alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Huntington Hospital Association, Plaintiff, *v.*William R. Halaby, Defendant.

County Court, Suffolk County,

October 7, 1953.

*Hayt S Hayt*for plaintiff.

*Toas, Buck & Boot*for defendant.

Hazleton, Acting County Judge.

The plaintiff seeks to recover from defendant the cost of hospital services rendered his wife and child both before and after the accouchement. The defendant disclaims liability upon the grounds that he is not the father of the child, that when the services were rendered he was separated from his wife, that the hospital had knowledge of such separation and further that after the services were rendered, an interlocutory decree was entered armnlh'-ng the marriage.

Before I apply the pertinent rules of law to this problem, I must find the facts. Thus, I decide (1) the child was born of the union of defendant and his wife; (2) when the hospital rendered the services to the wife and child, defendant was living away from his wife, which separation continues; (3) the hospital before it rendered such services had been apprised by defendant of his separation from his wife and had noted *746the marital breach upon its records; (4) that an interlocutory decree annulling the marriage was obtained by defendant upon default of the wife in July, 1953.

We are not concerned here with hospital services rendered the wife only while the husband and wife were separated, with knowledge to the hospital. The services under consideration were not rendered solely to the wife but rather to the combined condition consisting of both the pregnant mother and child to which condition the defendant was a contributing party. The hospital services were both pre- and postnatal.

Unquestionably, the father is responsible for the medical services rendered his child after its birth. Should a different rule apply while the child is *in esse in ventre sa mere?*I think not. Concededly, prenatal care is not only for the welfare of the mother but also of the child.

Even though there had been no marriage and the child was born out of wedlock, the putative father nevertheless would be responsible for the lying-in expenses as well as the prenatal care of the child. (Domestic Relations Law, § 120; *People*v. *Fermoile,*236 App. Div. 388.) How then can liability for services rendered the wife be escaped upon the grounds that the parents were living apart when the pregnant mother needed hospitalization?

As to the interlocutory decree of annullment, I do not see how that decree entered in July, 1953, can affect conditions back in December, 1951, and January and February, 1952, when the services sued for were rendered.

Judgment, accordingly, as prayed for in the complaint is granted to plaintiff together with costs.
#### Billie Marie PARKER, Petitioner, v. Thomas N. KEARNS, Respondent.

No. 2308.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Sept. 13, 1968.

Certiorari quashed.
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Henry CAGE v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, et al.

No. 53084.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 25, 1973.

In re: Henry Cage applying for writs of habeas corpus, mandamus, certiorari and/or prohibition.

Writ refused. A hearing having been ordered by the trial court, relator’s application is now moot.
U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government Skip to main content   end of header Census.gov Newsroom Releases Foreign-Born Population Population
 Newsroom Archive
 Skip left menu navigation
 About the Newsroom
 				Facts for Features
 				**News Releases**
 				Press Kits
 				Tip Sheets
 Release Information CB11-TPS.14 **Contact:**  Public Information Office
301-763-3030
 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  WEDNESDAY, APRIL 20, 2011 2008 Immigration/Emigration Supplement Data These data focus on five migration-related topics - citizenship, year of entry, residence one year ago, residents and emigrants abroad and monetary transfers. The monetary transfers section, in particular, is noteworthy because it represents the first time questions on both the giving and receiving of these transfers were included on a large, federally sponsored, nationally representative survey in the United States. This supplement to the Current Population Survey was fielded in August 2008. The purpose was to provide additional data to improve the statistics on the size and characteristics of the foreign-born population in the United States. These microdata can be downloaded from the Census Bureau website. <http://www.bls.census.gov/cps_ftp.html#cpssupps>. **No news release associated with this report. Tip Sheet only.**
  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
U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government Skip to main content   end of header Census.gov Newsroom Releases 2010 Census
 Newsroom Archive
 Skip left menu navigation
 About the Newsroom
 				Facts for Features
 				**News Releases**
 				Press Kits
 				Tip Sheets
 Release Information CB11-CN.141 **Contact:**  Public Information Office
301-763-3030
 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  TUESDAY, MAY 17, 2011 Media Advisory — Census Bureau to Release 2010 Census Demographic Profiles for Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Vermont, Virginia and the United States What:
 The demographic profiles include data on age and sex distributions, race, Hispanic or Latino origin, household relationship and type, the group quarters population, housing occupancy (including vacancy status) and tenure (whether the housing occupant owns or rents).
 When:
 To apply for embargo access, go to our Newsroom at <https://www.census.gov/newsroom> and click on “Embargoed Releases.” Please review the Embargo Policy carefully before submitting the embargo registration form.
 **Online Press Kit:** 
For more information about the release of the Demographic Profiles, please visit <http://2010.census.gov/news/press-kits/demographic-profiles.html>. Follow @uscensusbureau on Twitter, Facebook, Flickr, YouTube and Ustream.
  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
# C_2013036EN.01001301.xml

| 8.2.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 36/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.2.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 36/13

