alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Interest of R.S., a child, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 87-1961.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Oct. 4, 1988.

Michael E. Allen, Public Defender, David A. Davis, Assistant Public Defender, and Donald Mairs, Legal Intern., Tallahassee, for appellant.

Robert L. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Edward C. Hill, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals his adjudication of delinquency for obstructing a police officer contrary to section 843.02, Florida Statutes (1987). We reverse, finding that the facts in this case do not rise to the level of obstructing a police officer.

The sheriff was called by an irate tenant at an apartment complex, about an altercation at the complex swimming pool. Appellant and others were being “rowdy” and splashing the tenants while they were trying to sun and read.1 Two deputy sheriffs responded to the call and talked to the complainant. The appellant and the others had left the pool area, but later were located in the apartment laundromat. Appellant and his friend were not placed under arrest nor were they advised that arrest was imminent. One of the deputies admitted that the appellant was not being officially detained and that he was free to leave.

The deputies attempted to talk to appellant and his friend. Appellant refused to answer any questions so the deputy turned to his companion to ask him some questions. Appellant told his friend not to answer the questions. Under the circumstances, the pair were free to decline to answer questions.2 The deputy asked appellant to keep quiet but she did not tell him he was free to leave nor did she ask him to leave. Appellant continued to advise his friend not to say anything. The deputy was frustrated in her questioning by appellant’s repeated admonitions so she placed him under arrest for interfering with her investigation. There is no evidence in the record that appellant made any physical overtures toward the deputies in any way. There is no evidence that he *1027was verbally abusive toward the deputies nor is there any evidence that he verbally threatened them.3 While his actions were frustrating and annoying, we are unprepared to say that under the circumstances of this case they sufficiently impeded the deputies so as to constitute a violation of this criminal statute. See generally, the cases collected in Annot., *What Constitutes Obstructing or Resisting an Officer, In the Absence of Actual Force,*44 ALR 3d 1008 (1972), including this court’s decision in *English v. State,*293 So.2d 105 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); compare *Johnson v. State,*433 So.2d 648 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). See also, *B.H. v. State,*505 So.2d 14 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); and *C.K. v. State,*487 So.2d 93 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986).

REVERSED.

SMITH, C.J., and JOANOS and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.

1

. Appellant lives with his mother at the apartment complex.

2

. *Jacobson v. State,*476 So.2d 1282, 1285 (Fla.1985); see also *Terry v. Ohio,*392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968).

3

. By our recitation of the absence of these facts, we do not imply that these facts must be present to constitute "obstruction.”
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Tommy Lee WHEELER.

No. 89-KH-1314.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 30, 1989.

In re Wheeler, Tommy Lee; — Defendants); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writ; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 89KW-0935; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “B”, No. 291-678.

Denied. The district court acted on June 2, 1989, finding that relator was competent to represent himself. Relator’s request to order the district court to provide transcripts of the multiple offender proceedings is still premature. Neither the transcription nor the record on appeal has yet been lodged in the court of appeal.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND 1995 IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                      <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 12-MOS                  12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                           JAN-01-1996             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                             DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                             0                       0
<SECURITIES>                                       0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      0                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                       0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                        0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   0                       0
<PP&E>                                             0                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                                     0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     0                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          5,500                   3,500
<BONDS>                                            0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                        0                       0
<COMMON>                                   1,090,150               1,090,150
<OTHER-SE>                                (1,095,650)             (1,093,650)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       0                       0
<SALES>                                            0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   0                       0
<CGS>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               2,000                 322,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (2,000)               (322,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (2,000)               (322,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0                       0
<CHANGES>                                          0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (2,000)               (322,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (.00)                   (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (.00)                   (.04)



</TABLE>
**Exhibit
31.1**


**Certification**





I, Antony
Crawford, certify that:





1.
    I
      have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of MC Shipping Inc. ("the
      Registrant");





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 officer and I are responsible for
      establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
      defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the Registrant and
      have;





a)
    designed
      such disclosure controls and procedures 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 annual report is being
      prepared;





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





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





5.
    The
      Registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
      most recent evaluation, to the Registrant's auditors and the audit
      committee of Registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
      equivalent functions):





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





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




6.
    The
      Registrant's other certifying officer and I have indicated in this annual
      report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in
      other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent
      to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
      actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material
      weaknesses.








