alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Theron R. DURDEN and Lorraine T. Durden, his wife, Petitioners, v. COMPASS POINTS, INC., and Century 21 Compass Points, Inc., Respondents.

No. 88-201.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

March 10, 1988.

Robert M. Moletteire of Reinman, Harrell, Silberhorn and Graham, P.A., Melbourne, for petitioners.

Henry J. Martocci, Cocoa, for respondents.

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This matter is before the court upon a petition for writ of certiorari to the circuit court to review an opinion of that court acting in. its appellate capacity over the county court.

The county court originally awarded petitioners, landlords, possession of their leased premises. Respondents, tenants, appealed that award and won. In the meantime, pending the appeal, the landlords renovated and changed the premises after they had been vacated by the tenant who had not superseded the judgment.

After the landlords lost the appeal they were ordered by the county court to refund to tenants an amount of money alleged to have been rental overpayment and to change the premises back to the way it was before they made the changes and renovations during the pendency of the appeal.

Petitioners, landlords, then appealed that last order saying they should not be required to restore the premises to status quo and were denied their due process rights when the county court refused an evidentiary hearing in regard to the alleged rental overpayment. The circuit court on appeal reversed the order of rental refund *364because of the due process violation. We, by the way, quite agree with that ruling. The circuit court affirmed the remainder of the county court order. Based upon the argument presented to the circuit court upon the issue regarding restoration of the premises we must affirm that disposition because the opinion does not reflect any departures from the essential requirements of law. However, had the landlord presented to the circuit court a complaint that it had been denied due process because no evidence was permitted on this other issue and had the' circuit court not required a hearing regarding this issue, as well, then we would grant certiorari. Although nothing in this record suggested the landlords did so, we can see how they might have presented mitigation-of-damages evidence as well as preservation-of-the-property evidence to support a contention that they should not suffer a detriment for improving or re-renting the premises pending the appeal of the unsuperseded judgment.

The circuit court cannot be faulted for something not presented to it properly.

CERTIORARI DENIED.

SHARP, C.J., and DANIEL, J., concur.
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

18 CA 13-00759 PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, CENTRA, CARNI, AND WHALEN, JJ.

LINDA SINNI, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF PAUL R. SINNI, DECEASED, CLAIMANT-RESPONDENT,

V ORDER

STATE OF NEW YORK, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. (CLAIM NO. 114038.)

ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (JULIE M. SHERIDAN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

ALEXANDER & CATALANO, LLC, ROCHESTER (TIMOTHY R. MANDRONICO OF COUNSEL), FOR CLAIMANT-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Court of Claims (Diane L. Fitzpatrick, J.), entered July 10, 2012. The order denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing claimant’s claim.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in the decision at the Court of Claims.

Entered: February 7, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
### steam_record - Fw: Request for Extension of Time for Questionnaire - Plant ID 09522

-----Forwarded by Jezebele Alicea/DC/ USEPA/US on 07/02/2010 08:10PM -----

To: Jezebele Alice a/DC/USEPA/US@EPA From: "Kolarick, John" <jkolarick@libgen.com>

Date: 06/29/2010 05:59PM cc: Tom Favinger <tfavinger@cpv.com>, Joseph Michienzi <jmichienzi@cpv.com>, "Duff, Dan" <dduff@libgen.com>, "Pamela.Berner@N AES.com" <Pamela.Berner@NAES.com> Subject: Request for Extension of Time for Questionnaire - Plant ID 09522

Dear Ms. Alicia,

Liberty Electric Power received the Department’s request for the completion of the Questionnaire for the Steam

Electric Power Generating Effluent Guidelines. Attached is a request for an extension of time. Please advise on our
request at your earliest convenience.

Thank you,


# John

John Kolarick

Plant Manager

Liberty Electric Power, LLC

1000 Industrial Highway

Eddystone, PA 19022

Main: 610

‐ 872

‐ 2300

Direct: 610

‐ 872

‐ 8022

Fax: 610

‐ 872

‐ 7685 

### From: <Alicea.Jezebele@epamail.epa.gov>

To: <steam

_ record @ er g .com>, < j ordan.ronald @ e p a. g ov> Date: 7/2/2010 7:10 PM Subject: Fw: Request for Extension of Time for Questionnaire - Plant ID 09522

Attachments: Request for Extension of Time - Plant ID 09522.pdf 

### Pa g e 1 of 1

3/21/2011 file://C:\Documents and Settin g s\TMedle y \Local Settin g s\Tem p \XP g r p wise\4C2E39C0D

...
D-13. 2007 Ozone Plan, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, April 30, 

2007. (Because of the size of this document, please use the link below to view the 

document and related materials.) 

http://www.valleyair.org/Air_Quality_Plans/AQ_Final_Adopted_Ozone2007.htm
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 252 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 252

   Expressing the sense of the Senate that Rebiya Kadeer, her family 
   member and business associate, should be released by the People's 
                           Republic of China.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 2, 2000

Mr. Wellstone submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                   the Committee on Foreign Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Expressing the sense of the Senate that Rebiya Kadeer, her family 
   member and business associate, should be released by the People's 
                           Republic of China.