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

7 February 2013

2013/C 36/06

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3546 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 126,88 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4605 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,86240 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,6339 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2312 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,4350 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,275 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 294,35 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6998 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1885 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4103 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,3940 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,3135 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3488 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,5067 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6241 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6775 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 479,03 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 12,0740 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,4420 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5790 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 13 144,55 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,2002 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 55,058 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 40,6910 |
| THB | Thai baht | 40,340 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,6881 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 17,1761 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 72,1800 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3546

JPY

Japanese yen

126,88

DKK

Danish krone

7,4605

GBP

Pound sterling

0,86240

SEK

Swedish krona

8,6339

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2312

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,4350

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,275

HUF

Hungarian forint

294,35

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6998

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1885

RON

Romanian leu

4,4103

TRY

Turkish lira

2,3940

AUD

Australian dollar

1,3135

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3488

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,5067

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6241

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6775

KRW

South Korean won

1 479,03

ZAR

South African rand

12,0740

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,4420

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5790

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

13 144,55

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,2002

PHP

Philippine peso

55,058

RUB

Russian rouble

40,6910

THB

Thai baht

40,340

BRL

Brazilian real

2,6881

MXN

Mexican peso

17,1761

INR

Indian rupee

72,1800

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-18-00051-CR

Alberto SANCHEZ,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017CR0864A

Honorable Lorina I. Rummel, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

Delivered and Filed: February 28, 2018

DISMISSED

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal and for expedited issuance of the 

mandate. The motion is granted, and this appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a). We 

order the clerk of this court to immediately issue the mandate. See TEX. R. APP. P. 18.1(c).

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v. 

DAVID CROSBY, 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-30119 

D.C. No. 1:16-cr-00009-SPW-1 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Montana

Susan P. Watters, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted August 27, 2018

Seattle, Washington

Before: HAWKINS, McKEOWN, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

David Crosby appeals his jury trial conviction for failure to register as a sexoffender, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2250. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 

1291, and affirm.

Crosby contends that the prosecutor engaged in improper witness vouching 

during closing and rebuttal arguments. Because Crosby did not object to the 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

FILED

SEP 6 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 17-30119 

prosecutor’s statements during the trial, “we review under the more deferential plain 

error standard.” See United States v. Ruiz, 710 F.3d 1077, 1082 (9th Cir. 2013) 

(quoting United States v. Wright, 625 F.3d 583, 610 (9th Cir. 2010)).

The prosecutor’s statement that the government’s witness, Stephanie Harman,

had no “dog in the fight” and submission that it was reasonable to believe Ms. 

Harman testified truthfully did not cross the line. We have previously held that 

statements, analogous to the prosecutor’s statement here, regarding a witness’ 

motive to lie did not amount to vouching. See United States v. Wilkes, 662 F.3d 524, 

540 (9th Cir. 2011); United States v. Nash, 115 F.3d 1431, 1439 (9th Cir. 1997). 

The prosecutor’s submission that it was reasonable to believe Ms. Harman 

testified truthfully, viewed in context, was an argument of “inference from evidence 

in the record” rather than vouching. United States v. Necoechea, 986 F.2d 1273, 

1279 (9th Cir. 1993). A prosecutor has “considerable leeway” to argue reasonable 

inferences from the evidence, United States v. Tucker, 641 F.3d 1110, 1120 (9th Cir. 

2011) (citation omitted), and the statements here did not place “[the government’s] 

own prestige behind the witness” or “indicat[e] that extrinsic information not 

presented in court support[ed] the witness’ testimony,” United States v. Simtob, 901 

F.2d 799, 805 (9th Cir. 1990).

Even if vouching did occur, Crosby has not “demonstrate[d] a reasonable 

probability that he wouldn’t have been found guilty had the error not occurred.” See 
3 17-30119 

United States v. Rangel-Guzman, 752 F.3d 1222, 1225–26 (9th Cir. 2014). The 

record demonstrates that (1) the government offered sufficient evidence aside from 

Ms. Harman’s testimony; (2) the prosecutor’s statements followed the defense’s 

attack on Ms. Harman’s testimony; and (3) the jury was properly instructed on its 

duty to evaluate witness credibility and the appropriate considerations for doing so. 

