alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Balance
Sheet, Statement of Operations, Statements of Cash Flows and Notes thereto
incorporated in Part I, Item 1. of this Form 10-KSB and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           7,770
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  532,765
<ALLOWANCES>                                    80,000
<INVENTORY>                                    410,293
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,021,071
<PP&E>                                          19,435
<DEPRECIATION>                                 163,064
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,087,096
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,529,917
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        23,569
<OTHER-SE>                                   (445,821)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,087,096
<SALES>                                      6,222,484
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,230,022
<CGS>                                        7,694,140
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,136,585
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               118,209
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              28,514
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (906,585)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (906,585)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              (704,256)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (906,585)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.43)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.43)
        

</TABLE>
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Environmental Protection Agency

          - [ER-FRL-9040-9]

*Responsible Agency:*                     Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7156 or                     *https://www2.epa.gov/​nepa/​*.                

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements

Filed 08/13/2018 through 08/17/2018 

Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

## Notice

                    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment letters on EISs are available at:                     *https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/​cdx-enepa-public/​action/​eis/​search*.                

*EIS No. 20180187, Draft, GSA, CA,*                     Otay Mesa Modernization and Expansion, Comment Period Ends: 10/09/2018, Contact: Osmahn Kadri 415-522-3617                

*EIS No. 20180188, Draft, USFS, ID,*                     Crow Creek Pipeline Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Comment Period Ends: 11/23/2018, Contact: Mike Duncan 208-847-0375                

*EIS No. 20180189, Draft Supplement, NRC, LA,*                     Nureg 137 Supplement 59, Comment Period Ends: 10/09/2018, Contact: Elaine Keegan 301-415-8517                

*EIS No. 20180190, Draft, USFS, CA,*                     Stanislaus National Forest Over-Snow Vehicle (OSV) Use Designation, Comment Period Ends: 10/09/2018, Contact: Beth Martinez 209-288-6307                

*EIS No. 20180191, Final, USFS, PR,*                     El Yunque National Forest Plan Revision EIS, Review Period Ends: 10/23/2018, Contact: Pedro Rios 305-306-3805                

Dated: August 21, 2018.

Robert Tomiak,

Director, Office of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 2018-18331 Filed 8-23-18; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
STATE OF LOUl 1

SIANA 

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT 

STATE OF LOUISIANA, 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

& DEVELOPMENT 

VERSUS 

TANGER PROPERTIES LIMITED 

PARTNERSHIP 

NO. 2023 CW 0245 

MARCH 30, 2023 

In Re: Tanger Properties Limited Partnership, applying for 

supervisory writs, 23rd Judicial District Court, 

Parish of Ascension, No. 133723. 

BEFORE: GUIDRY, C. J. , WOLFE AND MILLER, J J. 

WRIT DENIED ON THE SHOWING MADE. 

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT 

DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT 

FOR THE COURT 

JMG 

EW 

SMM
#### Charles E. CARMEN, Petitioner, v. Honorable R. W. RAWLINS, Circuit Judge, Thirteenth Judicial Circuit of Florida, Respondent.

No. 73-159.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 7, 1973.

Rule discharged and petition dismissed.
#### Samuel L. BRENNER, Appellant, v. BARCO CHEMICALS DIVISION, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 67-622.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

April 16, 1968.

*278Joseph A. McGowan, Miami, for appellant.

Melvin J, Richard, Miami Beach, for appellee.

Before HENDRY and SWANN, JJ., and NATHAN, RAYMOND G., Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the defendant, Brenner, from a final decree which restrained him from engaging or entering into a business similar to that of Barco Chemicals for a period of one year in Dade or Broward County.

Appellant, Brenner, former sales manager of the company, argues that the contract between the parties had expired by its terms on August 6, 1965 and its restrictions from competing are not binding on him. The express terms of the agreement, however, provided in part:

> ******

> “In case the services of SALES MANAGER [Brenner] are retained by COMPANY after the expiration of this contract without formal contract, it .is hereby mutually agreed that the terms of this contract shall continue to govern the relations between COMPANY and SALES MANAGER. (R 69) * * *” [Brackets ours]

> 5jC % }}{ }JC >|<

The language of the agreement also provided for non competition by Brenner *“during the term of his employment by company and for a period of one year immediately following*the *expiration*or termination of such employment by mutual agreement.”

This provision differs from, and is distinguishable, from Storz Broadcasting Co. v. Courtney,1 where the court held “that the convenant relating to restriction against competing was applicable *only to termination of employment during the term.”*

The defendant herein wrote to the plaintiff on February 10, 1967 and tendered his resignation *as an employee*of the plaintiff. He left the date of actual termination to the discretion of the company but stated he would appreciate it if it were no later than March 25, 1967 (43 days later). It was accepted by the company, immediately.

Brenner claims that he is an officer, to-wit a Vice President, not an employee, of the company and that the contract as applied to him is void as against public policy. There is sufficient competent evidence in the record to sustain a finding that he was an employee of plaintiff and the contract is not void as against the public policy of Florida. See Fla.Stat. § 542.12, F.S.A.

