alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
pated ’ . Ne sl file gg I
_\ °° DSPARTMENT OF COMMERCE—BUREAU OF THE CENSUS
mm a rg FIFTEENTH CENSUS OF THE UNITED STATES: 1930

Wasd of city ee POPULATION SCHEDULE

» -aeveeeee Unincorporated place... . niitldwes _ Institution. Enumerated by me on Qrrarad, { 2. , 1930, ~ nl.

lastruections ) (Enter naar of ony uclneurperate! plane having apprsimelo x sttepts of More, See pottructions.) mart name A ingtitstii a te ais a the abtries ere mime. Hee inetrucisans,)

T PERSONAL DESCRIPTION | EDUCATION BIR MOTHER TONGUE (OR NATIVE ITIZEXSH . CCUPATIC
NAME eee SARA Phineas aa sll eee _— ere MACS #8. LANGUAGE) OF FOREIGN porn | | CTZESSHIP, Exc = TS ee er
RELATION } T AS RM Ae ca, I; j
ot each persor whose place of abode on : 358 Piace of birth of each person enumerated aod of his or her parents. If born in cons | cope |
A 1, 1936, was in this family Reeteeiely oo > the United give mete or pames. If of foreign birth, give ——— Dan L = ad i | sow '
person to which birthplace is now situate (See Instructions.) Distinguish Canada- | -anguage spok fire y j | -
Koter surname Grst, then the given name and the head of th f ei in home before| Ve sot write in profeasion, ot particular | Lotustry or beriness, ax cof | 7.
enlddie instal, if cag ead e Breach tom Canada Bagiish, ent Irish Pree State from erthera Ireland to the| tae cultwomne) "a od wok, wn apiane. tom mall, dre- store, |

prt family aes os speneen ies
ate asia ie OM u lemme oo |

j
ty |

race
at
y

| Does this far!
| teeoneatarms |
| Sex
3 or
- at
—
~ | Magital con
| dition
Age at fi

rat
‘]
&

OCCUPATION INDUSTRY

se to
ad write

marria

Attended wheel

| ealleme eny th
| since Bape
s

Po) | os

—— Vv SST hele i a

7 ae _——. g j O— ee”

a eS oo ee

4 ~

16451244 | 306 ‘oary) £. ®. | be 4 0 'R Me nw FLW ye ly
def hadh , “ye few bt. | 1 LV bn we | sa. Nn 22 Tn :
: since — VIE lw '¢¢!im | iii, ly

| 62° aoe SOLAR beer ; _| Heed IR me din) W. (faim 'sifre ye
re a ec ee pV LF Yarn latin |

oe

|

“

,.?

Ccakeescar hi

—— —-
W — *

| | | ; :
2000/1 ne lm Ww |43!m 24

wg . ly | wie __2l\aa - zin* -

e na Historic census records are maintained and released by
| the National Archives and Records Administration,
not the U.S. Census Bureau.

ait

4444

15000
i nu Visit http:/Awww.archives.gov for more information about publicly

—_

Head 10 1%000/f |r | Via yo] Cnn de

”
C2

5 wr
-

ABBREVIATIONS TO BE USED eee Eh ee 2 hae —- _— . —— ; ses U1, 12, 12, 14, 46, 18, 29, 20, amd 25—Her all per
UMNS INDIC : } L . ~ 4 un . ENTRIES ARE REQUIRED IN THE as, Der mente et tamtting ent. (Ca. 9
IN COLUMNS INDICATED lowing the eerd which shows tamitee having 9 i = = aowed_ = ’ ° Cea w pineal SEVED TL COLUMES AS BOLLOWS: SS. ant © Byes ¢