AFFIRMED.
# C_2014026EN.01000202.xml

| 29.1.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 26/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.1.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 26/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.7007 — RZB/RBSPK/RWBB)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2014/C 26/04

On 4 November 2013, 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 German 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 32013M7007. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32013M7007. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 19

- 00284

- CR

K IRK A LAN P EARSON

, Appellant

V

.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS §

§

§

§

§

§ On Appeal from

County Criminal Court No. 2

o f Tarrant County ( 1522986 )

September 03 , 2020

Opinion by Justice Gabriel

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no reversible error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the ju dgment

of the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Lee G abriel

Justice Lee Gabriel
260 La. 123

#### Mertice MAXEY v. AETNA CASUALTY & SURETY COMPANY et al.

No. 51928.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 2, 1971.

In re: Mertice Maxey applying for cer-tiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Sabine. 255 So.2d 120.

Writ refused. The result is correct.
# C_2013159EN.01000201.xml

| 5.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 159/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 159/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

4 June 2013

2013/C 159/02

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3092 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 131,28 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4545 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,85580 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,5704 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2397 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,5975 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,775 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 291,53 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7019 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2365 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,3960 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,4518 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,3538 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3510 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,1612 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6290 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6382 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 468,61 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 12,7074 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,0237 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5365 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 836,54 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,0513 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 54,816 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 41,7513 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,813 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,7749 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,6649 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 73,9630 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3092

JPY

Japanese yen

131,28

DKK

Danish krone

7,4545

GBP

Pound sterling

0,85580

SEK

Swedish krona

8,5704

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2397

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,5975

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,775

HUF

Hungarian forint

291,53

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7019

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2365

RON

Romanian leu

4,3960

TRY

Turkish lira

2,4518

AUD

Australian dollar

1,3538

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3510

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,1612

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6290

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6382

KRW

South Korean won

1 468,61

ZAR

South African rand

12,7074

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,0237

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5365

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 836,54

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,0513

PHP

Philippine peso

54,816

RUB

Russian rouble

41,7513

THB

Thai baht

39,813

BRL

Brazilian real

2,7749

MXN

Mexican peso

16,6649

INR

Indian rupee

73,9630

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
# C_2013319EN.01000202.xml

| 5.11.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 319/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.11.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 319/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.7059 — Koch Industries/Molex)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2013/C 319/04

On 22 October 2013, 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 32013M7059. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32013M7059. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---
### _ , UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 2 290 BROADWAY NEWYORK, NY 10007-1866 David Park Division of Air Resources New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Abatement Planning 50 Wolf Road Albany, New York 12233-0001 RE : Adjusted Three Year Average for Madison Avenue Dear D ave, As you know, 40 CFR, Part 50 Appendix K, requires that when determining attainment of the NAAQS for a PM10 nonattainment area, a capture rate of at least 75% for each quarter of the three years used to make the determination is required. According to the AIRS database, for Madison Avenue, the third quarter of 1992 did not meet the 75% criteria rate. Therefore, an adjustment needs to be made to fill-in the data for that quarter. NYSDEC will have to submit this adjusted average as part of the redesignation request. Appendix K outlines this adjustment, but I'm enclosing EPA's step by step guidance on calculating this adjustment, "Guideline on Exceptions to Data Requirements for Determining Attainment of Particulate Matter Standards". I used these guidelines and did a quick calculation of the adjusted three-year average for Madison Avenue for 1992-1994, which I've determined to be 50.2 ugjm3 . My notes are also enclosed. I'm also enclosing an example from another Region II PMlO nonattainment area to demonstrate how the calculation should be done and certain assumptions that have to be identified. Call me if you have any questions.

**S~ncerely,**

**,.**... !' ) I . . I ' 

## /
**tutfi~** 

## /. . • I /._;__.(./ Kristeen Ga



# fn**~** 

# 0 Air Programs Branch Enclosures cc: R. Werner

Recycled/Recycllbl&•PrintedwithVegetable01BasedInks on 100"/. RecycledPaper ( 40%Postconsu mer )
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000949859
<NAME>                        CFC INTERNATIONAL, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         $1,314,968
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  11,895,228
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,003,596)
<INVENTORY>                                    12,531,013
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                3,404,226
<PP&E>                                         43,673,115
<DEPRECIATION>                                (17,205,969)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 61,065,218
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          22,138,275
<BONDS>                                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                       11,744,309
<OTHER-SE>                                              0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   61,065,218
<SALES>                                        36,059,374
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               36,059,374
<CGS>                                          17,785,365
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  31,795,082
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  295,308
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                1,113,745
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                537,079
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 2,318,160
<INCOME-TAX>                                      775,829
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             1,542,331
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                    1,542,331
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0.16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0.15


</TABLE>