alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1064 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1064

 To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to clarify coverage of 
certified nurse-midwife services performed outside the maternity cycle 
                      under the medicaid programs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                May 28 (legislative day, April 19), 1993

Mr. Rockefeller introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to clarify coverage of 
certified nurse-midwife services performed outside the maternity cycle 
                      under the medicaid programs.

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

SECTION 1. CLARIFICATION OF COVERAGE OF CERTIFIED NURSE-MIDWIFE 
              SERVICES PERFORMED OUTSIDE THE MATERNITY CYCLE.

    (a) In General.--Section 1905(a)(17) of the Social Security Act (42 
U.S.C. 1396d(a)(17)) is amended by inserting before the semicolon at 
the end the following: ``, and without regard to whether or not the 
services are concerned with the management of mothers and newborns 
throughout the maternity cycle''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to services furnished on or after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.

                                 <all>
```
# C_2021382EN.01002401.xml

| 20.9.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 382/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.9.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 382/24

---

Order of the President of the Court of 18 June 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Köln — Germany) — Deutsche Lufthansa AG v BC

(Case C-106/21) (1)

(2021/C 382/33)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 182, 10.05.2021.

---
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1206

To redesignate the Federal building located at 380 Trapelo Road in Waltham,

Massachusetts, as the ‘‘Frederick C. Murphy Federal Center’’.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 1 (legislative day, JUNE 30), 1993

Mr. KERRY (for himself, Mr. KENNEDY, and Mr. DOLE) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

A BILL

To redesignate the Federal building located at 380 Trapelo

Road in Waltham, Massachusetts, as the ‘‘Frederick C.

Murphy Federal Center’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION.

4 The Federal building located at 380 Trapelo Road

5 in Waltham, Massachusetts, and known as the Waltham

6 Federal Center, shall be known and designated as the

7 ‘‘Frederick C. Murphy Federal Center’’.
2

•S 1206 IS

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal

4 building referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be

5 a reference to the ‘‘Frederick C. Murphy Federal Center’’.

Æ
Heather Clement /s

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 8, 2015

No. 04-15-00153-CV

Tina M. Allen SOUZA,

Appellant

v.

Heather Clement TESSMER,

Appellee

From the 225th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014-CI-15319

Honorable Peter A. Sakai, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

The panel has considered Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing, and the motion is DENIED. 

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

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

court on this 8th day of September, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
IV

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 72

Providing amounts from the contingent fund of the House for expenses

of investigations and studies by the Committee on Armed Services in

the first session of the One Hundred Third Congress.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 4, 1993

Mr. DELLUMS submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on House Administration

RESOLUTION

Providing amounts from the contingent fund of the House

for expenses of investigations and studies by the Committee on Armed Services in the first session of the One

Hundred Third Congress.

1 Resolved, That (a) expenses of investigations and

2 studies by the Committee on Armed Services (hereinafter

3 in this resolution referred to as the ‘‘Committee’’), includ4 ing expenses for—

5 (1) procurement of consultant services under

6 section 202(i) of the Legislative Reorganization Act

7 of 1946; and
2

HRES 72 IH

1 (2) provision of assistance for members of pro2 fessional staff in obtaining specialized training under

3 section 202(j) of such Act;

4 there shall be paid out of the contingent fund of the House

5 not more than $2,650,233.

6 (b) Not more than $40,000 of the amount specified

7 in subsection (a) may be used for consultant services re8 ferred to in paragraph (1) of such subsection and not more

9 than $8,000 of such amount may be used for specialized

10 training referred to in paragraph (2) of such subsection.

11 SEC. 2. Payments under this resolution shall be made

12 on vouchers authorized by the Committee, signed by the

13 Chairman of the Committee, and approved by the Commit14 tee on House Administration.

15 SEC. 3. Amounts shall be available under this resolu16 tion for investigations and studies carried out during the

17 period beginning at noon on January 3, 1993, and ending

18 immediately before noon on January 3, 1994.

19 SEC. 4. Amounts made available under this resolution

20 shall be expended in accordance with regulations pre21 scribed by the Committee on House Administration.

Æ
#### Tyrone MAYCOCK, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-263.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 24, 1973.

Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Bennett H. Brummer, Asst. Public Defender, and James Eshnell (Legal Intern), for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Lance R. Stelzer (Legal Intern), for appellee.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was found guilty by a jury of entering a dwelling with intent to commit a misdemeanor therein. He was sentenced to two years in the state prison. On this appeal, he urges that error was committed because his counsel’s cross-examination of a State’s witness was improperly restricted. An examination of the record in the light of this contention shows that the point is without merit because there was a reasonable ground on which the trial court could find that the examination was intended only to embarrass the witness, and was not incidental to an attempt to shed light upon his credibility. See Nelson v. State, 99 Fla. 1032, 128 So. 1 (1930). A trial judge has wide discretion in such matters. Cf. Dabney v. Yapa, Fla.App.1966, 187 So.2d 381.

Affirmed.
# C_2022451EN.01000501.xml

| 28.11.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 451/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.11.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 451/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 6 October 2022 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione — Italy) — Agenzia delle Entrate v Contship Italia SpA

(Joined Cases C-433/21 and C-434/21) (1)

