alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[No. 37209.

Department One.

May 20, 1965.]

#### Wesley R. Patton *et al., Appellants,*v. Robert Tubbs *et al., Defendants,*George Watanabe *et al., Respondents.****

*Schroeter, Farris, Bangs & Horowitz, Gerald L. Bangs,*and *Peter D. Francis,*for appellants.

*Elliott, Lee, Carney & Thomas, Nelson T. Lee,*and *Nancy Ann Holman,*for respondents.

*

Reported in 402 P.2d 355.

Per Curiam.

On this appeal from a judgment of dismissal of an action arising out of an automobile collision, only three assignments of error are made, and all relate to instructions.

1. The trial court properly refused to instruct on either phase of last clear chance;

2. The trial court did not err in refusing to give cautionary or limiting instructions, stating that certain statutory violations which would constitute negligence per se would not constitute negligence if the happenings were beyond the defendant-driver’s control. No cautionary or limiting instructions were proposed, as required by Rule of Pleading, Practice and Procedure 51.04W, RCW vol. 0;

*2843. The trial court should not have instructed, in a civil case, on the presumptions which arise only in a criminal prosecution1 from certain readings on a “breathalyzer.” *Mattingly v. Eisenberg,*79 Ariz. 135, 285 P.2d 174 (1955). However, there was no prejudice to the plaintiffs from an instruction that said that no presumption would arise that the defendant-driver was, or was not, under the influence of intoxicating liquor from readings between 0.05 per cent and less than 0.15 per cent by weight of alcohol in the defendant-driver’s blood. The plaintiffs had the benefit of the evidence of a 0.14 per cent reading and any arguments they could make therefrom. Neither party received the benefit of any presumption.

Finding no prejudicial error, the judgment is affirmed.

1

RCW 46.56.010, insofar as material, provides:

> “In any criminal prosecution for a violation of the provisions of this section relating to driving a vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, the amount of alcohol in the defendant’s blood at the time alleged as shown by chemical analysis of the defendant’s blood, urine, breath, or other bodily substance shall give rise to the following presumptions:

> “If there was at that time 0.05 percent or less by weight of alcohol in the defendant’s blood, it shall be presumed that the defendant was not under the influence of intoxicating liquor;

> “If there was at that time in excess of 0.05 percent but less than 0.15 percent by weight of alcohol in the defendant’s blood, such fact shall not give rise to any presumption that the defendant was or was not under the influence of intoxicating liquor, b'ut such fact may be considered with other competent evidence in determining the guilt or innocence of the defendant;

> “If there was at that time 0.15 percent or more by weight of alcohol in the defendant’s blood, it shall be presumed that the defendant was under the influence of intoxicating liquor. ...”
Instructions for KC-14 

REQUEST FOR TARIFF INFORMATION 

Warehouse operators use this form to provide tariff information for their Sugar 

Storage Agreement requiring tariff information. 

Submit the original of the completed form in hard copy or facsimile to the Kansas 

City Commodity Office, P.O. Box 419205, Stop 8748, Kansas City, MO 64141-6205; 

FAX number 816-448-5610. For questions or assistance, contact Commodity 

Management Division, Storage Contract Branch, at 816-926-2848. 

Features for transmitting the form electronically are available to those customers 

with access credentials only. If you would like to establish online access credentials 

with USDA, follow the instructions provided at the USDA eForms web site. 

Warehouse Operators must complete Items 1 through 6. 

Items 1-6 

Fld Name / 

Item No. 

Instruction 

1 

Warehouse 

Name and 

Address 

Enter the name and address of the warehouse operator. 

2 

Warehouse 

Location 

Enter the location of the warehouse if different than that in Item 1. 

3 

Contract 

Number 

Enter the storage contract number, and check box indicating whether the 

warehouse has dry or cold storage. 

4 

Warehouse 

Code 

Enter the warehouse code. 

5 A - B 

Tariff 

Item 5A. If warehouse publishes a current tariff, enter date of tariff. 

Item 5B. Check box indicating if warehouse does not publish a tariff. 

Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 5 (Tuesday, January 8, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 1198]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00153]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security


Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee; Notice 
of Partially Closed Meeting

    The Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee 
(SITAC) will meet on January 29, 2013, 9:30 a.m., in the Herbert C. 
Hoover Building, Room 6087B, 14th Street between Constitution and 
Pennsylvania Avenues NW., Washington, DC. The Committee advises the 
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration on 
technical questions that affect the level of export controls applicable 
to sensors and instrumentation equipment and technology.

Agenda

Public Session

1. Welcome and Introductions.
2. Remarks from the Bureau of Industry and Security Management.
3. Industry Presentations.
4. New Business.

Closed Session

5. Discussion of matters determined to be exempt from the provisions 
relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 Sec. Sec.  
10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3).

    The open session will be accessible via teleconference to 20 
participants on a first come, first serve basis. To join the 
conference, submit inquiries to Ms. Yvette Springer at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#2a73595a5843444d4f586a484359044e4549044d455c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="560f2526243f3831332416343f257832393578313920">[email protected]</span></a> no later than January 22, 2013.
    A limited number of seats will be available during the public 
session of the meeting. Reservations are not accepted. To the extent 
that time permits, members of the public may present oral statements to 
the Committee. The public may submit written statements at any time 
before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate distribution of 
public presentation materials to the Committee members, the Committee 
suggests that the materials be forwarded before the meeting to Ms. 
Springer.
    The Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of 
the General Counsel, formally determined on December 11, 2012 pursuant 
to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 
U.S.C. app. 2 Sec.  10(d), that the portion of this meeting dealing 
with pre-decisional changes to the Commerce Control List and U.S. 
export control policies shall be exempt from the provisions relating to 
public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 Sec. Sec.  10(a)(1) and 
10(a)(3). The remaining portions of the meeting will be open to the 
public.
    For more information contact Yvette Springer on (202) 482-2813.

    Dated: January 2, 2013.
Yvette Springer,
Committee Liaison.
[FR Doc. 2013-00153 Filed 1-7-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Inspected

by experts

Protected

by law

Inspected

by experts

Traced

from farm to store

Shaped

by public input

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

Final.pdf 7 2/23/2024 9:32:35 AM
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Wireless Telecom Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marc
Wolfsohn, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
'SS' 1350, as adopted pursuant to 'SS' 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

     (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) as applicable, 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 result of operations of the
Company.


                                                         /s/ Marc Wolfsohn
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         Marc Wolfsohn
                                                         Chief Financial Officer
                                                         May 13, 2003

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate
disclosure document.


                                                                              18
trans.bin
This decision of the New Mexico Court of Appeals was not selected for publication in 

the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Refer to Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the 

citation of unpublished decisions. Electronic decisions may contain computergenerated errors or other deviations from the official version filed by the Court of 

Appeals.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

No. A-1-CA-41483

STATE OF NEW MEXICO,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

ENRIQUE VILLAR,

Defendant-Appellant.

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF SANTA FE COUNTY

Mary Marlowe Sommer, District Court Judge

Raúl Torrez, Attorney General

Santa Fe, NM

Van Snow, Acting Deputy Solicitor General

Albuquerque, NM

for Appellee

Bennett J. Baur, Chief Public Defender

Kathleen T. Baldridge, Assistant Appellate Defender

Santa Fe, NM

for Appellant

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BOGARDUS, Judge.

{1} Summary reversal was proposed for the reasons stated in the notice of proposed 

summary disposition. Appellee has filed a notice with this Court informing us that they 

will not be filing a memorandum in opposition. No memorandum opposing the proposed 

disposition has been filed, and the time for doing so has expired. Accordingly, we rely 

on the reasoning contained in our notice of proposed disposition. REVERSED.
{2} IT IS SO ORDERED.

