alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Betty Sue MITCHELL, Appellant, v. W. B. MITCHELL, Appellee.

No. 71-341.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 30, 1972.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 29, 1972.

Raymond E. LaPorte, of Ragano & LaPorte, Tampa, for appellant.

Robert P. Murray, of Holland & Knight, Lakeland, for appellee.

LILES, Acting Chief Judge.

W. B. Mitchell brought suit against his wife, Betty Sue Mitchell, for divorce. The marriage occurred in 1946 and the final judgment of divorce was entered April 21, 1971.

We have meticulously studied the record, the trial judge’s finding of fact and the final judgment. The appellant complains that $100.00 per month as an award of child support for one son constitutes an abuse of discretion, particularly when it is determined that the father has an average annual income of $67,172.83 and possesses a sizeable estate. If this were the only fact to be taken into consideration, then it is our judgment that this would constitute an abuse of discretion. *470However, from, the record it appears that it is the husband’s intent to do much more for his minor son. It also appears that the son is too young to have the money paid to him directly and the wife’s habits do not support her ability to see that the money would be spent on support of the child. We would point out that the trial judge retained jurisdiction to modify child support in the event the mother’s conduct should improve or in the event the father does not voluntarily live up to his responsibilities.

Appellant also questions the $400.00 per month award to her as alimony. We are not persuaded under the circumstances that the trial judge abused his discretion.

The last point assigned as error contests the judge’s authority to order the sale of the home which is held as tenants by the entireties. This court recently rendered an opinion, Rankin v. Rankin, Fla.App.1972, 258 So.2d 489, in which we attempted to compile the cases construing the chancellor’s authority to partition property held as tenants by the entireties absent an agreement between the parties or by appropriate pleadings complying with the partition statute. The trial judge in his final judgment followed the procedural requirements of Chapter 64, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.

We do not recede from the law enunciated in *Rankin,*since it appears that the intent of that law has been followed in the instant case. We do not believe that the best interests of justice and equity would be served by requiring a reversal simply to file additional pleadings for partition since the safeguards have been met.

We therefore affirm.

McNULTY, J., and DAYTON, ORVILLE L., Jr., (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.
EXHIBIT 99 (a) **CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 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 on Form 10-K of Canandaigua National Corporation for the period ending December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, George W. Hamlin, IV, Chief Executive 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: 
(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. 
March 21, 2003 
/s/ George W. Hamlin, IV
Date 
George W. Hamlin, IV, Chief Executive Officer 

 ******
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1080

To suspend until January 1, 1996, the duty on ioxilan, and to extend

until January 1, 1996, the existing suspensions of duty on iohexol,

iopamidol, and ioxaglic acid.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 8 (legislative day, JUNE 7), 1993

Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself and Mr. BRADLEY) introduced the following;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To suspend until January 1, 1996, the duty on ioxilan,

and to extend until January 1, 1996, the existing suspensions of duty on iohexol, iopamidol, and ioxaglic acid.

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

3 SECTION 1. IOXILAN.

4 Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized Tar5 iff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting

6 in numerical sequence the following new heading:
2

•S 1080 IS

‘‘ 9902.31.12 N-(2,3-Dihydroxypropyl)-5-[N-(2,3-

dihydroxypropyl)acetamido]-N′-(2-

hydroxyethyl)-2,4,6-

triiodoiso-phthalamide,

known as ioxilan (CAS

No. 107793–72–6)

(provided for in subheading 2924.29.44) ... Free No change No change On or before

12/31/95 ’’.

1 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF EXISTING SUSPENSIONS OF DUTY

2 ON IOHEXOL, IOPAMIDOL, AND IOXAGLIC

3 ACID.

4 Headings 9902.30.64, 9902.30.65, and 9902.30.66

5 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States

6 are each amended by striking ‘‘9/30/91’’ and inserting

7 ‘‘12/31/95’’.

8 SEC. 3. APPLICABILITY.

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—The amendments made by sec10 tions 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 15th day after the

11 date of the enactment of this Act.

12 (b) RETROACTIVE PROVISION.—Notwithstanding sec13 tion 514 of the Tariff Act of 1930 or any other provision

14 of law to the contrary, upon a request filed with the appro15 priate customs officer before the 90th day after the date

16 of the enactment of this Act, any entry or withdrawal from

17 warehouse for consumption of goods to which any amend18 ment made by section 1 or section 2 applies and that was

19 made—

20 (1) after September 30, 1991; and
3

•S 1080 IS

1 (2) before the 15th day after the date of the en2 actment of this Act;

3 and with respect to which there would have been no duty

4 or a lower duty if any amendment made by section 1 or

5 section 2 had applied to such entry or withdrawal, shall

6 be liquidated or reliquidated as though such entry or with7 drawal had occurred on such 15th day.

