D)(1) and that publication be 

made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(17)(D)(2). 

{¶ 5} For earlier case, see Warren Cty. Bar Assn. v. Vardiman, 146 Ohio 

St.3d 23, 2016-Ohio-352, 51 N.E.3d 587. 

O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, KENNEDY,

FRENCH, and O’NEILL, JJ., concur. 

________________________
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




                       September 21, 1999
        Date of Report (Date of Earliest Event Reported)

                      HOWARD B. WOLF, INC.


   State of Texas            1-6775              75-0847571
   (State or other      (Commission File        (IRS Employer
    Jurisdiction             Number)         Identification No.)
  of Incorporation)

  3710 Rawlins Street, Suite 973
          Dallas, Texas                             75219
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)          (Zip Code)

                          214.852.0124
      (Registrant's Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

                        3809 Parry Avenue
                    Dallas, Texas 75226-1753
  (Former Name or Former Address, if Changed since last Report)


<PAGE>

ITEM 5.   OTHER EVENTS.

     Reference is hereby made to those certain Press Releases
     (the "Releases") issued to the public by Howard B. Wolf,
     Inc. (the "Company") on September 21, October 4 and October
     5, 1999.  The Releases are attached as Exhibits 99.1 to 99.3
     to this Current Report on Form 8-K and are incorporated into
     this report by reference.


ITEM 7.   FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND EXHIBITS.

(c)       EXHIBIT NO.         DESCRIPTION

            99.1              Press Release, dated September 21, 1999.

            99.2              Press Release, dated October 4, 1999.

            99.3              Press Release, dated October 5, 1999.



                           SIGNATURES

     Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended, the registrant has duly caused this report
to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly
authorized.

                              HOWARD B. WOLF, INC.


                              By:  /s/ EUGENE K. FRIESEN
                                   ------------------------------
                                   EUGENE K. FRIESEN
                                   Senior Vice President and
                                    Treasurer
                                   (Principal Financial and Duly
                                    Authorized Officer)
### Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA

- 2012

- 0722 Directorate Identifier: 2011

-NM

- 188

- AD If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If they do not, click (or Tab) into a nd then out of the changed cell

. **Estimated Costs:**  Action (e.g., Inspection, replacement) Do not include on

condition costs here Costs per **Product** (e.g., aircraft, engine,

propeller, appliance) Work

- h ours (include access, testing, and close

- up) Labor

c ost ( @ $8 5 /h our) Part s Cost Total Costs ( labor + parts) Number of

**U.S. Registered**  **Products** Total Cost

for U

. S

. Fleet

2.0 $ 170.00 $0 $ 170.00 83 $14,110.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 

### The known number of products in compl iance: Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $14,110 

### Costs covered under warranty ( if known ) $
**On**
**- Conditio**  **n Costs:** Action (e.g., Inspection, replacement) Work

- h ours

(include access, testing, and close

up) Labor cost

( @ $8 5 /hour) Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 

### $0 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 

### Special considerations for Economic Analysis ( Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to ex plain warranty costs) 

### :

### Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”? YES * NO
* Explanation: **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significant? YES * NO
* Explanation: **Regulatory Flexibili ty Act:**  Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? E xplain for either a Yes or No answer. YES NO Explanation: **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES * NO


### * Explanation 

### :
#### Alfred MART and Adelaide Mart, his wife, Appellants, v. Joseph LEIBMAN, Appellee.

No. 72-1275.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Aug. 21, 1973.

Shalle Stephen Fine, Miami, for appellants.

Bakerman, Shapiro & Marcus, Miami, for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, C. J., and PEARSON and CHARLES CARROLL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The appellants were defendants in an action to foreclose a trust deed on real property. Their defense was that the whole transaction was usurious because it had its inception in a usurious loan which the appellee and another made to the defendant, Alfred Mart. The trial court, in its final judgment, found against the defendants upon the issue of an alleged usurious transaction. On this appeal, the single question presented is, “Can the final judgment in this cause be sustained against the appellants’ claim of usury in the transaction?” In essence, appellants’ argument is that the trial judge misconceived the legal effect of the evidence before him. In other words, the appellants contend that the evidence of a usurious transaction was so clear that a finding that it did not exist is not supportable by competent evidence. Our review of the record convinces us that the manner in which the transactions were handled was sufficient to raise a suspicion of usury, but that appellant’s testimony as defendant was so vague and indefinite and in fact contradictory, that the record will support a finding upon the conflicting evidence that usury was not proved. As was stated in In re Estate of Hobein, Fla.App.1970, 238 So.2d 497:

> * * * * * *

> “It is also fundamental that an order of a . court rendered in the exercise of its lawful discretion is clothed with a presumption of correctness, and will be disturbed on appeal only upon a clear showing that it is contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence, the burden being on the appellant to make error clearly appear.”