Whereas members of the Uighur minority population in Xinjiang, China, are 
        subject to ongoing repression and violations of their internationally 
        recognized rights of free expression, association, and belief;
Whereas on August 11, 1999, the Government of the People's Republic of China 
        arbitrarily detained Rebiya Kadeer, a prominent and respected Uighur 
        businesswoman well-known in the United States;
Whereas from 1993 to 1998, Ms. Kadeer was an elected member of the Provincial 
        People's Political Consultative Conference in Xinjiang;
Whereas in 1995, Ms. Kadeer was a delegate to the United Nations Fourth World 
        Conference on Women in Beijing;
Whereas the police have detained Ms. Kadeer previously and kept her under close 
        surveillance, threatening her because of the alleged separatist 
        activities of her husband, who came to the United States in 1996 and was 
        granted political asylum after publishing articles critical of the 
        Chinese Government;
Whereas on September 2, 1999, Chinese authorities formally charged Ms. Kadeer 
        with ``illegally offering state secrets across the border'', and she is 
        currently detained in Urumqi, the capital of Xinjiang;
Whereas Ms. Kadeer's son, Ablikim Abdyirim, and her secretary, Kahriman 
        Abdukirim, were also arbitrarily detained by Chinese security forces in 
        August 1999 in Urumqi, without any justification or evidence of their 
        involvement in criminal activities of any kind; and
Whereas on November 20, 1999, Ablikim Abdyirim was sent for 2 years to the 
        Wulabai Reeducation Through Labor School, without charge or judicial 
        review, in clear violation of international human rights standards, and 
        Kahriman Abdukirim received a 3-year sentence in the same facility: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, that the President should express to the representatives 
of the Government of the People's Republic of China the sense of the 
Senate that Ms. Kadeer, her family member and business associate, 
should be immediately and unconditionally released.
                                 <all>
```
#### In re EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH SPECIAL GRAND JURY SUBPOENA ISSUED TO Robert S. ATKINSON.

Nos. 87-KK-0571, 87-KK-0494.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 15, 1987.

In re State of Louisiana, applying for rehearing to the First Circuit Court of Appeal, Nos. KW-87-0205 and KW-87-0108; *10819th Judicial District Court, No. 2-87-433, Parish of East Baton Rouge.

Prior report: La., 505 So.2d 729.

Denied.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Miguel VELEZ, Bernardo Vasquez and Luis Carlos Quintero-Cruz.

No. 87-KK-2133.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 13, 1987.

In re Quintero-Cruz, Luis Carlos; Velez, Miguel; Vasquez, Bernardo Antonio; applying for supervisory and/or remedial writs; Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court, Div. “G”, No. 1904-87; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KW87-0779.

Denied.
III

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 31

Commending Archbishop Desmond Tutu for being a recipient of the Immortal

Chaplains Prize for Humanity.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 3, 1999

Mr. GRAMS submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

OCTOBER 24 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 22), 2000

Committee discharged; considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

Commending Archbishop Desmond Tutu for being a recipient

of the Immortal Chaplains Prize for Humanity.

Whereas the Immortal Chaplains Prize for Humanity was established by the Immortal Chaplains Foundation to

honor the memory of the four ‘‘Immortal Chaplains’’ of

World War II, Lieutenant George L. Fox, Methodist;

Lieutenant Alexander D. Goode, Jewish; Lieutenant

John P. Washington, Catholic; and Lieutenant Clark V.

Poling, Dutch Reformed;

Whereas witnesses have verified that during the approximate

18 minutes the United States Army transport Dorchester

was sinking on February 3, 1943, after being torpedoed

off the coast of Greenland, the four chaplains went from
2

SRES 31 ATS

soldier to soldier calming fears and handing out life jackets and guiding men to safety and when there were no

more life jackets, they removed their own life jackets and

gave them to others to save their lives and were last seen

arm-in-arm in prayer on the hull of the ship;

Whereas many of the 230 men who survived owed their lives

to these four chaplains, and witnesses among them recounted the unique ecumenical spirit and love for their

fellow man these four demonstrated;

Whereas the Immortal Chaplains Prize for Humanity was

created to ensure that the spirit of these Chaplains is

celebrated through a living memorial to be awarded to

those who have been willing to put their lives in danger

to grant assistance to persons of a different creed or

color;

Whereas Archbishop Desmond Tutu served as Chairman of

the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa, which performed a historical role and set a precedent

in revealing the truth about atrocities committed in the

past and providing the means of a peaceful resolution for

the pain suffered by that nation;

Whereas Archbishop Desmond Tutu continues to defend the