Æ
#### NEW FLORIDIAN HOTEL, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. Porter W. HOMER, etc., et al., Appellees.

No. 70-527.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 15, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1235

To provide for the treatment of Indian tribal governments under section

403(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 15 (legislative day, JUNE 30), 1993

Mr. MCCAIN (for himself and Mr. INOUYE, Mr. BOREN, and Mr. BAUCUS) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To provide for the treatment of Indian tribal governments

under section 403(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

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

3 SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF INDIAN TRIBAL GOVERN4 MENTS UNDER SECTION 403(b).

5 In the case of any contract purchased in a plan year

6 beginning before January 1, 1993, section 403(b) of the

7 Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall be applied as if any

8 reference to an employer described in section 501(c)(3) of

9 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 which is exempt from

10 tax under section 501 of such Code included a reference
2

•S 1235 IS

1 to an employer which is an Indian tribal government (as

2 defined by section 7701(a)(40) of such Code), a subdivi3 sion of an Indian tribal government (determined in accord4 ance with section 7871(d) of such Code), an agency or

5 instrumentality of an Indian tribal government or subdivi6 sion thereof, or a corporation chartered under Federal,

7 State, or tribal law which is owned in whole or in part

8 by any of the foregoing.

Æ
The professional 

mapping drone 

Technical specifications

The survey-grade 

mapping drone
Technical specifications

Weight (inc. supplied camera)

Wingspan

Material

Propulsion

GNSS/RTK receiver

Battery

Camera (supplied)

Cameras (optional)

Carry case dimensions

Hardware

Operation

Approx. 0.73 kg (1.61 lb) 

96 cm (38 in)

EPP foam, carbon structure & composite parts

Electric pusher propeller, 160 W brushless DC motor

L1/L2, GPS & GLONASS

11.1 V, 2150 mAh

WX (18.2 MP)

S110 RGB, S110 RE, S110 NIR, thermoMAP*

55 x 45 x 25 cm (21.6 x 17.7 x 9.8 in)

* Applies to version 02 eBee RTKs (those with serial numbers EB-02-...) and later.

40 minutes 

40-90 km/h (11-25 m/s or 25-56 mph) 

Up to 3 km (1.86 miles) 

8 km2

 / 3 mi2 (at 974 m / 3,195 ft altitude AGL)

Up to 45 km/h (12m/s or 28 mph)

Down to 1.5 cm (0.6 in) per pixel

1-3x GSD

Down to 3 cm (1.2 in) / 5 cm (2 in)

Yes (inc. mid-air collision avoidance) 

Yes

Approx. 5 m (16.4 ft)

Maximum flight time

Nominal cruise speed

Radio link range

Maximum coverage (single flight)

Wind resistance

Ground Sampling Distance (GSD)

Relative orthomosaic/3D model accuracy

Absolute horizontal/vertical accuracy (no GCPs)

Multi-drone operation

Automatic 3D flight planning

Linear landing accuracy

Package contents

• eBee RTK foam body (inc. all electronics & built-in 

autopilot) 

• Pair of detachable wings 

• WX still camera (inc. 16 GB SD card, battery, USB cable & charger) 

• GNSS antenna

• 2.4 GHz USB radio modem for data link (inc. USB cable) 

• Two Lithium-Polymer battery packs & charger

• Spare propeller

• Carry case with foam protection 

• Remote control & accessories (for safety pilots)

• User manual 

• Software included: eMotion (flight planning & control) 

& Postflight Terra 3D (professional photogrammetry)

For eBee RTK updates

subscribe to our newsletter at

www.sensefly.com
#### John T. SEALE, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James David CALDWELL and Jerome K. Post, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.

No. 13713.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit.

July 27, 1978.

Writ Refused Aug. 1, 1978.

Crawford A. Rose, Jr., Rayville, for defendant-appellant James David Caldwell.

*1198Lancaster, Baxter & Seale by E. H. Lancaster, Jr., Tallulah, for plaintiff-appellee.

Before PRICE, HALL and MARVIN, JJ.

HALL, Judge.

This is an action objecting to candidacy brought under the provisions of the Election Code dealing with primary and general elections, LSA-R.S. 18:401, et seq. Plaintiff is John T. Seale, a registered voter of Madison Parish, the incumbent district attorney for the Sixth Judicial District and a qualified candidate for reelection to that office in this year’s regular election. By law the primary election is scheduled for September 16, 1978 and the general election is scheduled for November 7. Defendant is James David Caldwell who also qualified as a candidate for the office of district attorney. Defendant was admitted to the practice of law in this state on October 5, 1973 and will have been admitted to the practice of law for five years on October 5, 1978, a date subsequent to the primary election and prior to the general election. As grounds for the objection to candidacy plaintiff contends that defendant does not meet the qualifications for the office he seeks because he will not “have been admitted to the practice of law in this state for at least five years prior to his election” as required by Article V, § 26 of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974 in that one of the two candidates for the office will be elected in the primary election.

