alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
TRIEAT~ORNEY GENERAL 

OFTEXAS 

AUSTIN~I.TEXAE 

Ronor8blo Dave Ho&ill, Jr. 

Cmaty Attorney 

Shelby County 

Csrfer, Taxa8 

D6ar Sir: Opi~ioa No. O-6213 

Re: Sale of beer to prisomra of 

war i8 a dzy area, l %d related 

queation8. 

Your mqusst for am opinion reads a8 Pollorr: 

"Shelby County is a 'dry oounty' bavin~g voted dry rnder the local optioi 

law of 1906. Durirg the earlier prt of tbir year, the U. S. Govenmnt, 

looatad a prisoner of war camp within the coruty. Reomtly, there has 

booa muoh displto in the coumty as to whether or mot bear oould legally be 

brought irto this oamp md there oonmmed by the soldier8 of the U. 8. 

Andy ud the prisomro of kr. Baoause of this diapnte b&woe8 the U. 6. 

offf~ers amd the offiaiale of ths mu&y, I hereby oertify the following 

question of law to your offimr 

9. 

“2. 

9. 

“4.’ 

US6 

Is it lawful for hoer to be brought ixbo a prisoner of war oamp, 

auoh amp beiag looated in a dry ooulty, ad tbero oo~smwd w 

ooldiers and prisonen of war? 

IB the emmt you answer queaticm 080 'yqr*, thr in it lawful for 

suoh beer to be *ought into tbia oamp b,ooxmuon earrisr? 

IS it lawful for liquor, aa dofined in 'our per1 coda, Art. 66642, 

$0 be brought imto suoh prisoner of rr oamp either B their own 

vehioles or by man08 oarrisr*? 

Rhat effect, if any, will the faot that such beor is 3.2 boor barn 

up011 questiomr 1 ud 21" 

bf the 

The Vaitod Stat.8 havirg l o@rod laad i8 Shelly County for the 

gemoml govemt a8 a osnp for houalmg, bari% for and yardlag prlsaera of u‘haa the uaquastiomd power to makb auoh uma oftho 

proper$? a8 may be authoriswd by tie Aot8 of Co~grom or by offioers oftln 

govexaumt acting in purruaaoe of suoh Aots. If itk datennimdbypropor 

offloors that the cale of beer iu a ~~oessary or doeirablo maeuro for the 

otmfort, norentio8 or morals of mob prlsoaek8 ati the penopel thoreon, 

the Stats is without porer to iaferf'ors with iC, ffea Wwugb looated ti a 

dry area. We e~olore our opinion No. O-4458 wbioh dirourso8 the authoritim amd reaches the same oaclusiox ia am ualagoun situation. Joimsoa V. 

Yellow Cab Trantit CO., 88 k~w Ed. 663. 
Hon. Dave Molkill, Jr., page 2 (O-6213) 

Following the reasoaiag of our forum opihor sad that of tha 

6up~1110 c0UX-k Of the WtOd 8tate8, WO Nib, (1) that boor my lawfully 

b broughtixtothe campy (2)+hat sinooitis lawful,a oonnuon arribr 

may tramporb suah boor to distinatior; (3) Chpb vehioles of the governmat my traatport mob beers md (4) the fact that it is 3.2 beor makes 

no differonoe. Umlass prohibited By Aot of Comgress,tha Nle would bs 

applioable to all liquors, regardlessof alooholio oontsnt. 

Very t Nly yours 

ATTORBBY GENERAL OFTEXA6 

By /a/ Xlbert Hooper 

EHcdbregr 

AF'PRCVED OCT 6, 1944 

/6/ CarlOP Ashley 

FIBST LSSISTAW 

ATTORNEY GEBEBAL 

Ellmrt Rooper 

&mistsnt 

APPROVND 

Opiaior Ccmdttso 

By B.U.2. 

Chairmu
An official website of the United States government                

----

end of header

Census.govNewsroomReleasesCensus 2000

# Newsroom Archive

Skip left menu navigation                          - About the Newsroom
                          - Facts for Features
                          - **News Releases**
                          - Press Kits
                          - Tip Sheets

### Release Information

**CB01-CN.74**
**Contact:**  Public Information Office 	301-457-3691/301-457-3620 (fax) 301-457-1037 (TDD) e-mail: 2000usa@census.gov Statistical Information Staff Population Division 301-457-2422 e-mail: pop@census.gov

## FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  EMBARGOED UNTIL: 12:01 A.M. EDT, MAY 17, 2001 (THURSDAY)

## Census Bureau Releases Census 2000 Demographic Profile for Delaware

The U.S. Census Bureau today released the *Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: Census 2000* for Delaware, a one-page table providing Census 2000 data on age and sex distribution, race, Hispanic origin, household relationship and type, housing occupancy and tenure (whether the housing occupant owns or rents). 

