alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### F. W. Frisbee and another *vs.*Horace Poole and others.

November 20, 1884.

Mortgage — Future Advances.

This action was brought in the district court for Mower county, to have a certain mortgage made to defendants declared satisfied, and discharged of record, and to restrain foreclosure by defendants. The complaint alleged that the mortgage was given as collateral security to certain book-accounts, which had been fully paid. The answer alleged that the mortgage was given to secure an indebtedness existing at its date, amounting to $630; and also to secure such future indebtedness as might be incurred by the mortgagor by the purchase of goods from the defendants; that after the date and delivery of the mortgage, purchases were made by the mortgagor amounting to $986, which sum was secured by the mortgage, and that of these two-amounts there was still unpaid the sum of $445.

The action was tried by the court, *Parmer,*J., presiding, who found that the contract referred to in the clause of the mortgage which is quoted in the opinion had been lost, and did not provide for future advances of any character, and that the indebtedness secured by the mortgage was fully paid. Judgment was ordered for plaintiffs, and defendants appeal from an order refusing a new trial.

*Thayer é Hibner*and *H. B. Wells,*for appellants.

*Joseph McKnight,*for respondents.

*By the Court.*

The terms of the mortgage are as follows: “This-mortgage is given as collateral security to the payment of certain, book-accounts, *according to the terms of a certain contract bearing even date herewith,*executed by the parties of the second part.” There is-nothing on the face of the mortgage itself showing that it was to secure future advances. The court, upon a substantial conflict of evidence on that point, finds as a fact that the contract referred to in the mortgage (which had been lost) did not provide for future advances-to the mortgagor. This is conclusive that the mortgage does not se*412•cure future advances. It is therefore unnecessary to consider any other questions.

Order affirmed.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Trent L. WELLS.

No. 89-KO-0484.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 30, 1989.

In re Wells, Trent L.; — Defendants); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writs; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. KA-6451; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “G”, No. 304-528.

Prior report: La.App., 538 So.2d 1053.

Denied.
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2316 

To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on alpha Oxy Naphthoic Acid. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 29, 2009 

Mr. BROWN (for himself and Mr. VOINOVICH) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on alpha Oxy 

Naphthoic Acid. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ALPHA OXY NAPHTHOIC ACID. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.25.19 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 alpha Oxy Naphthoic Acid) is amended by striking the 

7 date in the effective column period and inserting ‘‘12/31/ 

8 2011’’. 

9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

10 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2316 IS

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

# **CONSENT OF INDEPENDENTREGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporationby reference in Registration Statements No. 333-61101, as amended; No.333-35051; and No. 333-88216 of Hearst-Argyle Television, Inc. on Form S-3, and inRegistration Statements No. 333-115280; No. 333-115279; No. 333-75709; and No. 333-35043 of Hearst-Argyle Television, Inc. on Form S-8,of our reports dated February 23, 2006, relating to the consolidated financialstatements and financial statement schedule of Hearst-Argyle Television, Inc.and management’s report on the effectiveness of internal control over financialreporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Hearst-ArgyleTelevision, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2005.

 
| /s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP |   |
|-------------------------------|--------|
|                          |
| New York,  New York           |
| February 23,  2006            |

 

----
INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT CBI: No
PMN: 09-0436 Post-Focus Draft Revision 1 8/6/2009

ENGINEER: Hall \ CPW PV (kg/yr):

Revision Notes / Assessment Overview:

SUBMITTER:

USE:

OTHER USES:

MSDS: Yes Label: No

Gen Eqpt: use with adequate ventilation / nitrile or neoprene gloves / safety glasses Respirator: Use NIOSH/MSHA approved respirator with a combination organic vapor and high efficiency filter cartridge if recommended exposure limit is exceeded. Use self-contained breathing apparatus for entry into confined space, for other poorly ventilated areas and for large spill clean-up sites.
Health Effects: no known health hazards TLV/PEL: none established for PMN

CRSS : Chemical Name: S-H20: g/L @

VP: torr @ MW: 0.00%<500 0.00%<1000 Physical State and Misc CRSS Info:

Consumer Use:

SAT (concerns) (07/01/2009): Migration to groundwater: PBT rating: P3B1T1
Health: 1-2
Eco: 2

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING:

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

POLLUTION PREVENTION CONSIDERATIONS:

EXPOSURE-BASED REVIEW:

1) # of workers exposed: >1000? 2) >100 workers with >10 mg/day inhalation exposure: 3) (a) >100 workers w/1-10 mg/day inh. exp. & >100 days/yr: (b) Routine Dermal Cont: >250 workers & >100 days/yr:INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT CBI: No
PMN: 09-0436

Number of Sites/ Location: Days/yr: Basis:

Process Description:

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES ESTIMATE SUMMARY IRER Note: The daily releases listed for any source below may coincide with daily releases from the other sources to the same medium.