OFS eden tonges (Caiseane th i andy] | CH P-Qeees—————--—----- Ba 5%

+ eee Peere? r= - - . . — ee ert i = Mra ene: ~—~-~ mm 5 ‘
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM DIEDRICH
COFFEE, INC. UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE TWENTY-SIX WEEKS ENDED AND
AS OF JULY 29, 1998 CONTAINED IN COMPANY'S 2ND QUARTER 1999 10-Q AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-27-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-29-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-29-1998
<CASH>                                       1,001,625
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  332,140
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,263,933
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,852,695
<PP&E>                                      14,114,373
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,532,975
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              13,025,794
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,402,156
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        59,417
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                13,025,794
<SALES>                                     11,952,876
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            11,952,876
<CGS>                                        5,395,068
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,395,068
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             7,884,161
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             197,254
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,503,201)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,690
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,506,891)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,506,891)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.26)
        

</TABLE>
THEODORE MOSS III

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 16

- 2637

______ _______________________/

Opinion filed October 7, 2016.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Linda F. McC allum , Judge

.

Theodore Moss III, pro se , Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Samuel B. Steinberg, Assistant Attorney

General, Tallahasse e , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

MAKAR, KELSEY, and WINSOR, JJ., CONCUR.
#### James Richard NOLAN et al., Appellants, v. Ellen COHAN, Appellee.

No. 72-313.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 26, 1972.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Broward County; Otis Farrington, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Cutter &Buck Inc. (“the Company”) on Form 10-Q for the third quarter offiscal year 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 8,2006 (“the Report”), I, John T. Wyatt, Chief Executive Officer and President ofthe Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best ofmy knowledge and belief, that:

(1)   The Reportfully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

|        | /s/ JOHN T.  WYATT                      |
|--------|-----------------------------------------|
|   | John T. Wyatt                           |
|   | *Chief Executive Officer and President* |
|   | *(Principal Executive Officer)*         |

 

----
EXHIBIT 99.0


                                                     March  22, 2002

Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20549

Reference: Annual Report on Form 10-K for American Insured Mortgage
           Investors - Series 85, L.P.


Dear Ladies and Gentlemen:

Consistent with the  Commission's  release of March 18, 2002,  please be advised
that the  Partnership  has  obtained a letter  from  Arthur  Andersen  LLP,  the
Partnership's  independent public accountants,  dated March 22, 2002, containing
the   following   representations   regarding   the  audits   performed  on  the
Partnership's  balance  sheets as of December  31, 2001 and 2000 and the related
statements of income and comprehensive  income,  changes in partners' equity and
cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2001, 2000 and 1999:


o    the audits were subject to Arthur Andersen's quality control system for the
     U.S. accounting and auditing practice to provide reasonable  assurance that
     the engagement was conducted in compliance with professional standards;
o    there was appropriate  continuity of Arthur Andersen  personnel  working on
     the audits; and
o    there was appropriate availability of national office consultation.

Representation  relating to the availability of personnel at foreign  affiliates
of Arthur Andersen was not relevant to these audits.

                                                     AMERICAN INSURED MORTGAGE
                                                     INVESTORS - SERIES 85, L.P.
                                                     (Registrant)

                                                     By: CRIIMI, Inc.
                                                         General Partner


                                                     /s/ William B. Dockser
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     William B. Dockser
                                                     Chairman of the Board and
                                                     Principal Executive Officer
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

November 21, 2011 

d1114 

Order 

 

November 21, 2011 

143652 

DIANE BIES-RICE, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 143652 

 COA: 304313 

Wayne CC: 08-100728-DO 

ALVIN FOSTER RICE, JR., 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 12, 2011 and 

August 16, 2011 orders of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because 

we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
unaudited interim financial statements as of September 30, 1996, and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                              72
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     42,500
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                42,572
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  43,409
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           908
<OTHER-SE>                                      45,753
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    43,409
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    49
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,230
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               (3,181)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,181)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,181)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,181)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .00
        

</TABLE>
#### Vincent A. PARRINI, Sr., and Philomena Parrini, his wife, Appellants, v. Anthony PARRINI, Appellee.

No. 2588.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Sept. 3, 1969.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 22, 1969.

Ainslee R. Ferdie, Coral Gables, for appellants.

