alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, Florida, a municipal corporation, Appellant, v. 100 LINCOLN ROAD, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 68-17.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Sept. 24, 1968.

Joseph A. Wanick, City Atty., Frank, Strelkow & Marx, Miami Beach, for appellant.

Irving Cypen Law Offices, Miami Beach, for appellee.

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

PEARSON, Judge.

The City of Miami Beach appeals a final judgment which enjoined it from claiming that the actions of the appellant constitute a violation of its zoning ordinance. The appellee owns and operates a large apartment building and provides parking space pursuant to a city ordinance.1 The appellee brought action in the trial court alleging that the city 'had misinterpreted the legal effect of its zoning ordinance and as a consequence of this misinterpretation had ordered the appellee to “discontinue using parking areas within building for other than tenants’ of apartments within building.” The trial court found that any interpretation of the ordinance requiring use of the appellee’s parking space to be limited to the occupants of the appellee’s apartment building is unreasonable and invalid. We agree and affirm the judgment.

The ordinance in question simply requires builders of apartments to provide a designated number of permanent parking spaces for each family unit. Since zoning laws are in derogation of the common law, as a general rule they are subject to strict construction in favor of the right of a property owner to the unrestricted use of his property. Wright v. De Fatta, 244 La. 251, 152 So.2d 10, 14 (1963).

The authorities seem agreed that the purpose of off-street parking requirements is *40not to provide every tenant with a parking space at all times but rather to alleviate traffic congestion. See School Dist. of Philadelphia v. Zoning Bd. of Adjust., 417 Pa. 277, 207 A.2d 864, 868 (1965); 1 Yokley, Municipal Corporations, § 245 ; 58 Mich.L.Rev. 1068, 1071.

The appellant has suggested that the ap-pellee is engaged in the business of operating a parking garage in violation of the use regulation for the business district in which the apartment house is located. This issue has no place in these proceedings, because it was not raised in the trial court. The interpretation of § 16-B of Ordinance 289 was the only matter in issue in the trial court. The judgment is clearly based upon the court’s correct interpretation of that section. We need not pursue the possible application of other ordinances.

Affirmed.

1

. Section 16-B of Ordinance 289 requires apartment buildings to provide three parking places for each two apartment units constructed. The appellee obtained a variance permitting it to provide one parking space for each unit.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       3,670,870
<SECURITIES>                                 2,958,322
<RECEIVABLES>                               41,509,528
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (952,563)
<INVENTORY>                                 53,595,857
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            16,170,686
<PP&E>                                      40,005,488
<DEPRECIATION>                            (17,585,482)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             159,273,337
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       63,679,183
<BONDS>                                     32,633,442
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    26,163,606
<OTHER-SE>                                  28,351,327
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               159,273,337
<SALES>                                     56,068,880
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            56,068,880
<CGS>                                       34,503,710
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               34,503,710
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            16,688,737
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         (1,105,801)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,861,677
<INCOME-TAX>                               (1,615,187)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,246,490
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,246,490
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.17


</TABLE>
Exhibit
31.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, George
J. Coates, President, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Executive Officer of
Coates International, Ltd., certify that:





1. I have
reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Coates International, Ltd. (the
"Company");





2. Based
on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of
a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;





3. Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of,
and for the periods presented in this quarterly report;





4. I am
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the Company and I
have:





(a)
designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period
in which this quarterly report is being prepared;





(b)
evaluated the effectiveness of the Company's disclosure controls and procedures
as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report
(the "Evaluation Date"); and





(c)
presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date;





5. I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the Company's auditors and to
the audit committee of the Company's board of directors:





(a)
all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which could adversely affect the Company's ability to record, process, summarize
and report financial data and have identified for the Company's auditors any
material weaknesses in internal controls; and





(b)
any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the Company's internal controls; and





6. I have
indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes
in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect
internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation,
including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and
material weaknesses.