The profile includes nearly 100 data items in all, plus percentage distributions.

In addition to the profile of the state as a whole, similar demographic profiles for counties, places and other geographic components of the state can be accessed on an embargoed basis at <https://www.census.gov/dcmd/www/embargo/embargo_demoprofile.html>. After the release time, go to the Census Bureau's online search-and-retrieval database *American FactFinder* <http://factfinder2.census.gov> or to its Demographic Profile Page <https://www.census.gov/census2000/demoprofile.html>. You will also be able to download the profiles from the bureau's file transfer protocol site <http://www2.census.gov/census_2000/datasets/demographic_profile/>. 

For information about how to order paper copies of Census 2000 demographic profiles, contact Customer Services Center, U.S. Census Bureau, 301-457-4100; or e-mail:<webmaster@census.gov>. 

For local context, contact the Delaware State Data Center, 302-739-4271; e-mail: <oshowell@state.de.us>.

CONNECT WITH US**********

                            - Information Quality
                            - Data Linkage Infrastructure
                            - Data Protection and Privacy Policy
                            - Accessibility
                            - FOIA
                            - Inspector General
                            - No FEAR Act
                            - U.S. Department of Commerce
                            - USA.gov

----

Measuring America's People, Places, and Economy

Is this page helpful?
YesNo

NO THANKS

255 characters maximum255 characters maximum reached

Thank you for your feedback.Comments or suggestions? 

PIO@census.gov
#### Lee PINKINS, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, Respondent.

No. 73-653.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Oct. 10, 1973.

Lee Pinkins, pro se.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Robert J. Landry, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for respondent.

MANN, Chief Judge.

Pinkins’ contention that he did not know of his right to appeal and was deprived of appellate review through state action is shown by the record. The trial judge failed to advise Pinkins of his right to appeal, as required by Rule 3.670, CrPR, 33 F.S.A. What the transcript does show, however, is “that the trial judge carefully and with respect for Pinkins’ rights determined that his guilty plea was voluntary. Accordingly, we must determine that he is entitled to delayed appeal under Baggett v. Wainwright, Fla.1969, 229 So.2d 239 but *578that such appeal would be subject to dismissal as frivolous unless there is something in the record as yet undisclosed and reachable on direct appeal rather than through petition for post-conviction relief under CrPR 3.850. We appoint the Honorable James Gardner, Public Defender for the Twelfth Circuit, as counsel for Pinkins and request that he respond to the rule issued herewith to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed as frivolous and patently without merit. Should there be any point in proceeding further, we will discharge the rule; if not, the appeal will be dismissed on the court’s own motion.

Habeas corpus granted; appeal allowed; rule to show cause why appeal should not be summarily dismissed issued.

McNULTY and BOARDMAN, JJ., concur.
#### AMERICAN TIRE CORP., Appellant, v. GUARDIAN TIRE SERVICE CO., Appellee.

No. 68-369.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

June 10, 1968.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
A H C E N E Z E M IR I,

Petitioner,
v . BA RACK H. OB AMA, President of the United States, et al ., Re sp on de nts . UNITED STAT ES DIS TRICT COURT

F OR THE D ISTRIC T OF CO LU M BIA

Civil Action No. 04-2046 ( CKK)

OR DE R (June 15, 2009) The Court held a

closed-se ssion St atus Hea ring in the above- captioned c ase on June 12, 2009. The Court set a sc hedule f or fur ther proc eeding s based on the a ssumption t hat the Guantana mo Review Task F orce operating pur suant to Ex ecutive O rder No. 13,492 has not made any rec ommendations–and the Review Panel in connec tion with the same has made no decisions–that would re nder unne cessa ry or otherw ise ineff

icient the fur

ther e x penditure of jud ic ia l and

pa rt y re so ur c e s in

thi s matte r. To e ns ur e that r e ma ins a c or re c t a ssumpt ion , it

is, thi s 15th day of June, 2009, hereby OR DE RE D that Re sp on de nts ’ c ouns e l sh a ll h a ve an a ff ir mativ e ob lig a tio n to a sc e rt a in whether the Guanta

namo Review Ta sk Forc e has ma de any rec ommendations reg ardingthe dispositi on of Petitioner and, if it has, to notify the Court of the same . I f a r ecommendation reg ardingthe disposition of P etitioner has be en made , Respondents’ counse l shall also have a n
a ff ir mativ e ob lig a tio n to a sc e rt a in w he the r t he Re vie w Pa

ne l ha s ma de any

de c isi on s in
connec tion with the recommendation and, if so, to notify the Court with the results of such decisions; it is further2