(References for a preliminary ruling - Direct taxation - Freedom of establishment - Corporate income tax - Measures to prevent tax avoidance by shell companies - Determination of taxable income on the basis of presumed minimum income - Exclusion from the scope of those measures of companies and entities listed on national regulated markets)

(2022/C 451/06)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte suprema di cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Agenzia delle Entrate

Defendant: Contship Italia SpA

Operative part of the judgment

Article 49 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which restricts the ground for exclusion from the scope of the measures to prevent tax avoidance by shell companies to companies whose securities are traded on national regulated markets, excluding from the scope of that ground for exclusion other companies, whether national or foreign, whose securities are not traded on national regulated markets but which are controlled by companies and entities listed on foreign regulated markets.

---

(1)  OJ C 422, 18.10.2021.

---
**IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVA NIA** 

IN RE: DESIGNATION OF CHAIR AND VICE
- CHAIR OF THE PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF LA W EXAMINERS : : : : : : : No. 663 SUPREME COURT RULES DOC KET

**O R D E R**
**PER CURIA M:** 

AND NOW , this 19 th day of February , 201 5 , Dermot F

. Kennedy , Esquire, is hereby designated as Chair and C. Robert Keenan, III , Esquire, as Vice
- Chair of the Pennsylvania Board of Law Examiners.
#### Edward GOBIE v. WAINWRIGHT.

No. 38656.

Supreme Court of Florida.

May 1969.

Rehearing Denied June 10, 1969.

Habeas corpus denied without opinion.
#### Howard KRESGE, Appellant, v. Ellen O. GRAVES, Appellee.

No. 70-602.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

May 4, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
---

EXHIBIT 13.2

CERTIFICATION 
of 
Periodic Financial Report 
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. 
Section 1350

I, Tony J. Giuliano, acting as Vice President, Finance and Administration and Chief Financial Officer of Sand Technology Inc., hereby certify that the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the Fiscal Year ended July 31, 2010 fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as amended and that the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Sand
Technology Inc.

|Date: November 26, 2010
|-----------------------
|                       
|                       
|By:                    
|                       
|                       
|                       

This certification is made solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject to the knowledge standard set forth therein, and not for any other purpose. It is not being filed as part of the Annual Report or as a separate disclosure
document.

---
#### George Anastasio, Jr., Appellant, v Franklin Plaza Apartments, Inc., Respondent.

[655 NYS2d 360]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Tompkins, J., and a jury), entered February 2, 1995, in favor of defendant, following a jury trial, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

This is an action based on personal injuries sustained at an elevator renovation site brought by a worker against defendant building owner. Viewing the jury interrogatories in light of the court’s entire chárge, we conclude that the wording of the interrogatories did not deprive plaintiff of a fair trial.

We have considered plaintiff’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach and Nardelli, JJ.
**SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION**

**Washington, D.C.  20549**

**Form 10-K**

 (Mark One)

 x

**Annual report**pursuant to section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for the fiscal year ended **March 31, 2006**, or

  ̈

**Transition report** pursuant to section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for the transition period from ______________ to ______________

**Commission File Number 001-10255**

**NETWORK EQUIPMENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.**

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
**Exhibit
      32.2**





**CERTIFICATION
      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 COMC, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB
      for the period ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marc Dell’Immagine,
      Controller and Principal Accounting 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 to the best of my knowledge:





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 result of operations of the Company.





*By:
                /s/ Marc Dell’Immagine*
              *------------------------------------*
              *Marc
                Dell’Immagine*
              *Controller
                (principal accounting officer)*








June
      17,
      2005
# C_2023015EN.01001902.xml

| 16.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 15/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 15/19

---

Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 17 November 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Ministero dell’Interno, Presidenza del Consiglio dei ministri v PF

(Case C-569/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Social policy - Equal treatment in employment and occupation - Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Directive 2000/78/EC - Article 2(2), Article 4(1) and Article 6(1) - Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of age - National legislation fixing a maximum age limit of 30 years for the recruitment of technical psychologist commissioners - Justification)

(2023/C 15/20)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring Court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: Ministero dell’Interno, Presidenza del Consiglio dei ministri

Respondent: PF

Operative part of the order

Article 2(2), Article 4(1) and Article 6(1) of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, read in the light of Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which provides for the fixing of a maximum age limit of 30 years for participation in a competition aimed at recruiting police psychologists.

---

(1)  Date lodged: 16.9.2021.

---
# C_2022002EN.01001901.xml

| 3.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 2/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 2/19

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Amsterdam (Netherlands) lodged on 14 September 2021 — European arrest warrant issued against X, Other party to the proceedings: Openbaar Ministerie

(Case C-562/21)

(2022/C 2/23)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank Amsterdam

Parties to the main proceedings

European arrest warrant issued against: X

Other party to the proceedings: Openbaar Ministerie

Question referred

What test should an executing judicial authority apply when deciding whether to execute an EAW for the purpose of executing a final custodial sentence or detention order when examining whether, in the issuing Member State, the trial resulting in the conviction was conducted in breach of the right to a tribunal previously established by law, where no effective remedy was available in that Member State for any breach of that right?

---
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7717

ROBERT EARL WASHINGTON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD ANGELONE, Respondent - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CA-00-1482) Submitted: April 12, 2001 Decided: April 17, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Earl Washington, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Robert Earl Washington seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254(West 1994 & Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Washington v. Angelone , No. CA-00-1482 (E.D. Va. filed Oct. 23, 2000; entered Oct. 26,2000). We deny Washington’s motion to supplement the record because the proposed documents are already contained in the record.We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.31


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

                                  AMENDMENT TO

                          SUBORDINATED PROMISSORY NOTE

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


















                                    Page 248

<PAGE>




                    AMENDMENT TO SUBORDINATED PROMISSORY NOTE


This Amendment is hereby made as of this 26th day of March, 2002 by Jeffrey K.
Cornelius (the "Holder") and Community Bancshares, Inc (the "Borrower"), a
Delaware corporation.

         WHEREAS, the parties entered into a Subordinated Promissory Note (the
"Note") dated as of October 4, 1994 pursuant to which the Borrower promised to
pay the Holder the sum of Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000); and

         WHEREAS, the Borrower is current in performing its obligations pursuant
to the Note; and

         WHEREAS, its is unclear whether the Note is subordinated to certain
other indebtedness of the Borrower; and

         WHEREAS, the parties desire to resolve an ambiguity in the provisions
of the Note and provide that the Note is senior to such other indebtedness;

         NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereby agree that the Note is amended by
adding the following sentence to the end of paragraph 4(f): "Notwithstanding the
foregoing, the term `Senior Indebtedness' shall not refer to any indebtedness of
the Borrower, whether currently outstanding or hereafter created, which purports
to be subordinated indebtedness of the Borrower, unless the instrument creating
or evidencing such indebtedness specifically identifies this Note and expressly
states that it is superior to the indebtedness represented by this Note."

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have causes this Amendment to be
executed as of the day and year first above written.


                                     /s/ Jeffrey K.Cornelius
                                     ------------------------------------------
                                     Jeffrey K. Cornelius


                                     COMMUNITYBANCSHARES, INC.


                                     By:  /s/ Kennon R. Patterson, Sr.
                                          ------------------------------------
                                     Its  Chairman, President & CEO
                                          ------------------------------------



                                    Page 249
#### John H. McLAUGHLIN v. Jerry WIGGS.

No. 45468.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Oct. 27, 1969.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 24, 1969.

James S. Gore, Armis E. Hawkins, Houston, for appellant.

Charles H. McCraine, Jr., Houston, for appellee.

JONES, Justice:

This was an automobile accident in which the issue was whether the negligence of the *827defendant (appellee) proximately caused or contributed to the collision. The issue being submitted to the jury, and it having heard all the evidence, returned a verdict for the said defendant (appellee). We find no error which would justify a reversal.

Affirmed.

GILLESPIE, P. J., and PATTERSON, INZER, and ROBERTSON, JJ„ concur.
#### Johnny Lee RANSOM, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-1059.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 8, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### Julian RUBIN, individually and as next friend, parent and guardian of Robin Rubin, Appellant, v. Ralph E. KIRSCH, M.D., Appellee.

No. 67-976.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Dec. 13, 1967.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1018 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1018

 To amend the War Powers Resolution to require a cost assessment with 
  respect to certain commitments of United States Armed Forces abroad.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                May 25 (legislative day, April 19), 1993

 Mr. Pressler introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
             referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the War Powers Resolution to require a cost assessment with 
  respect to certain commitments of United States Armed Forces abroad.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
That (a) section 4(b) of the Water Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 
1543(b)) is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``(1)'' immediately after ``(b)''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following new clause:
    ``(2) Within sixty calendar days after a report is submitted or is 
required to be submitted pursuant to section 4(a), the President shall 
submit to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President 
pro tempore of the Senate a report setting forth a cost assessment of 
the continued involvement of the United States Armed Forces in the 
circumstances necessitating their introduction.''.
    (b) The amendments made by subsection (a) shall apply with respect 
to introductions of United States Armed Forces occurring on or after 
the date of enactment of this Act.

                                 <all>
```
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to  incorporation  by reference in the  Registration  Statements (No.
333-10249,  333-10251, and 333-21253) on Form S-8 of Smithway Motor Xpress Corp.
of our report  dated  February  5, 1999,  relating to the  consolidated  balance
sheets of Smithway Motor Xpress Corp. and  subsidiaries  as of December 31, 1998
and 1997,  and the related  consolidated  statements of earnings,  stockholders'
equity,  and cash  flows for each of the years in the  three-year  period  ended
December 31, 1998,  which report  appears in the December 31, 1998 Annual Report
on Form 10-K of Smithway Motor Xpress Corp.





                                                     KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

                                                     /s/KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
                                                     
                                                     Des Moines, Iowa
                                                     March 15, 1998

                                       51