Dated:
      May 13, 2009
              By:
              /s/ George
      J. CoatesGeorge
      J. CoatesPresident,
      Chief Executive Officerand
      Principal Executive Officer
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14

- 40621 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
ERIKA MARICELA VITELA , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:13

- CR

- 7 41

- 2

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges

. PER CURIAM: *
Erika Maricela Vitela appeals the four, concurrent 18

- month prison

sentences imposed upon revocation of the terms of probation she received following her convictions on one count of conspiracy to transport an undocumented alien within the United States for commercial advantage or private financial gain and three counts of transporting an undocumented alien for commercial advantage or private financial gain. On appeal, Vi tela argues

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED March 30, 2015 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 14-40621 Document: 00512986229 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/30/2015No. 14

- 40621

that th e district court abused its discretion by failing to take the recommended sentencing range of three to ninth month s into account and by imposing

sentence s that w ere greater than necessary to meet the goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). She fu rther contends that the district court did not give adequate weight to the mitigating factors and arguments that she presented during the revocation hearing. The district court’s sentencing decision was not plainly unreasonable. See United States v. Kipp ers , 685 F.3d 491, 496 (5th Cir. 2012). Before pronouncing Vitela ’s sentence s , the district court expressly considered the applicable policy statement range under Chapter Seven of the Guidelines Manual promulgated by the United States Sentencing Commissio n, the maximum statutory sentence that Vitela faced, and Vitela’s arguments in favor of leniency. Wh ile Vitela ’s sentence s exceeded the applicable policy statement

range, they were within the statutory maximum term that s he faced. See 18 U.S.C. § 3565(a); United States v. Pena , 125 F.3d 285, 28 7

- 8 8 (5th Cir. 1997).
We have routinely upheld such sentences. United States v. Whitelaw , 580 F.3d 256, 265 (5th Cir. 2009). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.

2 Case: 14-40621 Document: 00512986229 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/30/2015
Twelfth Census of the United States. 

CENSUS BULLETIN. 

No. ·33. WASHINGTON, D. C. January 17, 1901. 

POPULATION OF' MONTANA BY COUNTIES AND MINOR CIVIL DIVISIONS. 

'I'his bulletin, prepared under the direction of Mr. WrLLIAJII 0. HuNT, chief statistician for population, gives the 

aggregate population of Montana by counties anc1 minor civil divisions, according to the official count of the returns 

of the 'l'welfth Census, taken as of June 1, 1000. 

Montana was organized as a territory May 26, 1864, and admitted as a state November 8, 1880. 'l'able 1 shows 

the population of Montana at each census from 1870 to 1900, inclusive, together with the increase by number and per 

cent during each decade. 

TABLE 1.--POPUI"ATION OF MONTANA: 1870 To moo. 

OENSUS YEAl\8. 

1900 ----------------------------------------

1890 ----------------------------------------

1880 ----------------------------------------

18 70 ----- -----------------------------------

INC!\ EASE, 

Populntion. 1---~---I 

Number. Per cent. 

2·13, 329 111, 170 

132, 159 93, 000 

30, 159 18, 564 

20, 595 

84.l 

237.5 

90.l 

The population of the state in 1900 is 243,329 as compared with a population in 1890 of 132,159, showing an 

increase during the decade of 111, 170, or 84.1 per cent. A part of this increase is due to the fact that there were 

10,346 Indians aucl 419 other persons, or a total of 10, 765 persons, on Indian reservations, etc., in Montana, who were 

specia.lly enumerated in 1890 under the provisions of the census act, but were not included in the general population of 

the state at that census. 'l'he population of the territory of Montana in 1~70 was 20,595, and in 1880, 39,159, 

showing an increase of 18,564, or 90.1 per cent. During the following decade, from 1880 to 1890, in the last year of 

which the territory became a state, the population increased from 39,150 to 132,159, or 237.5 per cent. Although the 

numerical increase has been greater during the last decade than for any preceding one, the percentage of increase has 

declinqcl. 

'I'he population of Montana in 1900 is more than eleven times as large as the population given for 1870, the first 

census taken after its organization as a territory in 1864. 

The total land surface of Montana is, approximately, 145,310 square miles, the average number of persons to the 

square mile at the censuses of 1890 and 1900 being as follows: 181JO, O. 9; 1900, 1. 7. 

1~able 2 shows the population of Montana by counties at each census from 1870 to 1900, inclusive, while table 3, 

which immediately follows, shows, for each county, the increase (or decrease) by number and per cent during the ten 

years from 1890 to 1900. 