We have considered the other arguments advanced by the appellant and the appellee in its cross assignments of error and find them to be without merit.

Affirmed.

1

. Fla.App.1965, 178 So.2d 40.
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas September 30, 2020 No. 04-19-00836-CV Al SUAREZ , as Mayor of the City of Converse; Jeff Beehler, as Place 5 Member, City Counsel of the City of Converse; Kathy Richel as place 1 Member, City Counsel of the City of Converse; Shawn Russell, as Place 3 Member, City Counsel of the City of Converse; Marc Gilbert, as Place 6 Member, City Counsel of the City of Converse; Le Ann Piatt, as City Manager of the City of Converse; Holly Nagy, as Secretary of the City of Converse and City of Converse, Appellants v. Katherine SILVAS , Appellee From the 438th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019CI22419 Honorable Mary Lou Alvarez, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Irene Rios, Justice The panel has considered Appellants’ motion for rehearing; the motion is DENIED. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 49.3

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 30th day of September, 2020.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
#### Warren Charles LOWE, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 43660.

Supreme Court of Florida.

May 21, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 274 So.2d 571.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, Mc-CAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

ERVIN, J., dissents.
#### Joseph MULLEN, Petitioner, v. CITY OF MIAMI (Self-Insured) and the Industrial Relations Commission, Respondents.

No. 43705.

Supreme Court of Florida.

July 13, 1973.

Certiorari denied.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ADKINS,- McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

ERVIN and BOYD, JJ., dissent.
#### Carlyle Ensley BOWERS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-390.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Aug. 22, 1973.

Walter R. Talley, Public Defender, Bradenton, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles Corees, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PIERCE, Judge (Ret.)

Appellant Carlyle Ensley Bowers was tried in the Polk County Criminal Court of Record for the offense of second degree murder, was convicted of manslaughter, and was thereupon sentenced to serve a term in the state prison. Thereafter, over four years later, he filed a post-conviction motion to vacate the judgment and sentence, which motion was denied by the court. He has appealed the order of denial to this court. The public defender, appointed to represent Bowers on this appeal, has filed a brief in this court on his behalf.

After reviewing the facts contained in the record, the public defender says in his brief that he “has carefully examined the record on appeal and can find nothing which would arguably support an appeal;” *583whereupon he moved to be permitted to withdraw as attorney of record for appellant, under the rationale of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493. The public defender has served a copy of said brief upon appellant Bowers and on August 30, 1972, this court entered an order giving Bowers thirty (30) days therefrom to file any additional brief he might desire “calling the court’s attention to any matters that he feels should be considered in connection with the appeal in this cause.” Prior thereto, on May 17, 1972, Bowers filed a pro se brief in his own behalf, which we will consider as being in reply to our order of August 30, 1972, aforesaid.

We have carefully examined the entire record on file here on behalf of appellant Bowers, including his own brief of May 17, 1972, and find nothing therein sufficient to justify a reversal of the judgment appealed. Accordingly the judgment is thereupon

Affirmed.

MANN, C. J., and LILES, J., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3328 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3328

To prohibit the United States Postal Service from expending any further 
funds in connection with instituting a new logo until such time as its 
      operations are no longer being conducted at an annual loss.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 21, 1993

  Ms. Byrne introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
               Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To prohibit the United States Postal Service from expending any further 
funds in connection with instituting a new logo until such time as its 
      operations are no longer being conducted at an annual loss.

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

SECTION 1. PROHIBITION.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the United States 
Postal Service may not, in any year, expend any amounts in connection 
with instituting a new logo if the total obligations and expenditures 
incurred by the Postal Service in connection with its operations in the 
previous year exceeded the total revenues and other amounts which it 
received in connection therewith.

SEC. 2. USE OF ANNUAL REPORTS.

    For purposes of this Act, a determination as to whether or not the 
condition under section 1 has been satisfied shall be made based on 
information contained in the comprehensive statement of postal 
operations required under section 2401(g) of title 39, United States 
Code.