After trial the district court upheld the plaintiffs contentions, held that defendant does not meet the qualifications required by law for the office of district attorney and rendered judgment disqualifying defendant as a candidate. On defendant’s appeal we reverse the judgment of the district court, hold the defendant is a duly-qualified candidate for the office, and render judgment dismissing plaintiff’s action.

The decision in this case is controlled by the opinion of this Court rendered yesterday in the case of *Cook v. Campbell,*360 So.2d 1193, No. 13,695 on the docket of this Court, in which we upheld the qualifications of a candidate for the office of district judge under identical facts and under the identical constitutional qualification that the officeholder “shall have been admitted to the practice of law in the state for at least five years prior to his election.” See also *Jory v. Arnette,*360 So.2d 921, No. 6781 on the docket of the Third Circuit Court of Appeal which reached the same result upholding the qualifications of a candidate for district attorney under similar facts.

For the reasons assigned in the *Cook*case, the judgment of the district court is reversed and set aside. The defendant, James David Caldwell, is declared to be a duly-qualified candidate for the office of district attorney of the Sixth Judicial District of the State of Louisiana, and plaintiff’s action is dismissed, at plaintiff’s costs.

Reversed and rendered.
|Exhibit 21 Subsidiaries         
|--------------------------------
|                                
|CANANDAIGUA NATIONAL CORPORATION

|Name of Subsidiary                                                      |  | State of Incorporation
|----------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------
|                                                                        |  |                       
|The Canandaigua National Bank and Trust Company                         |  | New York              
|                                                                        |  |                       
|Home Town Funding, Inc. d/b/a CNB Mortgage Company                      |  | New York              
|                                                                        |  |                       
|Greater Funding of New York d/b/a Greater Funding, The Mortgage Company |  | New York              
|                                                                        |  |                       
|Canandaigua National Statutory Trust I                                  |  | Connecticut
ACTIO N



# ^'9rmm m CO\~,-voi . \ 0 

# FAIRBANK S CONVENTIO N 6 VISITOR S BUREA U 

## o 1
- S 5
10 1 Dunke l Strwt , Suit e 111 - Fairbanks , A K9970 1 -480 6 (907)457-328 2 * 1907)459-378 7 Fa x wvvw.explorc(airbanks.co m Januar y14,201 1 Th e Honorabl e Ra

yLaHoo d Secretar y U.S
. Departmen t o fTransportatio n 120 0 Ne wJerse yAvenue , S.E
. Washington , D.C
. 2059 0 Re : Continuatio n o fAlask a Airlines ' Essentia l Ai rServic e at Cordova
. Gustavus
. Petersburg
. Wranoell
. an d Yakutat
. Alaska
. Docke t OST-1998-489 9 Dea rSecretar

yLaHood : Thi s lette ri s t o expres s stron g support fo rth e selectio n o fAlask a Airline s t o continu e t o provid e essentia l ai rservic e t o th e communitie s o fCordova , Gustavus , Petersburg , Wrangell , an d Yakuta t i n Alaska
. Alaska' s curren t patter n o fservic e - usin g je t aircraft - meet s crucia l need s tha t woul d b e difficult , i fnot impossible , t o mee t wit h an yothe rtyp e o fservic e o raircraft type . Alaska' s servic e connect s Southeas t Alask a passengers t o on e o rmore majo r communitie s o finterest , wit h single-plan e servic e t o Anchorage , Juneau , Ketchika n o r Seattle
. Fro m thes e hubs , ou rcommunityca n acces s th e airline' s extensiv e rout e syste m an d benefi t fro m it s marketin g relationship s wit h othe rcarriers
. Th e 737-40 0 combinatio n ("combi" ) passenge ran d carg o aircraft , whic h Alask a Airline s propose s t o continu e usin g o n thi s route , provide s freight , mai l an d carg o capacit ytha t a non-je t carrie rsimpl ycanno t provide
. Further , th e 737-40 0 comb i aircraft i s equippe d wit h Require d Navigatio n Performanc e Technolog yprecisio n technology , whic h enable s th e airlin e t o reliabl yacces s th e airport durin g inclemen t weather , thu s reducin g diversion s an d cancellation s and , i n turn , enablin g peopl e an d product s t o dependabl yreac h th e community
. I n sum , Alaska' s je t servic e i s critica l t o th e economi cwel l bein g o fthes e communities
. Fo rthes e reasons , w e respectfull yurg e DO Tt o select Alask a Airline s t o continu e t o provid e essentia l ai rservic e t o Southeas t Alaska , a s th e airlin e ha s successfull ydon e fo r more tha n thirt yyears . 