March 18 ,
2005





Antony
      CrawfordChief
      Executive Officer
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Robert H. VIDRINE.

No. 88-K-0602.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 20, 1988.

In re State of Louisiana; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. KA-8047; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “D”, No. 309-528.

Prior report: La.App., 521 So.2d 472.

Denied.

DIXON, C.J., and MARCUS and WATSON, JJ., would grant the writ.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2444 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2444

  To suspend temporarily the duty on certain children's textile upper 
                               footwear.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To suspend temporarily the duty on certain children's textile upper 
                               footwear.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN CHILDREN'S TEXTILE UPPER FOOTWEAR.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00      Other footwear      Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                        with uppers of                                                     31/2011.......
                        textile materials
                        (other than of
                        vegetable
                        fibers), other
                        than house
                        slippers, other
                        than for men or
                        women (provided
                        for in subheading
                        6405.20.90)......

    (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 99.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



I, Glenn L. Argenbright, Chief Executive
Officer of SAFLINK Corporation (the Registrant), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) |  | the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Registrant, to which this certification is attached as an exhibit (the Report), fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and
| | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) |  | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.
| | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     
|---------------------
|Dated: March 28, 2003
|
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.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Fiscal Service

# AGENCY:

Financial Management Service, Fiscal Service, Department of the Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This is Supplement No. 16 to the Treasury Department Circular 570, 2011 Revision, published July 1, 2011, at 76 FR 38892.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Surety Bond Branch at (202) 874-6850.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice is hereby given that the Certificate of Authority issued by the Treasury to the above-named company under 31 U.S.C. 9305 to qualify as acceptable surety on Federal bonds has been terminated. The above-named company merged with and into American Contractors Indemnity Company (NAIC #10216) effective December 31, 2011. The surviving corporation of the merger activity is American Contractors Indemnity Company (NAIC #10216), a California domiciled corporation. Federal bond-approving officials should annotate their reference copies of the Treasury Department Circular 570 (“Circular”), 2011 Revision, to reflect this change.

In the event bond-approving officers have questions relating to bonds issued by the above-named company, they should contact American Contractors Indemnity Company at (310) 649-0990.

                    The Circular may be viewed and downloaded through the Internet at                     *www.fms.treas.gov/​c570.*

Questions concerning this notice may be directed to the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Financial Management Service, Financial Accounting and Services Division, Surety Bond Branch, 3700 East-West Highway, Room 6F01, Hyattsville, MD 20782.

Dated: March 9, 2012.

Laura Carrico,

Director, Financial Accounting and Services Division,  Financial Management Service.

[FR Doc. 2012-7304 Filed 3-27-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4810-35-M
----

----

|   | (1)               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      the Company. |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| February      13, 2009 | /s/                          |
|------------------------|------------------------------|
|                   | Richard      R Ivanovick, CA |
|                   | Chief      Financial Officer |

----
Exhibit 4.3(ii)
​
ECOLAB SAVINGS PLAN AND ESOP
2017
​
FIRST AMENDMENT
​
​
Pursuant to Section 10.2 of the “Ecolab Savings Plan and ESOP - 2017 Restatement” (the “Plan”), Ecolab Inc. (the “Company”) amends the Plan, effective January 1, 2017, as follows:
​
Supplement A, Special Provisions Applicable to Employees in Puerto Rico is amended by restating paragraph 6 in its entirety to read as follows:
​
		6)
	Highly Compensated Employee.  For PR Code purposes, “Highly Compensated Employee” means each Employee who:


​
		(a)	During the Plan Year for which the determination is being made was more than a 5% owner or had more than a 5% interest in earnings or capital of the Employer, determined using the controlled group rules as defined in PR Code Section 1010.04, the related entity rules of PR Code Section 1010.05 and the affiliated service group rules of PR Code Section 1081.01(a)(14)(B); or	

​
		(b)	Received Compensation during the preceding Plan Year from the Employer in excess of the PR Code Section 1081.01(d)(3)(E)(iii)(III) limit.	