RELEASE TOTAL

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

Inhalation:

Dermal:
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2330 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain woven mesh fabric. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 29, 2009 

Mr. KERRY (for himself and Mr. KIRK) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain woven mesh 

fabric. 

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

3 SECTION 1. WOVEN MESH FABRIC. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Woven mesh fabric, certified 

by the importer as made of 

perfluoroalkoxy copolymer 

resin formed into fibers 

measuring 100 to 120 microns in diameter (provided 

for in subheading 

5407.71.00) ........................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2330 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 

3 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day 

4 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Antoney White, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Heller, J.), rendered June 6, 1989, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Although the trial court erred in refusing to allow the defendant to answer several questions pertaining to his state of mind which were asked so that he might attempt to explain his flight from the vicinity of the crime scene *(see, People v Gonzalez,*92 AD2d 873, 874, *rearg granted, decision amended*96 AD2d 847, *affd*61 NY2d 633), the defendant was not prejudiced thereby since his flight was explained during the course of his testimony and during his counsel’s summation *(see, People v Dean,*162 AD2d 699, 700; *cf., People v Gonzalez, supra).*Thus, reversal of the judgment of conviction on this basis is unwarranted.

We have considered the defendant’s remaining contentions and find either that they are unpreserved for appellate review *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Flecha,*161 AD2d 116), or do not warrant reversal *(see, People v Alvarez,*135 AD2d 543). Brown, J. P., Kunzeman, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18
- 6187

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. DORIS FOSTER , Defendant

- Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville . Martin K. Reidinger, District Judge. ( 1:09

- cr
- 00013

- MR

- DLH

- 7 )

Submitted : July 26, 2018 Decided: October 2, 2018

Before MOTZ , FLOYD , and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion

.
Doris Denise Foster, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Doris Denise Foster appeals the district court ’ s order denying her motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) . We have reviewed the record
and find no reversible error. ∗ Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district

court. United States v. Foster , No. 1:09

- cr
- 00013

- MR

- DLH

- 7 ( W

. D. N. C

. Jan

. 24 , 201 8 )

. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED

∗ We note that the district court ’ s finding of fact on the range of cocaine base Foster possessed ( “ between 1.5 and 4.5 kilos, ” E.R. 811), straddles two categories of base offense levels under the United States Sentencing Guidelines. If the relevant amount of cocaine base fell under 2.8 kilograms, Foster may be eligible for a further reduction in her sentence. See USSG app. C, a mend. 782

. Foster, however, did not raise the issue in the court below, and so we do not consider it here

.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, David O'Neill, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Global Electronic Recovery Corp., hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)	the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Global Electronic Recovery Corp. for the interim period ended July 31, 2006 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)	the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Global Electronic Recovery Corp.

Dated:  October 20, 2006

/s/ David O'NeillDavid O'Neill
President, Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
EXHIBIT 31.3
 
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302
 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 I, David G. Zahka, certify that:
 
 1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Talk America Holdings, Inc.;
 
 2.  Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual report;
 
 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;
 
 4.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:
 
 a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, 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)  [omitted pursuant to the guidance of Release No. 33-8283 (June 5, 2003)]
 
 c)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
 
 d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and
 
 5.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
 
 a)  all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
 
 b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.
 
 May 7, 2004
 
 /s/ David G. Zahka
 David G. Zahka
 Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2387 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2387

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2,7-Naphthalenedisulfonic 
                acid, 4-amino-5-hydroxy-3,6-bis[[4-[[2-
        (sulfooxy)ethyl]sulfonyl]phenyl]azo]-, tetrasodium salt.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

  Mrs. Hagan introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2,7-Naphthalenedisulfonic 
                acid, 4-amino-5-hydroxy-3,6-bis[[4-[[2-
        (sulfooxy)ethyl]sulfonyl]phenyl]azo]-, tetrasodium salt.

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

SECTION 1. 2,7-NAPHTHALENEDISULFONIC ACID, 4-AMINO-5-HYDROXY-3,6-
              BIS[[4-[[2-(SULFOOXY)ETHYL]SULFONYL]PHENYL]AZO]-, 
              TETRASODIUM SALT.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.24.91 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to 2,7-Naphthalenedisulfonic 
acid, 4-amino-5-hydroxy-3,6-bis[[4-[[2-
(sulfooxy)ethyl]sulfonyl]phenyl]azo]-, tetrasodium salt) is amended by 
striking ``12/31/2009'' and inserting ``12/31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.2
SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                               SECTION 906 OF THE
                  Section 1.02   SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Annual Report of Brooklyn  Cheesecake & Desserts Company,
Inc. (the  "Company") on form 10-KSB for the period ended  December 31, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof, I
Anthony J. Merante  Vice-President  and Chief  Financial  Officer of the Company
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge, that

      (iii) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and
            Section  15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
            and

      (iv)  the  information  contained  in the Report  fairly  present,  in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company at the dates and for the periods indicated.