OR DE RE D that the obligations im posed on Respondents’ c ounsel pursuant to this Order
s h al l b e i m m ed i at e a n d

o n go i n g. SO ORDERED. /s/ CO LLEEN K OLLA R- K OTEL LY Un i t edS t at es Di s t ri ct J u d ge
EXHIBIT 23


Independent Auditors' Consent


We consent to the incorporation by reference in Post-Effective Amendment
Number 6 to Registration Statement No. 2-54429 on Form S-8, Post-Effective
Amendment Number 9 to Registration Statement No. 2-42388 on Form S-8, and
Registration Statement Nos. 33-23709, 33-23710, 33-54176, 33-64729, 33-
64731, 333-42915 and 333-66031 on Forms S-8 of A.T. Cross Company of our
reports dated February 10, 2000 (February 28, 2000 as to the last sentence
of Note L), appearing in and incorporated by reference in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K of A.T. Cross Company for the fiscal year ended January
1, 2000.


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Boston, Massachusetts
March 23, 2000
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 11(a)

                            Blue Wave Systems Inc.

                      Computation of Per Share Net Income
                   (in thousands, except per share amounts)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                             Three Months Ended
                                                                                                December 31,
                                                                                         1999                  1998
                                                                                       --------              --------
<S>                                                                                    <C>                   <C>
Basic Net Income Per Share:
 Net income applicable to common stock                                                  $   598                $    36
                                                                                        =======                =======

 Weighted average shares outstanding                                                     14,401                 13,028

Basic net income per share                                                              $  0.04                $  0.00
                                                                                        =======                =======

Diluted Net Income Per Share:
 Weighted average shares outstanding                                                     14,401                 13,028

 Effect of common stock equivalents:
  Options granted                                                                         1,080                    968
  Weighted average exercised options and warrants outstanding for portion of
   period, net of equivalent shares purchased at average fair market value                  551                      8
  Effect of using option proceeds to repurchase common stock at average
   fair market value                                                                       (306)                  (335)
                                                                                        -------                -------
    Total common stock equivalents                                                        1,325                    641
                                                                                        -------                -------
 Weighted average diluted shares outstanding                                             15,726                 13,669
                                                                                        -------                -------

Diluted net income per share                                                            $  0.04                $  0.00
                                                                                        =======                =======
</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           2,390
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      767
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                         85
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,865
<PP&E>                                          76,371
<DEPRECIATION>                                (11,012)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  70,466
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,036
<BONDS>                                         67,593
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        47,405
<OTHER-SE>                                    (46,568)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    70,466
<SALES>                                       (13,464)
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,189
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,096
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,408
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,229)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  2,519
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       290
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.01


</TABLE>
# C_2013219EN.01000801.xml

| 31.7.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 219/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.7.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 219/8

---

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

2013/C 219/05

Image

National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by Belgium

National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by Belgium

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the Community providing for the issuing of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national side features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

1

2

Issuing country: Belgium

Subject of commemoration: 100th anniversary of the creation of the Royal Meteorological Institute (Koninklijk Meteorologisch Instituut/Institut Royal Météorologique)

Koninklijk Meteorologisch Instituut/Institut Royal Météorologique

Description of the design: The obverse of the coin displays in its centre the number 100 with the first zero encircling the abbreviations ‘KMI’ and ‘IRM’ and the second zero representing a sun.

Isobars, raindrops and snowflakes are depicted to the left of the sun. The year ‘2013’ is displayed in the upper rays of the sun and the nationality ‘BE’ is indicated in the lower rays. The mark of the mint master and the mark of the Brussels mint, a helmeted profile of the Archangel Michael, are displayed under the ‘1’ of the number ‘100’.

The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Number of coins to be issued: 2 million

Date of issue: September 2013

---

(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1 for the national sides of all the coins issued in 2002.