Michael K. Davis of Watson Hubert & Davis, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment, which imposed an equitable lien on appellants’ property and which retained jurisdiction for the foreclosure of the lien in the event the sum due ap-pellee is not repaid within the time provided in the judgment, is affirmed on the authority of Hullum v. Bre-Lew Corp., Fla. 1957, 93 So.2d 727; Folsom v. Farmers’ Bank of Vero Beach, 1931, 102 Fla. 899, 136 So. 524; Craven v. Hartley, 1931, 102 Fla. 282, 135 So. 899; Jones v. Carpenter, 1925, 90 Fla. 407, 106 So. 127, 43 A.L.R. 1409; International Realty Associates v. McAdoo, 1924, 87 Fla. 1, 99 So. 117; and Tucker v. Prevatt Builders, Inc., Fla.App. 1959, 116 So.2d 437.

WALDEN, REED and OWEN, JJ., conCUr‘
U.S. D EPARTMENT O F E NERGY

P UBLIC M EETING O N T EST P ROCEDURES F OR

S MALL E LECTRIC M OTORS A ND ELECTRIC M OTORS

U .S. D epartment o f E nergy

1 000 I ndependence A venue, S W.

W ashington, D C 2 0585

T hursday, J anuary 2 9, 2 009

R oom 1 E­245

P urpose

Th e D epartment o f En ergy ( DOE) seeks c omments, information, a nd d ata f rom i nterested p arties

o n t he No tice o f P roposed R ulemaking ( NOPR) a ddressing t est p rocedures f or s mall e lectric

m otors a nd e lectric m otors. Th e NO PR p roposes n ew t est p rocedures f or s mall e lectric m otors,

b oth s ingle­phase a nd p olyphase. Th e NO PR a lso p roposes t o up date r eferenced i ndustry

s tandards i n D OE’s e xisting t est p rocedure f or e lectric m otors, including m aterials i ncorporated

b y r eference.

A genda

9 :00

– 9:15 a m W elcome, I ntroductions, Opening S tatements

R on L ewis, Presiding Officer,

S

upervisor

– Regulatory, B uilding Technologies P rogram

J

im R aba, Facilitator

9 :15

– 9:30 a m R ulemaking O verview

S ummary o f t he s tatutory b ackground, r ulemaking p rocess, and t he

i ssues o n w hich D OE s eeks i nput d uring t oday's public m eeting.

9 :30

– 10:30 a m S mall E lectric M otors T est Pr ocedures

P resentation a nd d iscussion o f d efinitions c oncerning s mall e lectric

m otors, test p rocedures f or t he m easurement o f e nergy e fficiency, a nd t he

a lternative e fficiency d etermination m ethod.

1 0:30

– 10:45 a m B reak

1 0:45

– 12:00 p m E lectric M otor T est P rocedure

P resentation a nd d iscussion o f d efinitions c oncerning e lectric m otors,

up dates t o c itations t o i ndustry s tandards, and c larification o f m otors

c overed b y t he En ergy I ndependence a nd S ecurity A ct o f 2 007.

1 2:00

– 1:00 p m L unch

1 :00

– 1:15 p m O ther I ssues

P resentation a nd d iscussion o f m iscellaneous up dates t o t he C ode o f

F ederal R egulations.

1 :15

– 1:45 p m C losing R emarks
#### Roosevelt EASTERWOOD v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 50281.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Sept. 14, 1977.

Hugh L. Bailey, Winona, for appellant.

A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen. by Wayne Snuggs, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Montgomery County; Clarence E. Morgan, Jr., Judge.

Before PATTERSON, C. J., and SUGG and WALKER, JJ.

AFFIRMED.
#### The State vs. Hester.

Where the same order of the County Court, appointing an overseer of the public road, also defines the boundaries of the road, it is sufficient evidence, on the trial of an indictment for not keeping the road in repair, of the appointment, and that the district was laid off.

*Appeal from Washington Circuit Court.*

*194Hon. John M. Wilson, Circuit Judge.

Mr. Attorney General Hollowell, for the State.

Mr. Justice Compton

delivered the opinion of the Court.

Tne appellee, Ransom Hester, was tried upon an indictment preferred against him as overseer of the road.

He was acquitted, and the State appealed.