(CPlSM)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
STATEMENT OF NET ASSETS IN LIQUIDATION AT March 31, 2000(UNAUDITED) AND THE
STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS IN LIQUIDATION FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
March 31, 2000 (UNAUDITED) AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         305,925
<SECURITIES>                                 4,288,950
<RECEIVABLES>                                   72,007
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,666,882
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          284,187
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,382,695
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,666,882
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,083
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,083
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,083
<EPS-BASIC>                                        2
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        2



</TABLE>
Exhibit 99.2

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18U.S.C. SECTION 1350

 

I,Mark A. Flowers, Assistant Treasurer of FNB Banking Company (the“Company”), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. sec. 1350 as adopted by sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

| (1) | the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of theCompany for the annual period ended December 31, 2002 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (2) |  the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.                                                                          |

Dated: March [__], 2003

|  | /s/ Mark A.Flowers                 Mark A. FlowersAssistant Treasurer, PrincipalAccounting Officer |
|--|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government Skip to main content   end of header History
 You are here: Census.gov ›
  History ›
   Agency History Skip top of page navigation
 History Main
      Agency History
        Director Biographies
          Census Facilities
          Suitland, MD
          Notable Alumni
      Innovations
        Data Collection
          Technology
      Programs
        Agriculture
          Demographic
          Housing
          Economic
          Geography
          Governments
      Through the Decades
        Fast Facts
          Overview
          Index of Questions
          Questionnaires
          Census Instructions
      Genealogy
        Decennial Census Records
          Other Resources
      Reference
        Data@Museums
          Artifacts
          Lesson Plans
          Legislation
          Maps
          Oral Histories
          Privacy & Confidentiality
          Apportionment
          Publications
 Home Page Archive
        2024
          2023
          2022
          2021
          2020
          2019
          2018
          2017
          2016
          2015
          2014    
      FAQs
        Genealogy
          Agency History
          Demographic
          Economic
          Governments
          Agriculture
          Geography
          Innovations
          Miscellaneous
  Also in this Section: Director Biographies
   
    
        Notable Alumni
   
    
        Census Facilities
   
    
        Suitland, MD
 Agency History Timeline of Census History
View complete document
 The U.S. Constitution requires only that the decennial census be a population count.  Since the first census in 1790, however, the need for useful information about the United States' population and economy became increasingly evident. The decennial census steadily expanded throughout the nineteenth century. By the turn of the century, the demographic, agricultural, and economic segments of the decennial census collected information on hundreds of topics. The work of processing these data kept the temporary Census Office open for almost all the decades following the 1880 and 1890 censuses. Recognizing the growing complexity of the decennial census, Congress enacted legislation creating a permanent Census Office within the Department of the Interior on March 6, 1902. On July 1, 1902, the U.S. Census Bureau officially "opened its doors" under the leadership of William Rush Merriam. In 1903, the Census Office was moved to the newly created Department of Commerce and Labor. It remained within Commerce when Commerce and Labor split into separate departments in 1913. For a summary history of the Census Bureau, see Factfinder for the Nation: History and Organization [PDF 159KB]. For a visual chronology of the history of the census from 1790 to the present, see the Timeline of Census History [10.8MB BMP].  A portable document format version of the timeline is available here [567 KB].
#### LUMIDOR MANUFACTURING CORP., a Maryland corporation, Appellant, v. MILL FACTORS CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, Appellee.

No. 70-1007.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

May 18, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
p130182.eng INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 13-0182 Focus Ready Draft 1/14/2013
ENGINEER: Choudhary \ AH PV (kg/yr):

SUBMITTER:

Page 1p130182.eng

SAT (concerns) (11/06/2012): Related Cases and Related Cases and Misc SAT Info:

Migration to groundwater: Negligible PBT rating: P2B3T2 Linear: P1B2T2 // Branched: P2B3T2. Health: 2 Dermal, Inhalation Eco: 3 Water (All releases to water with a CC = 1 ppb.)

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: 1D

NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS: Generated by the 06/07/2005 version of ChemSTEER.

Page 2p130182.eng

Page 3p130182.eng

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 13-0182

Page 4p130182.eng

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 13-0182

Page 5p130182.eng

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 13-0182
Page 6p130182.eng

Page 7p130182.eng

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 13-0182

Page 8p130182.eng

Page 9
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

**Certification**

I, Bennie H. Duck,certify that:

1.     I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q ofFirst Investors Financial Services Group, Inc.

2.     Based on my knowledge, this report does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary 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 financial statements, andother financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     The Company’s other certifying officer(s) and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the Company andbased on such evaluation:

a)   Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared; and

b)  Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by thisreport (based on such evaluation); and

c)   Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting;

5.     The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and Ihave disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controls overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)   Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting, which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

b)  Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

 

Date:  Dec 13, 2006
|   | By:                      | /s/ BENNIE H.  DUCK |   |
|--------|--------------------------|---------------------|--------|
|   | Bennie H. Duck           |
|   | Chief Financial  Officer |

 

----