> * * * * * *

Accordingly, the judgment appealed is affirmed.

Affirmed.
SHARON KELLER

 PRESIDING JUDGE

BARBARA P. HERVEY

BERT RICHARDSON

KEVIN P. YEARY

DAVID NEWELL

MARY LOU KEEL

SCOTT WALKER

MICHELLE M. SLAUGHTER

JESSE F. MCCLURE, III

 JUDGES

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

P.O. BOX 12308, CAPITOL STATION

AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711

DEANA WILLIAMSON

CLERK

(512) 463-1551

SIAN SCHILHAB

GENERAL COUNSEL

(512) 463-1597

SUPREME COURT BUILDING, 201 WEST 14TH STREET, ROOM 106, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701

WEBSITE WWW.TXCOURTS.GOV/CCA

Wednesday, May 12, 2021

12th Court of Appeals Clerk

Katrina McClenny

1517 W. Front, Room 354

Tyler, TX 75701

* Delivered Via E-Mail *

Re: Warren, James Earl

CCA No. PD-0117-21 COA No. 12-20-00156-CR

Trial Court Case No. 007-0351-18

The court has issued an opinion on the above referenced cause number.

Sincerely,

Deana Williamson, Clerk

cc: Presiding Judge 7th District Court (Delivered Via E-Mail)

District Clerk Smith County (Delivered Via E-Mail)

District Attorney Smith County (Delivered Via E-Mail)

Amy R. Blalock (Delivered Via E-Mail)

Stacey M. Soule (Delivered Via E-Mail)

FILE COPY
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 123 (Tuesday, June 26, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29745-29746]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13872]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

CHEMICAL SAFETY AND HAZARD INVESTIGATION BOARD


Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND DATE: July 11, 2018, 1:00 p.m. EDT.

PLACE: U.S. Chemical Safety Board, 1750 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 
910, Washington, DC 20006.

STATUS: Open to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation 
Board (CSB) will convene a public meeting on Wednesday, July 11, 2018 
at 1:00 p.m. EDT in Washington, DC, at the CSB offices located at 1750 
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 910. The Board will discuss open 
investigations, the status of audits from the Office of the Inspector 
General, financial and organizational updates, and a review of the 
agency's action plan. New business will include the release of the 
2018-2021 Human Capital Plan.

Additional Information

    The meeting is free and open to the public. If you require a 
translator or interpreter, please notify the individual listed below as 
the Contact Person for Further Information, at least three business 
days prior to the meeting.
    A conference call line will be provided for those who cannot attend 
in person. Please use the following dial-in number to join the 
conference:

Dial-In: (888) 862-6557
Confirmation Number: 47179969

    The CSB is an independent federal agency charged with investigating 
incidents and hazards that result, or may result, in the catastrophic 
release of extremely hazardous substances. The agency's Board Members 
are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. CSB 
investigations look into all aspects of chemical accidents and hazards, 
including physical causes such as equipment failure as well as 
inadequacies in regulations, industry standards, and safety management 
systems.

Public Comment

    The time provided for public statements will depend upon the number 
of people who wish to speak. Speakers should assume that their

[[Page 29746]]

presentations will be limited to three minutes or less, but commenters 
may submit written statements for the record.

Contact Person for Further Information:  Amy McCormick Driver, at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cdbdb8afa1a4ae8daebeafe3aaa2bb"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="91e1e4f3fdf8f2d1f2e2f3bff6fee7">[email protected]</span></a> or (202) 261-7630. Further information about this public 
meeting can be found on the CSB website at: www.csb.gov.

    Dated: June 22, 2018.
Raymond Porfiri,
Deputy General Counsel, Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board.
[FR Doc. 2018-13872 Filed 6-22-18; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6350-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
H. Res. 161

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

April 29, 1993.

Resolved, That the following named Members, Resident

Commissioner, and Delegates, be, and they are hereby, elected to the following standing committees of the House of Representatives:

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE: Bennie G. Thompson,

Mississippi.

COMMITTEE ON MERCHANT MARINE AND FISHERIES:

Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi.

Attest:

Clerk.
No. 69.