1

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52).

2

---
Document

EXHIBIT 10.4

FOURTH AMENDMENT
TO THE
CATERPILLAR INC.
SUPPLEMENTAL EMPLOYEES’ INVESTMENT PLAN
Caterpillar Inc. (the “Company”) sponsors the Caterpillar Inc. Supplemental Employees’ Investment Plan (the “Plan”). The Plan was most recently amended and restated effective May 15, 2017 by a document dated May 9, 2017, and has since been amended on three occasions.  Pursuant to Section 9.1 of the Plan, the Company has reserved the right to amend the Plan, in whole or in part, at any time. By this instrument, the Company amends the Plan to update the definition of Director.
    1.    This Fourth Amendment shall be effective as of July 1, 2022. 
    2.    Section 1.1(l) of the Plan is amended in its entirety to read as follows:
“(l)    “Director” means the Company’s Vice President Total Rewards.”
    3.    This Fourth Amendment amends only the provisions of the Plan as noted herein, and those provisions not expressly amended shall be considered in full force and effect. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Fourth Amendment shall supersede the provisions of the Plan to the extent those provisions are inconsistent with the provisions and the intent of this Fourth Amendment.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Fourth Amendment to be executed as of 			
	9/6/2022

.
CATERPILLAR INC.


			
	/s/ Cheryl Johnson


Cheryl H. Johnson
Chief Human Resources Officer
8597295
#### Carolynn W. WALKER, etc., Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, DIVISION OF RETIREMENT, Respondent.

No. II-490.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 12, 1978.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 18, 1978.

*1292P. Kevin Davey of Douglass, Powell & Davey, Tallahassee, for petitioner.

L. Keith Pafford, Division Atty., and E. Douglas Spangler, Jr., Asst. Division Atty., Division of Retirement, Tallahassee, for respondent.

SMITH, Judge.

Ronnie Walker, a deputy sheriff employed by Leon County, was killed in a collision while driving his car home after completing his duty shift. The facts are as stated in *Walker v. Life Ins. Co. of North America,*359 So.2d 471 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). The widow’s claim for “in line of duty” death benefits under the Florida retirement law was denied by a Division of Retirement order reaching a different conclusion on facts found by a hearing officer of the Division of Administrative Hearings. The widow seeks reversal of the agency order.

We agree with the Division that Deputy Walker’s death did not occur “in line of duty.” That phrase is defined for present purposes by Section 121.021(14), Florida Statutes (1977), as follows:

> “Death in line of duty” means death arising out of and in the actual performance of duty required by a member’s employment during his regularly scheduled working hours or irregular working hours as required by the employer.”

We previously noted a similarity in the causative test employed in the workmen’s compensation law, Chapter 440, and in the retirement law. *Bolinger v. Division of Retirement,*335 So.2d 568 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). In *Bolinger*the principal issue was whether the retiree’s injury could be characterized as “arising out of” her employment, a causative test adopted from the workmen’s compensation law. Bolinger’s injury undoubtedly occurred “in the actual performance” of her duty, and there was no issue concerning that. Here that is the critical question. While “in the actual performance of duty,” like “in the course of employment,” is a test concerned with the time, place, and circumstances in which the injury or death occurred, those two tests are not identical. We do not conceive that the phrase “in the actual performance of duty” can reasonably be read to embrace the policeman’s exception to going and coming rule, established by decisions under the workmen’s compensation law. E. g., *Warg*v. *City of Miami Springs,*249 So.2d 3 (Fla.1971).

AFFIRMED.

BOYER, Acting C. J., and BOOTH, J., concur.
# C_2012199EN.01000201.xml

| 7.7.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 199/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.7.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 199/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6590 — Santander Consumer UK/Hyundai Motor Company/Hyundai Capital UK Limited JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2012/C 199/03

On 29 June 2012, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32012M6590. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32012M6590. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , 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.

Octo ber 1 5 , 2015 

# Order

Clerk Octo ber 1 5 , 2015

151382 (52)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

SC: 151382

v COA: 319039

Wayne CC: 13

- 002517

- FH

MAHER MOHAMMED NAWWAS,

Defendant

- Appellant.

____________________________________/

On order of the C hief Justice

, the motion of plaintiff

- appellee to extend the time

for filing its answer to the application for leave to appeal is GRANTED

. The answer will

be accepted for filing if submitted on or before December 22, 2015.