​
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this instrument to be executed by its authorized officer on the date written below.
	​


	​


	​


	​


	​





	​


	​


	​


	​


	


	Dated:
	December 20th, 2017
	​
	ECOLAB INC.

	​
		​
	​
	​

	​
	​
	​
	​
	​

	​
	(Seal)
	​
	By:
	/s/ Daniel J. Schmechel

	​
	​
	​
	​
	Daniel J. Schmechel

	​
	​
	​
	​
	Chief Financial Officer

	​
	​
	​
	​
	​

	Attest:
	/s/ Michael C. McCormick
	​
	​
	​

	​
	Michael C. McCormick
	​
	​
	​

	​
	Executive Vice President, 
	​
	​
	​

	​
	General Counsel, 
	​
	​
	​

	​
	and Secretary
	​
	​
	​



​
#### Warren A. GOLDSTEIN, Mark B. Herman and Avram C. Herman v. Mitchell SERIO and Jack Serio.

No. 86-C-2523.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 30, 1987.

In re Serio, Mitchell; Serio, Jack; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. CA-5153; Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court, Div. “C”, No. 85-7038.

Prior report: La.App., 496 So.2d 412.

Denied.

CALOGERO, DENNIS and LEMMON, JJ., would grant the writ.
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**Certification
      Pursuant To**


**Section
      906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**





The
      undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies
      that:




1.  This
      quarterly report of Affinity Media International Corp. 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 operation of Affinity Media International
      Corp.


Date:
        November 14 ,
        2007
 By:
              /s/ Peter
                H.
                EngelPeter
                H. EngelChairman
                  and
                  CEO
                (Principal executive officer)


A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authentications, 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 Affinity Media International Corp. and
      will
      be retained by Affinity Media International Corp. and furnished to the
      Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### C.J. BITTNER, Appellant, v. Paul H. GEIER, Gene E. Greiling, Arlis Greiling, Appellees.

Nos. 86-3139, 86-3140.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 22, 1987.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 2, 1987.

Horton, Perse & Ginsberg and Mallory Horton, Miami, for appellant.

Beckmeyer, Mulick & Wolkowsky and Nicholas Mulick; Kenneth H. Smith, Taver-nier, for appellees.

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

PER CURIAM.

The trial court construed a real estate deposit agreement against the seller and awarded judgment in favor of the purchaser by the return of his deposit, and awarded the broker a sum representing the commission he would have received but for the default of the seller. The court also awarded each, attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to provisions of the agreement,1 and reserved jurisdiction to award attorney’s fees, costs and expenses incurred in collecting the judgment.

The seller appeals and urges error in the entry of judgment for the purchaser and the broker and in the reservation of jurisdiction to award attorney’s fees, costs and expenses incurred in collecting the judgments. We affirm the entry of the judgment and award of attorney’s fees to the prevailing parties to the contract, *Ritter’s Hotel, Inc. v. Sedebothom,*142 Fla. 171, 194 So. 322 (1940); *Brickell Bay Club Condominium Association, Inc. v. Forte,*397 So.2d 959 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); *Kendall East Estates, Inc. v. Banks,*386 So.2d 1245 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); *Silver Blue Lake Apts., No. 3, Inc. v. Manson,*334 So.2d 48 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), however, we strike the provision retaining jurisdiction to award attorney’s fees, costs and expenses incurred in collecting the judgment.2

Following modification of the judgment we affirm same as modified.

1

. (1) ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS: In connection with any litigation arising out of this contract, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all costs incurred, including reasonable attorney’s fees.

2

. The portion of the agreement cited in Footnote 1 does not provide for an award of attorney’s fees, costs or expenses incurred in collecting the judgments.