rights of the downtrodden of many nations, exhibiting

compassion to those of different races and religious beliefs; and

Whereas it is proper and desirable to recognize that Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s actions are in keeping with the

spirit of the ‘‘Immortal Chaplains’’: Now, therefore, be it
3

SRES 31 ATS

1 Resolved, That the Senate commends Archbishop

2 Desmond Tutu for being a recipient of the Immortal

3 Chaplains Prize for Humanity.

Æ
Rancho La Valencia, Inc. and Charles 

R. “Randy” Turner 

 From the 201st District Court 

 Of Travis County 

 Appellants 

v. No. 07-06-00157-CV  November 9, 2011 

Aquaplex, Inc. and James Edward 

Jones, Jr. 

 Opinion by Justice Hancock 

 Appellees 

JUDGMENT

 Pursuant to the opinion of the Court, it is ordered, adjudged and decreed that the 

judgment of the trial court on liability for fraud in the execution of the MSA is affirmed, 

but remand to the trial court for a new trial on the issue of damages, including the 

amount of punitive damages. 

 It is further ordered that appellants pay all costs in this behalf expended for which 

let execution issue. 

 It is further ordered that this decision be certified below for observance. 

o O o
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 17, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 2283]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-681]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Northern 
New Mexico

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of Open Meeting: Correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On December 20, 2011, the Department of Energy (DOE) published 
a notice of open meeting announcing a meeting on January 25, 2012 of 
the Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Northern New 
Mexico (76 FR 78909). This document makes a correction to that notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Menice Santistevan, Northern New 
Mexico Citizens' Advisory Board (NNMCAB), 1660 Old Pecos Trail, Suite 
B, Santa Fe, NM 87505. Phone (505) 995-0393; Fax (505) 989-1752 or 
Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4b26382a253f22383f2e3d2a250b2f242e2a27652c243d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e08d93818e948993948596818ea0848f85818cce878f96">[email protected]</span></a>.

Corrections

    In the Federal Register of December 20, 2011, in FR Doc. 2011-
32535, on page 78909, please make the following correction:
    In that notice under ADDRESSES, first column, third paragraph, the 
meeting address has been changed. The original address was NNMCAB 
Offices, 96 Cities of Gold Road, Suite 3, Pojoaque, New Mexico 87506. 
The new address is Cities of Gold Conference Center, 10-A Cities of 
Gold Road, Santa Fe, NM 87506. The reason for this change is the 
renovations at the original location will not be completed by the 
meeting date.

    Issued at Washington, DC on January 10, 2012.
LaTanya R. Butler,
Acting Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012-681 Filed 1-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### Frank WENGLASZ and Anna Wenglasz, Appellants, v. J.R. FENTON, INC., et al., Appellees.

No. 86-2980.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Oct. 9, 1987.

Douglas J. Loeffler, Clearwater, for appellants.

Ray Peacock of Peacock & Cope, Clear-water, for appellee J.R. Fenton, Inc.

DANAHY, Chief Judge.

The appellants, the defendants in a suit to foreclose a mechanic’s lien, appeal a final judgment of foreclosure. We reverse.

The appellee originally filed its complaint against the appellant Frank Wenglasz and another party not involved in this appeal. After a nonjury trial, the trial judge entered a final judgment of foreclosure.

Thereafter the appellee filed an amended complaint joining the appellant Anna Wen-glasz as a party defendant and also filed a motion for leave to amend, which was granted. Frank and Anna Wenglasz then filed together an answer to the amended complaint, asserting affirmative defenses.

Following a hearing on the appellee’s motion for summary judgment, the trial judge set aside the previously entered final judgment of foreclosure. Thereafter the trial judge summarily entered another final judgment of foreclosure, from which this appeal is taken.

The appellants’ issues on appeal question the propriety of the trial judge’s entering a final judgment of foreclosure after Anna Wenglasz was joined as a party defendant, without giving Anna Wenglasz an opportunity to be heard on the issues raised by her answer to the appellee’s amended complaint. Perhaps it is true, as the appellee asserts, that all issues involved in this proceeding were determined in the nonjury trial held before Anna Wenglasz became a party. Nevertheless, Anna Wenglasz is entitled to her opportunity to be heard.

*772Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.

RYDER and LEHAN, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
PARTNERSHIP'S STATEMENTS OF EARNINGS AND BALANCE SHEETS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         615,686
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               615,686
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,985,893
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          224,703
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,281,454
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,985,893