Date: March 28, 2005
                                      /s/ Anthony J. Merante
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                      Anthony J. Merante
                                      Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
required by Section  906,  has been  provided to Brooklyn  Cheesecake & Desserts
Company,  Inc.  and will be  retained by and  furnished  to the  Securities  and
Exchange Commissions or its staff upon request.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, March 24, 2020. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, March 24, 2020 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A20I0193. PHILLIP E. ESTES v. WHITNEY FARMER.
Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. The Clerk of State Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
LC NUMBERS: 19SV0448
#### Norman ZULAUF, Appellant, v. FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION and Universal Service Credit Union, Appellees.

No. 88-38.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Nov. 8, 1988.

Santiago G. Leon, Miami, for appellant.

John D. Maher, Tallahassee, for appellee Florida Unemployment Appeals Com’n.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HUBBART and JORGENSON, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Norman Zulauf appeals from a ruling of the Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission denying him unemployment compensation benefits. We reverse upon a finding that the Commission’s decision dis*891regards both the appeals referee’s findings of fact as well as applicable law.

Zulauf worked as an assistant manager for a credit union, a job which required bond coverage. He was covered under a surety bond issued to his employer. When his eligibility for continued coverage came under investigation by the bonding company, Zulauf s employer discharged him. The appeals referee specifically found that Zu-lauf was bonded at the time of discharge and that his subsequent loss of bonding was not due to culpable conduct.

Section 443.101(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1985), provides for disqualification from benefits when the employee “has voluntarily left his employment without good cause attributable to his employer-” This court has determined that the term “voluntary” functions within the statute as an initial test to show whether the employee “[became] unable to meet a known, understood, and accepted condition of employment.” *Adain v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Comm’n,*523 So.2d 175, 177 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (quoting *Florida Sheriffs Youth Fund v. Dept, of Labor and Employment Sec.,*436 So.2d 332, 334 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)). The record plainly discloses that Zulauf had not become unable to meet an accepted condition of employment, that is, bondability. He was fired, not because he lacked bond coverage, but because his employer feared he might lose the coverage. Zulauf, therefore, is entitled to unemployment compensation benefits. The Commission’s decision is reversed, and the cause is remanded with directions to adopt the appeals referee’s decision awarding benefits.

REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.
# L_2006346EN.01000501.xml

| 9.12.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 346/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 346/5

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1816/2006

of 8 December 2006

on the issue of import licences for high-quality fresh, chilled or frozen beef and veal

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 936/97 of 27 May 1997 opening and providing for the administration of tariff quotas for high-quality fresh, chilled and frozen beef and for frozen buffalo meat (2),

Whereas:

| (1) | Regulation (EC) No 936/97 provides in Articles 4 and 5 the conditions for applications and for the issue of import licences for meat referred to in Article 2(f). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 936/97 provides in Articles 4 and 5 the conditions for applications and for the issue of import licences for meat referred to in Article 2(f).

| (2) | Article 2(f) of Regulation (EC) No 936/97 fixes the amount of high-quality fresh, chilled or frozen beef and veal meeting the definition laid down therein which may be imported on special terms for the period 1 July 2006 to 30 June 2007 at 11 500 t. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Article 2(f) of Regulation (EC) No 936/97 fixes the amount of high-quality fresh, chilled or frozen beef and veal meeting the definition laid down therein which may be imported on special terms for the period 1 July 2006 to 30 June 2007 at 11 500 t.

| (3) | It should be recalled that licences issued pursuant to this Regulation will, throughout the period of validity, be open for use only in so far as provisions on health protection in force permit, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

It should be recalled that licences issued pursuant to this Regulation will, throughout the period of validity, be open for use only in so far as provisions on health protection in force permit,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

1.   All applications for import licences from 1 to 5 December 2006 for high-quality fresh, chilled or frozen beef and veal as referred to in Article 2(f) of Regulation (EC) No 936/97 shall be granted in full.

2.   Applications for licences may be submitted, in accordance with Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 936/97, during the first five days of January 2007 for 5 686,783 t.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 9 December 2006.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 8 December 2006.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 21. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1913/2005 (OJ L 307, 25.11.2005, p. 2).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 137, 28.5.1997, p. 10. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1745/2006 (OJ L 329, 25.11.2006, p. 22).

2

---