#### Joseph Hodgson *v.*The Midwest Oil Company et al.

' Error to the District Court of the United States for the District of Wyoming.

Argued October 21, 1925.

Announced October 26, 1925.

*Mr. J. M. Hodgson,*with whom *Messrs. Floyd E. Pendell*and *Robert■ P. Stewart*were on the brief, for plaintiff in *535error.

*534
      *Per Curiam.*

Transferred to the Circuit Cojirt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit upon the ■ authority of the act of September 6, 1916, c. 448, sec. 3, 39 Stat. 726, and section 238 of the Judicial Code as amended by section 238 (a), act of September 14, 1922, c. 305; *Smith*v. *Apple,*264 U. S. 274. Order that case be transferred entered October 21, 1925.

*535
      *Messrs. Tyson Dynes, Jr., Tyson S. Dynes, Peter H. Holme*and *Harold D. Roberts*for defendants in error.
#### Justin J. ALBAUGH and Nora K. Albaugh, his wife, Appellants, v. MERCEDES-BENZ OF NORTH AMERICA, INC., a Delaware Corporation doing business in the State of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-146.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Dec. 18, 1970.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 19, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
---

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

I, Bing Xiao, hereby 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Chang-On
      International, Inc. for the period ended September 30, 2010 (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 Chang-On International, Inc.                                                                     

Dated: November 15, 2010



| | /s/ Bing Xiao                                                                                            
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | Bing Xiao                                                                                                
| | President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief
      Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer, Director
| | Chang-On International, Inc.                                                                             



A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Chang-On
International, Inc. and will be retained by Chang-On International, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.

---
Please note that GAO does not issue press releases for most of our reports. For questions about a specific report, please contact the individual listed on the Highlights Page. If you don’t know who to contact, or cannot reach the individual listed on the Highlights Page, please contact the Office of Public Affairs.

Charles YoungManaging Director, Public Affairsyoungc1@gao.gov202-512-4800

For a list of our most recently issued reports, see Reports and Testimonies. The quickest way to find out when we issue a new report is to follow us on Twitter.

## Press Releases

2010
                  -  2024 
                  -  2023 
                  -  2022 
                  -  2021 
                  -  2020 
                  -  2019 
                  -  2018 
                  -  2017 
                  -  2016 
                  -  2015 
                  -  2014 
                  -  2013 
                  -  2012 
                  -  2011 
                  -  2010 
                  -  2009 
                  -  2008 
                  -  2007 
                  -  2006 
                  -  2005 

Dec 30, 2010New Comptroller General Formally Sworn Into Office

Dec 21, 2010U.S. Government's 2010 Financial Report Shows Significant Financial Management and Fiscal Challenges

Nov 12, 2010New Member Appointed to PCORI

Nov 10, 2010GAO Union and Management Reach First Master Collective Bargaining Agreement

Oct 06, 2010Statement on Tanker Protest

Oct 01, 2010GAO Pilots New Web-Based Format for Reports: E-Report Project Offers Enhanced Navigation for Users

Sep 30, 2010GAO Announces Appointments to New National Health Care Workforce Commission

Sep 23, 2010GAO Announces Appointments to New Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Board of Governors

Sep 01, 2010GAO Again Named One of the &quot;Best Places to Work&quot; in Government

Jul 28, 2010GAO Launches Mobile Website

Jun 23, 2010GAO Announces Appointments to CO-OP Program Advisory Board

May 14, 2010Appointments Announced to Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC)

Mar 31, 2010Haiti Earthquake and Similar Disasters Are Focus of New GAO Webpage

Mar 18, 2010GAO Launches Web Site Improvements To Enhance Visibility, Impact

Mar 15, 2010Decision on Bid Protest by DynCorp International Regarding U.S. Army Contracts in Afghanistan

Mar 04, 2010GAO Launches "Watchdog Report" Podcast Series

Feb 26, 2010U.S. Government's 2009 Financial Report Shows Significant Fiscal Challenges: Weaknesses Evident in Financial Management as Nation Confronts Long-Term Fiscal Problems & Financial Regulatory Weaknesses

View the GAO Media Kit

Find a GAO Expert by Area of Expertise
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 04486

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2

File Name Description

04486\04486_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 04486\04486_PartA.XLS Plant submitted survey file

04486\Certification Statement Plant ID_04486.pdf Plant certification statement

x 04486\04486_Checklist.XLS EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

04486\04486_Completeness_Checklist.XLS EPA Completeness Review Checklist

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket.