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

SOUTH DAKOTA 

RAPID CITY OFFICE: (605) 341-3990 

PO BOX 1098, RAPID CITY, SD 57709 

ABERDEEN OFFICE: (605) 226-3440 

PO BOX 1554, ABERDEEN, SD 67402 

SIOUX FALLS OFFICE: (606) 332-8896 

PO BOX 1424, SIOUX FALLS, SD 57101 

/Vcc \> 

/^u^. 2 7 WASHINGTON OFFICE: 

136 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING 

WASHINGTON, DC 20510-4104 

~f:p^ ^,, , _ _ ^ARTMENTOF 

United States ^enaffiispo ^ 

(202)224-5842 

TDD: (202) 224-8279 

WASHINGTON, DC 20510-4104 

7H|n 0 P 

TOLL FREE 

1-800-537-0025 

1-800-819-0788 

"5; Q\ ^ SITE: http;//johnson.senate.gov 

Augusts, 2010 

Todd Homan 

Director, Office of Aviation Analysis 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Dear Director Homan: 

b OT- OST' ZxDoo- f 152 

I am writing with regard to Essential Air Service provided at Huron, South Dakota. Recently, 

airport and community leaders have raised concerns about the level of service provided by the 

current carrier. Great Lakes Aviation. As you consider proposals for a new two-year EAS 

contract to serve Huron, I would encourage the Department of Transportation to closely review 

the concerns of the community and work with the carrier to address these issues. 

In a letter dated July 14, 2010, Huron Mayor David McGirr cites examples of chronically 

delayed flights and multiple stops en route to the designated hub of Denver. These complaints 

are particularly concerning, as unreliable service threatens to reverse gains in the number of 

passengers utilizing the Huron Airport. As service and passengers decline, the need for greater 

subsidy to the community will grow. 

The Essential Air Service program promises a basic level of service to smaller communities that 

might otherwise be overlooked by carriers, but nonetheless deserve reliable flights. I am hopeful 

that the Department of Transportation will closely examine the city's concerns and work to 

remedy any problems found. 

Reliable, affordable air service is critically important to economic development and the quality 

of life in South Dakota. Thank you for your attention to this important matter. 

Sincerely, 

Tim Jotmson 

United States Senate 

COMMITTEES: APPROPRIATIONS; BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS; ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES: INDIAN AFFAIRS 

/
#### James Charles PAYNE, a minor, by and through his next friend and father, Walter Payne and Walter Payne, Individually, Appellants, v. CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE et al., Appellees.

No. 72-514.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 27, 1973.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 29, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
(March 28, 1997)

#### In the Matter of Benjamin F. L. Darden, an Attorney, Respondent. Committee on Professional Standards, Petitioner.

[656 NYS2d 397]

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice by the Appellate Division, Second Department, in 1969. He has maintained an office for the practice of law in Ithaca, Tompkins County.

Petitioner, the Committee on Professional Standards, moves pursuant to section 806.4 (f) of this Court’s rules (22 NYCRR 806.4 [f]) to suspend respondent from practice pending consideration of charges of professional misconduct against him set forth in a supplemental petition filed by petitioner. Respondent has not answered the supplemental petition nor has he appeared on the motion.

By the uncontroverted allegations of the supplemental petition and the papers submitted in support of the motion, it appears that respondent has converted client funds and is guilty of other professional misconduct, including commingling, failure to maintain a proper escrow account, failure to communicate with clients and others on their behalf, and failure to cooperate with petitioner’s investigation.

Under the circumstances presented, and considering respondent’s failure to appear in this matter, we find that respondent *872is guilty of professional misconduct immediately threatening the public interest and grant petitioner’s motion *(see, e.g., Matter of Bishop,*201 AD2d 750; *Matter of Schlesinger,*196 AD2d 683).

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, White and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that petitioner’s motion to suspend respondent from the practice of law, pursuant to section 806.4 (f) of this Court’s rules (22 NYCRR 806.4 [f]), be and hereby is granted, and it is further ordered that respondent be and hereby is suspended from the practice of law, commencing upon service on respondent of this order and continuing until such time as the disciplinary proceeding commenced by the supplemental petition has been concluded and until further order of this Court, and it is further ordered that, for the period of suspension, respondent be and hereby is commanded to desist and refrain from the practice of law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk or employee of another; and he hereby is forbidden to appear as an attorney and counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission or other public authority or to give to another an opinion as to the law or its application or of any advice in relation thereto; and it is further ordered that respondent shall comply with the provisions of section 806.9 of the rules of this Court (22 NYCRR 806.9) regulating the conduct of suspended attorneys.
#### Morris I. COHEN and Anne R. Cohen, his wife, Appellants, v. Siegmund FLAMM and Hannah Flamm, his wife, Appellees.

No. 71-809.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Nov. 9, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Peter R. Shipman, Respondent-Appellant, v Kathleen Shipman, Appellant-Respondent, et al., Defendants.

[655 NYS2d 962]

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, (1) the defendant wife appeals, as limited by her brief, (a) from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Levitt, J.), dated December 19, 1994, as granted those branches of the plaintiff husband’s motion which were for pendente lite maintenance and interim counsel fees, and (b) from so much of a separate order of the same court also dated December 19, 1994, as granted the plaintiff husband the exclusive use, pendente lite, of a 1988 Chevrolet Blazer and directed her to transfer title of that vehicle to the plaintiff, and (2) the plaintiff husband cross-appeals, as limited by his brief, (a) on the ground of inadequacy, from so much of the order dated December 19, 1994, as awarded him only $250 per week in pendente lite maintenance and. $5,000 in interim counsel fees, and (b) from so much of the separate order of the same court also dated December 19, 1994, as, in effect, denied that branch of his motion which was to compel the defendant to transfer to him the title to another motor vehicle.

Ordered that the orders dated December 19, 1994, are affirmed *insofar*as appealed and cross-appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Modifications of pendente lite maintenance should rarely be *427made by an appellate court and then only under exigent circumstances, such as when a party is unable to meet his or her financial obligations, or when justice otherwise requires (see, *Beige v Beige,*220 AD2d 636; *Gitter v Gitter,*208 AD2d 895). The general rule continues to be that the proper remedy for any perceived inequity in a pendente lite award is a speedy trial (see, *Gianni v Gianni,*172 AD2d 487). As this Court has repeatedly noted, pendente lite awards should be an accommodation between the reasonable needs of the moving spouse and the financial ability of the other spouse (see, *Polito v Polito,*168 AD2d 440; *Shapiro v Shapiro,*163 AD2d 294). Based on these considerations, we conclude that the pendente lite award of the Supreme Court is proper under the circumstances of this case and should not be disturbed.

Additionally, Domestic Relations Law § 237 (a) provides that the court may direct one party to pay interim counsel fees on behalf of the other to enable the petitioning spouse to carry on or defend the action or proceeding as in the court’s discretion justice requires, considering the financial circumstances of the parties together with all other circumstances of the case (see, *DeCabrera v Cabrera-Rosete,*70 NY2d 879). Under the circumstances of this case, the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion.

The parties’ remaining contentions are without merit. Thompson, J. P., Sullivan, Pizzuto and Santucci, JJ., concur.
#### Johnnie Lee HARRIS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-251.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 24, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
# C_2021481EN.01001801.xml

| 29.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 481/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 481/18

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție (Romania) lodged on 10 August 2021 — WA v Direcția pentru Evidența Persoanelor și Administrarea Bazelor de Date din Ministerul Afacerilor Interne

(Case C-491/21)

(2021/C 481/23)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: WA

Respondent: Direcția pentru Evidența Persoanelor și Administrarea Bazelor de Date din Ministerul Afacerilor Interne

Question referred

| 1. | Must Article 26(2) TFEU, Articles 20, 21(1) and 45(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Articles 4, 5 and 6 of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (1) be interpreted as precluding national legislation which does not permit the issue of an identity card — which may serve as a travel document within the European Union — to a national of a Member State on the ground that he has established his domicile in a different Member State? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must Article 26(2) TFEU, Articles 20, 21(1) and 45(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Articles 4, 5 and 6 of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (1) be interpreted as precluding national legislation which does not permit the issue of an identity card — which may serve as a travel document within the European Union — to a national of a Member State on the ground that he has established his domicile in a different Member State?

---

(1)  OJ 2004 L 158, p. 77.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1102 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1102

      To suspend temporarily the duty on 3-(a-acetonyl benzyl)-4-
                      hydroxycoumarin sodium salt.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 15, 1993

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To suspend temporarily the duty on 3-(a-acetonyl benzyl)-4-
                      hydroxycoumarin sodium salt.

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

SECTION 1. 3-(A-ACETONYL BENZYL)-4-HYDROXYCOUMARIN SODIUM SALT.

    Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of 
the United States is amended by inserting in numerical sequence the 
following new heading:

      

       ``  9902.31.12  3-(a-acetonyl benzyl)-4-hydroxy-coumarin sodium salt                        No change        No change        On or before 12/   
                        (provided for in subheading 2932.29.20).................  Free                                                31/96           ''

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendment made by section 1 applies with respect to articles 
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 
15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.

                                 <all>
```
#### Leroy CORIE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. P-383.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 6, 1972.

*85Richard W. Ervin, III, Public Defender, and William C. Owen, Special Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Wallace E. Allbritton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

JOHNSON, Judge.

In this appeal it appears that the appellant does not agree with his attorney, who is a special assistant public defender, who has filed a brief in which he says he cannot find error. We have studied the record and we do not find error, either, but the appellant has filed several motions, including a motion for the court to appoint a certain attorney, Honorable Ben Thompson, to represent him. We do not think that the court should at any time single out a certain attorney as a choice of the defendant, other than the duly constituted Public Defender’s Office, and therefore this motion is denied.

Due to the fact that some of the Federal decisions 'have been so liberal in their decisions in defining the defendants’ civil rights and due process, we feel and therefore hold that the appellant should be given an opportunity to procure additional counsel at his own expense, whether it be Mr. Thompson or not, and also, that he and/or his attorney be permitted sixty (60) days to file further briefs in this Court, and that the Public Defender’s Office is directed to make available to the appellant or his attorney, any instruments he has pertinent to appellant’s case.

The other motions now pending in this case are denied.

This appeal is held pending the happening of the instructions given supra, and if no further briefs are filed within said sixty (60) days, the conviction, judgment and sentence shall be affirmed.

SPECTOR, C. J., and WIGGINTON, J., concur.
No. 00-1019.

#### Anchor *v.*Hickman, Warden.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
# C_2020348EN.01002502.xml

| 19.10.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 348/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.10.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 348/25

---

Action brought on 27 August 2020 — Magic Box Int. Toys v EUIPO — KMA Concepts (SUPERZINGS)

(Case T-549/20)

(2020/C 348/36)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Magic Box Int. Toys SLU (Sant Cugat del Vallés, Spain) (represented by: J.L. Rivas Zurdo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: KMA Concepts Ltd. (Hong Kong, China)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark SUPERZINGS — EU trade mark No 16 164 204

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 June 2020 in Case R 2511/2019-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order any party or parties opposing this action to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order any party or parties opposing this action to pay the costs.

Plea in law

Infringement of Article 60(1)(a), in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
#### STAR STATIONERY CO. v. ROGERS.

No. 6201.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Feb. 23, 1937.

Milton E. Mermelstein, of New York City, for appellant.

Robert F. Darby and J. H. Harrison, both of Newark, N. J., for appellee.

Before BUFFINGTON and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges, and WELSH, District Judge.

BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge.

In the court below Rogers, receiver of the New Jersey *National Bank &*Trust Company, sued the Star Stationery- Company for an alleged balance on its note to the bank dated April 28, 1932, for $7,000. The defendant admitted it owed $234.10 on the principal of the note, but contended it was not liable for interest. On motion of the receiver to strike, the alleged defense of the defendant, that it was not liable for interest, was stricken and judgment was entered for the balance of debt and interest, $995.27, of which sum $234.10 was the balance of unpaid principal and $761.17 represented interest and protest fees. Defendant appealed and its contention is that when the bank received payments and did not specifically, apply them to interest, that it waived payment of interest.

We cannot accede to this view. The note fell due on July 9, 1932, and, allowing the payment of $500 that day made, the balance of $6,500 then came due and interest began to run. The sum of all payments thereafter made did not pay the principal, part of which remained unpaid when suit was brought. So long as such part of the principal remained unpaid, interest ran in the absence of any act or agreement of the bank to waive interest. See Curtis v. Innerarity, 6 How. 146, 154, 12 L.Ed. 380, where it is said:

> “Every one who contracts to pay money on a certain day knows, that, if he fails to fulfil his contract, he must pay the established rate of interest as damages for his non-performance. Hence it may correctly be said, that such is the implied contract of the parties.”

So regarding, the judgment below is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      16,304,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,272,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (437,000)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            25,013,000
<PP&E>                                     750,050,000
<DEPRECIATION>                            (10,393,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             782,809,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       26,291,000
<BONDS>                                    254,696,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      2,000
<COMMON>                                        27,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 501,793,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               782,809,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            39,901,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               19,201,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           6,868,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             13,832,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            (1,273,000)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                12,559,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.75
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.73
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 587 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 587

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                   November 29, 1994.  
    Resolved, That the House has heard with profound sorrow of the death of the 
Honorable Dean A. Gallo, a Representative from the State of New Jersey.
    Resolved, That the Clerk communicate these resolutions to the Senate and 
transmit a copy thereof to the family of the deceased.
    Resolved, That when the House adjourns today, it adjourn as a further mark 
of respect to the memory of the deceased.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 197 (Wednesday, October 12, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 63341]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-26379]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 7641]

Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Request for Grant 
Proposals; Global Undergraduate Exchange Program in Serbia and 
Montenegro

    NOTICE: Amendment to original Request for Grant Proposals.
SUMMARY: The United States Department of State, Bureau of Educational 
and Cultural Affairs, announces revisions to the original Request for 
Grant Proposals (RFGP) announced in the Federal Register on September 
29, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 189):
    (1) Deadline for proposals has been moved from Thursday, November 
24, 2011 to Friday, November 25, 2011, due to the fact that November 
24, 2011 is a Federal holiday. All other terms and conditions of the 
original announcement remain the same.
    (2) The Agency Contact responsible for this program has been 
updated to reflect Michaela S. Iovine, Ph.D., Office of Academic 
Exchange Programs, ECA/A/E/EUR, U.S. Department of State, 2200 C 
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037, (202)-632-3256, e-mail: 
IovineMS@state.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Interested organizations should contact 
Michaela Iovine, U.S. Department of State, Office of Academic Exchange 
Programs, Europe Branch (ECA/A/E/EUR), (202) 632-3256 prior to the 
amended deadline of November 25, 2011.

    Dated: October 3, 2011.
J. Adam Ereli,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs, U.S. Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2011-26379 Filed 10-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-11-P
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                  MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                        15,744
<SECURITIES>                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                 29
<ALLOWANCES>                  0
<INVENTORY>                   2,390
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              21,631
<PP&E>                        17,525
<DEPRECIATION>                11,901
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                40,385
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         9,374
<BONDS>                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         0
<PREFERRED>                   1
<COMMON>                      14,657
<OTHER-SE>                    2,262
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  40,385
<SALES>                       17,357
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              17,357
<CGS>                         9,718
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 9,623
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            (7)
<INCOME-PRETAX>               4,178
<INCOME-TAX>                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           4,178
<DISCONTINUED>                (176)
<EXTRAORDINARY>               0
<CHANGES>                     0
<NET-INCOME>                  4,002
<EPS-PRIMARY>                 0.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                 0.04
        

</TABLE>