                                 <all>
```
** **

**Exhibit 23**

 

 

 

 

CONSENTOF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

 

Weconsent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.333-108705 and 333-128071 on Form S-3 of our report dated December 18,2007, relating to the consolidated financial statements of John Deere CapitalCorporation and subsidiaries appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-Kof John Deere Capital Corporation and subsidiaries for the year ended October 31,2007.

 

DELOITTE &TOUCHE LLP

Chicago,Illinois

 

December 18,2007

 

 

61

----
U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government Skip to main content   end of header Census.gov Newsroom Releases Miscellaneous
 Newsroom Archive
 Skip left menu navigation
 About the Newsroom
 				Facts for Features
 				**News Releases**
 				Press Kits
 				Tip Sheets
 Release Information CB12 -TPS.91 **Contact:**  Public Information Office
301-763-3030
 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  THURSDAY, DEC. 13, 2012 A Look at the U.S. Population in 2060, Live on "America by the Numbers" Segment of C-SPAN's "Washington Journal" The U.S. population will be slower growing, considerably older and more racially and ethnically diverse by just past mid-century. Find out more on Friday, Dec. 14, 2012, at approximately 9 a.m. EST as Jennifer Ortman, a demographer in the Population Division at the U.S. Census Bureau, discusses U.S. population projections. Each Friday, C-SPAN's "America by the Numbers" segment features information from the federal statistical system. The program highlights the trends and allows the public to call in or email their views. More information on previous C-SPAN programs is available at <https://www.census.gov/newsroom/cspan.html>. **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
#### Frank BALBONTIN, Appellant, v. J. A. PORIAS, a/k/a Joseph Armando Porias, a/k/a J. Armando Porias, Appellee.

No. 67-553.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Feb. 27, 1968.

Rehearing Denied March 20, 1968.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
An official website of the United States government                

----

end of header

Census.govNewsroomReleases

# Newsroom Archive

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

## Manufacturing

The Newsroom site has been redesigned and relocated.  This is the archive area.

For the most current releases please visit the redesigned newsroom at:https://www.census.gov/newsroom.html

For previous press releases please contact the Public Information Office at 301-763-3030.

### 2012

                          - December 28:   Census Bureau to Provide Early Access to the 2010 Management and Organizational Practices Survey for Embargo Subscribers
                          - October  5:   New "How Do We Know?" Infographic Focuses on Manufacturing Day
                          - October  4:   A Look at Manufacturing in the United States, Live on C-SPAN's "Washington Journal" "America by the Numbers" Segment
                          - October  1:   Media Advisory — Census Bureau Participates in Manufacturing Day Oct. 5 in San Diego

### 2011

                          - March 28:   Quarterly Financial Report (QFR): Fourth Quarter 2010

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
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.6

                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

     We consent to the use of our report dated January 24, 2000, except as to
the fourth paragraph of Note 4 which is as of March 21, 2000, relating to the
consolidated balance sheets of CS Integrated LLC and subsidiaries as of December
31, 1999 and 1998 and the related consolidated statements of income, changes in
members' equity, and cash flows for the years then ended included in the
December 31, 1999 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Security Capital Group
Incorporated. Further, we consent to the incorporation by reference of the
aforementioned report in the registration statements filed by Security Capital
Group Incorporated on Form S-8 No's 333-38521, 333-38523, 333-32525, 333-38527,
333-38531, 333-38533, 333-38537, 333-48167, 333-38539, 333-61395, Form S-4 No.
333-61401, and Form S-3 No. 333-64979.


                                                                        KPMG LLP



New York, New York
March 24, 2000
Exhibit23.1 

Consentof Independent Auditors 

Weconsent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration Statement (Form S-8) pertaining to the HORIZON Pharmacies, Inc. 2000 Stock Option Plan of our report datedMarch 31, 2000, (except for the third paragraph of Note 7 (A) as to which the date is April 14, 2000), with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule ofHORIZON Pharmacies, Inc. included in its Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1999, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. 

/s/ERNST & YOUNG LLP 

OklahomaCity, Oklahoma
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 S.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Annual Report of Palm Harbor Homes, Inc. (the Company)
on Form 10-K for the year ended March 26, 2004, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Larry H. Keener,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350,
as adopted pursuant to §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 (15 U.S.C.78m
or 78o(d); and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company. By:
    
    /s/ Larry H. KeenerLarry H. KeenerChief Executive OfficerMay 3, 2004
#### Esther Simon, Plaintiff, *v.*L. Ingber, Known as Leopold Ingber, et al., Defendants.

City Court of the City of New York, Special Term, Bronx County,

November 23, 1953.

*884
      *Edward E. Hoenig*for defendants.

*Edward Scherer*for plaintiff.

Evans, J.

Motion for a reargument granted. I excluded from the bill of costs the sum of $159 paid by defendants to the Warden of Dannemora Prison for bringing Leopold Ingber, a prisoner, to testify on behalf of defendants in a case in which the prisoner and his wife were codefendants. The ground for exclusion of this sum ivas that defendants are not entitled to witness fees and expenses when one of them comes to court to testify in his own behalf, or in behalf of the defendants jointly (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1541).

It is now said that Leopold Ingber did not come to court to testify in his own behalf, but in behalf of his wife. The cause of action was upon promissory notes made by the prisoner and his wife. It was a joint and several liability. The defense was a joint defense of usury in one answer, appearing by the same attorney. The application to bring the prisoner as a witness (under Civ. Prac. Act, § 415) was made by the other defendant, not to bring him as a witness in her behalf alone, but in behalf of defendants. The order directing the warden of the prison to bring the prisoner down was not as a witness in behalf of the other defendant, but as a witness *“*in behalf of the said defendants ”. The prisoner was thus a witness not solely for his codefendant, but a witness in his own behalf, and a witness in behalf of the joint interests of defendants.

I think, therefore, that the defendants cannot tax as costs the expenses of one defendant coming to court to testify. Original disposition adhered to.
#### Phillip ETTINGER, Appellant, v. Claire M. ETTINGER, Appellee.

No. 70-908.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 22, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.