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                51,975
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,634,986
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,583,011)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (3,583,001)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,583,011)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
III

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 199

Designating the week of October 24, 1999, through October 30, 1999, and

the week of October 22, 2000, through October 28, 2000, as ‘‘National

Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Week’’.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 7, 1999

Mr. REED (for himself, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. TORRICELLI, Mr. REID, Mr. LEVIN,

Mr. WELLSTONE, Mr. LIEBERMAN, Mr. KERRY, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. SARBANES, Mr. DORGAN, Mr. SCHUMER, Mr. AKAKA, Mr. INOUYE, Mr.

CHAFEE, Mrs. BOXER, Ms. MIKULSKI, Mr. DODD, Mr. WYDEN, Mr.

CONRAD, Mr. GRAHAM, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. DEWINE, Ms. LANDRIEU, Mr.

JOHNSON, Mr. JEFFORDS, Mr. SMITH of Oregon, Mr. ROBB, Mr. FRIST,

Mr. CLELAND, Mr. ABRAHAM, Mr. BRYAN, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. SPECTER, Mr. BREAUX, Mr. BAYH, and Mrs. FEINSTEIN) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

OCTOBER 19, 1999

Committee discharged; considered, amended, and agreed to

RESOLUTION

Designating the week of October 24, 1999, through October

30, 1999, and the week of October 22, 2000, through

October 28, 2000, as ‘‘National Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Week’’.

Whereas lead poisoning is a leading environmental health

hazard to children in the United States;

Whereas according to the United States Center for Disease

Control and Prevention, 890,000 preschool children in
2

SRES 199 ATS

the United States have harmful levels of lead in their

blood;

Whereas lead poisoning may cause serious, long-term harm to

children, including reduced intelligence and attention

span, behavior problems, learning disabilities, and impaired growth;

Whereas children from low-income families are 8 times more

likely to be poisoned by lead than those from high income

families;

Whereas children may become poisoned by lead in water, soil,

or consumable products;

Whereas most children are poisoned in their homes through

exposure to lead particles when lead-based paint deteriorates or is disturbed during home renovation and repainting; and

Whereas lead poisoning crosses all barriers of race, income,

and geography: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Senate—

2 (1) designates the week of October 24, 1999, through

3 October 30, 1999, and the week of October 22, 2000,

4 through October 28, 2000, as ‘‘National Childhood Lead

5 Poisoning Prevention Week’’; and

6 (2) requests that the President issue a proclamation

7 calling upon the people of the United States to observe

8 such weeks with appropriate programs and activities.

Æ
#### STATE ex rel. James CLARK v. CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT, Hon. Frank Marullo, Judge, Sec. D.

No. 87-KH-0954.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 15, 1987.

In re Clark, James; applying for remedial writ; Parish of Orléans, Criminal District Court, Div. “D”, No. 278-791; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. K-7509.

Denied. No particularized need shown.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 151 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  2d Session
S. CON. RES. 151

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That in the enrollment of the bill (H.R. 2348) entitled ``An Act to 
authorize the Bureau of Reclamation to provide cost sharing for the 
endangered fish recovery implementation programs for the Upper Colorado 
and San Juan River Basins.'', the Clerk of the House of Representatives 
shall make the following correction:
            Strike section 4 and insert:

``SEC. 4. EFFECT ON RECLAMATION LAW.

    ``Specifically with regard to the acreage limitation provisions of 
Federal reclamation law, any action taken pursuant to or in furtherance 
of this title will not--
            ``(1) be considered in determining whether a district as 
        defined in section 202(2) of the Reclamation Reform Act of 1982 
        (43 U.S.C. 390bb) has discharged its obligation to repay the 
        construction cost of project facilities used to make irrigation 
        water available for delivery to land in the district;
            ``(2) serve as the basis for reinstating acreage limitation 
        provisions in a district that has completed payment of its 
        construction obligations; or
            ``(3) serve as the basis for increasing the construction 
        repayment obligation of the district and thereby extending the 
        period during which the acreage limitation provisions will 
        apply.''.

            Passed the Senate October 13 (legislative day, September 
      22), 2000.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
106th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                            S. CON. RES. 151

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

     To make a correction in the enrollment of the bill, H.R. 2348.
```