From a bill.of exceptions taken at the trial, it appears that the attorney tor the State proposed to read to the jury thé following entries from the record of the County Court of Crawford county, in connection with other evidence conducing to show that they referred to the road of which the appellee was overseer, to-wit:

> “ Ordered that Ransom Hester be and he is hereby appointed overseer of the first district of the Huntsville road, commencing at the corporation line, and terminating at the crossing of the west fork of White fiver.”

> “ Ordered by the Court that Amos Oittzen, a Justice of the Peace, be and he is hereby appointed apportioning justice in and for the township of Prairie for the next two years, for the purpose of apportioning the hands liable to work on the roads in said township among the different overseers thereof.”

To the reading of which the appellee objected, for the reason, as stated in the bill of exceptions, that no record was first read in evidence, showing said road to have been districted by the County Court — the prosecuting attorney announcing that the entries proposed to be read, were the only records he had to offer — and the court sustained the objection of the appellee, and refused to permit said records to be read to the jury.

It is made the duty of the County Court, to lay off the public roads, in each county, into convenient districts, with definite boundaries, and to appoint an overseer for each district. *Gould’s*Digest, *chap.*149, sec. 5. But it is not necessary, in the discharge of this duty, that two separate and distinct record entries should be made, the one districting the road, and the *195other appointing the overseer. That both requirements may be complied with in the same order, we think there can be no doubt; and, in this case, the order appointing the appellee overseer, also indicates the boundaries of his road district, which is a substantial compliance with the statute.

The court erred, therefore, in excluding the evidence.

Let the judgment be reversed.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**Certification**

 

I, Tommy A. Moore, Jr., certify that:

 

1.               I have reviewed this quarterly report onForm 10-Q of First Investors Financial Services Group, Inc.

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, this report doesnot contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.               Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

 

4.               The Company’s other certifyingofficer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e) for the Company and based on such evaluation:

 

a)              Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared; and

b)             Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures as of the end of the period covered by this report (based on suchevaluation); and

c)              Disclosed in this report any change inthe registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscalquarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting;

 

5.               The registrant’s other certifyingofficer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal controls over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):

 

a)              All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting, which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b)             Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 
| Date:  | March 12, 2004         |   |   |
|--------|-----------------------------|--------|--------|
|   |                        |
|   |                        |
|   | By: /s/ TOMMY A. MOORE, JR. |   |
|   | Tommy A. Moore, Jr.         |
|   | Chief Executive Officer     |

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1051 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1051

    To amend title 37, United States Code, to ensure that footwear 
 furnished or obtained by allowance for enlisted members of the Armed 
  Forces upon their initial entry into the Armed Forces complies with 
                     domestic source requirements.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 23, 2013

 Ms. Collins (for herself and Mr. King) introduced the following bill; 
  which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend title 37, United States Code, to ensure that footwear 
 furnished or obtained by allowance for enlisted members of the Armed 
  Forces upon their initial entry into the Armed Forces complies with 
                     domestic source requirements.

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

SECTION 1. COMPLIANCE WITH DOMESTIC SOURCE REQUIREMENTS OF FOOTWEAR 
              FURNISHED OR OBTAINED BY ALLOWANCE FOR ENLISTED MEMBERS 
              OF THE ARMED FORCES UPON THEIR INITIAL ENTRY INTO THE 
              ARMED FORCES.

    Section 418(a) of title 37, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(b)''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
    ``(2)(A) The footwear prescribed under this section to be furnished 
to, or to be paid for by allowance under this section by, members upon 
their initial entry into armed forces shall comply with the 
requirements of section 2533a of title 10, without regard to the 
applicability of any simplified acquisition threshold under chapter 137 
of title 10 (or any other provision of law) to the use of such 
allowance for such footwear.
    ``(B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to athletic footwear 
furnished to, or paid for by allowance by, a member described in that 
subparagraph if such footwear--
            ``(i) is medically required to meet unique physiological 
        needs of the member; and
            ``(ii) cannot be met with athletic footwear that complies 
        with the requirements referred to in that subparagraph.''.
                                 <all>
```