### War m Regards , De b Hicko k Presiden t an d CE O cc : Susa n Kurland , Assistan t Secretar yfo rAviatio n an d Internationa l Affair s Denni s DeVany , Chief , EA S an d Domesti cAnalysi s Th e Honorabl e Sea n Parnell , Governor , Stat e o fAlask a MarcA
. Luiken , Commissioner , Alaska Stat e Departmen t o fTransportatio n an d Publi cFacilitie s
ALASKA SEAFOOD CBI REPLACEMENT PAGE 

EPA-HQ-OW-2013-0652

DCN: 00313CBI

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE IT 

CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION 

(CBI) PER 40 CFR PART 2, SUBPART B.
#### Bernard C. GREEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-78.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Sept. 14, 1973.

James A. Gardner, Public Defender, and Mary Jo M. Gallay, Asst. Public Defender, Bradenton, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Richard C. Booth, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Kelly v. State, Fla.App. 1971, 254 So.2d 22; Davis v. State, Fla.App.1973, 277 So.2d 300, and Scarborough v. State, Fla.App.1973, 278 So.2d 657.

LILES, Acting C. J., and HOBSON and McNULTY, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Jun-30-1997 
<PERIOD-END>                                   Jun-30-1997 
<CASH>                                             857,000 
<SECURITIES>                                    21,935,000 
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,177,000 
<ALLOWANCES>                                       (79,000) 
<INVENTORY>                                      4,785,000 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                30,645,000 
<PP&E>                                          10,800,000 
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (5,671,000) 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  38,007,000 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,634,000 
<BONDS>                                          2,903,000 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0 
<PREFERRED>                                              0 
<COMMON>                                            30,000 
<OTHER-SE>                                      19,940,000 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    38,007,000 
<SALES>                                         21,300,000 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                21,300,000 
<CGS>                                          (12,116,000) 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  (12,116,000) 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,227,000 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 993,000 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,928,000 
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (320,000) 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,608,000 
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0 
<CHANGES>                                                0 
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,608,000 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          .64 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0 

        


</TABLE>
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

The undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as an officer of Diedrich Coffee, Inc. (the
Company), for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his knowledge:



| |  |  | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 10, 2008 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                        |  |  |  |                                                                     |  |  |  | 
|----------------------- |  |  |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------- |  |  |  | 
|Dated: January 26, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/ J. Russell Phillips J. Russell Phillips Chief Executive Officer

Note: A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Diedrich
Coffee, Inc. and will be retained by Diedrich Coffee, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 229 (Wednesday, November 28, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 70964]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28806]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs

25 CFR Part 226

Osage Negotiated Rulemaking Committee

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior

ACTION: Notice of public meeting cancellation

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the requirements of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. Appendix 2, the U.S. Department of the 
Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Osage Negotiated Rulemaking 
Committee has cancelled the December 13-14, 2012 meeting.

DATES: The meetings were originally scheduled for Thursday, December 
13, 2012, and Friday, December 14, 2012, from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. at the 
Wah Zha Zhi Cultural Center, 1449 W. Main, Pawhuska, Oklahoma 74056. A 
new meeting date and location will be announced later.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Eddie Streater, Designated Federal 
Officer, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Wewoka Agency, P.O. Box 1540, 
Seminole, OK 74818; telephone (405) 257-6250; fax (405) 257-3875; or 
email osageregneg@bia.gov. Additional Committee information can be 
found at: http://www.bia.gov/osageregneg.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 14, 2011, the United States and 
the Osage Nation (formerly known as the Osage Tribe) signed a 
Settlement Agreement to resolve litigation regarding alleged 
mismanagement of the Osage Nation's oil and gas mineral estate, among 
other claims. As part of the Settlement Agreement, the parties agreed 
that it would be mutually beneficial ``to address means of improving 
the trust management of the Osage Mineral Estate, the Osage Tribal 
Trust Account, and Other Osage Accounts.'' Settlement Agreement, 
Paragraph 1.i. The parties agreed that a review and revision of the 
existing regulations is warranted to better assist the Bureau of Indian 
Affairs (BIA) in managing the Osage Mineral Estate. The parties agreed 
to engage in a negotiated rulemaking for this purpose. Settlement 
Agreement, Paragraph 9.b. After the Committee submits its report, BIA 
will develop a proposed rule to be published in the Federal Register.

    Dated: November 21, 2012.
Michael S. Black,
Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2012-28806 Filed 11-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-02-P
```