KRISTINA BOGARDUS, Judge

WE CONCUR:

JENNIFER L. ATTREP, Chief Judge

JANE B. YOHAEM, Judge
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S FORM 10-K FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         141,657
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   96,293
<ALLOWANCES>                                    12,714
<INVENTORY>                                    301,511
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               572,534
<PP&E>                                         985,397
<DEPRECIATION>                                 721,060
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 836,871
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          104,139
<BONDS>                                        207,659
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  2,361,440
<COMMON>                                       969,834
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,806,201)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   836,871
<SALES>                                      2,317,501
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,326,161
<CGS>                                        1,787,350
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,243,591
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 3,327
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              13,998
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 65,245
<INCOME-TAX>                                    15,071
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             50,174
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    50,174
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1253 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1253

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 13507 Van Nuys Boulevard in Pacoima, California, as the ``Ritchie 
                     Valens Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. RITCHIE VALENS POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 13507 Van Nuys Boulevard in Pacoima, California, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Ritchie Valens Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Ritchie 
Valens Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 16, 2019.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
116th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 1253

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 13507 Van Nuys Boulevard in Pacoima, California, as the ``Ritchie 
                     Valens Post Office Building''.
```
April 22, 2015

U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Management 

System 1200 New Jersey Ave SE 

Washington, DC 20590

Dear Sir or Madam,

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the Reform Act) 

and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Alaska Aerial Services, operator of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems 

(“sUASs”) equipped to offer on-demand commercial UAS operations for a host of industries and 

applications. These include:

• Flare stack inspection,

• Utility-power generation and transmission system inspections and patrolling,

• Pipeline inspection and patrolling,

• Filmmaking, cinematography, and videography,

• Precision agriculture,

• Wildlife and forestry monitoring,

• Aerial surveying,

• Construction site inspection and monitoring, and

• Public Entity Support Operations.

hereby applies for an exemption from the listed Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) to allow 

commercial operation of its sUASs, so long as such operations are conducted within and under 

the conditions outlined herein or as may be established by the FAA in the future in the Federal 

Aviation Regulations or official guidelines for operators at large, should those be less restrictive.

The name and address of the applicant is:

Alaska Aerial Services 

3875 Geist Rd Ste E #210

Fairbanks, AK 99709 

info@alaskaaerialservices.com
REGULATIONS FROM WHICH THE APPLICANT REQUESTS RELIEF

14 CFR Part 21 14 C.F.R. 45.23(b)

14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b)

14 C.F.R. 91.7 (a)

14 CFR 91.9 (b) (2)

14 C.F.R. 91.103 14 C.F.R. 91.109 14 C.F. R. 91.119 14 C.F.R. 91.121 14 CFR 91.151 (a)

14 CFR 91.203 (a) & (b)

14 CFR 91.405 (a)

14 CFR 407 (a) (1)

14 CFR 409 (a) (2)

14 CFR 417 (a) & (b)

AIRCRAFT AND EQUIVALENT LEVEL OF SAFETY

The aircraft requested for operation have been approved by other exemption holders and are as 

follows:

Aircraft Previously Approved Exemption Number

F450 11287

F550 11397

S800, S1000 11401

S900 11256

X8, AERO-M 11379

Alaska Aerial Services’ sUAS are rotorcraft and fixed wing aircraft, weighting 55 or fewer lbs. 

including payload. Such operations will ensure that the sUAS will "not create a hazard to users 

of the national airspace system or the public.”

The applicant requests to be allowed to operate under the typical 31 bullet point outline typically

granted to other Section 333 Exemption holders. This will ensure the required “equivalent level 

of safety” and offer an explicit outline as to how this will be achieved, and a justification of the 

request to be relived from the burden of the CFR’s previously stated.

PUBLIC BENEFIT

Approval of this request would benefit the public by allowing legal professional use of this new 

technology under FAA guidelines where safety is a major concern.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Alaska Aerial Services is made up of engineers, manned aircraft pilots, remote control 

aircraft pilots, and experienced UAV operators.

Sincerely,

Carl France

Alaska Aerial Services
<PAGE>
Exhibit 23

          Consent of KPMG Peat Marwick LLP to the incorporation of
          their report dated February 7, 1997, relating to certain
          consolidated financial statements of Brenton Banks, Inc.
          into the Registration Statement on Form S-8 of Brenton
          Banks, Inc.
     288
<PAGE>
AUDITORS' CONSENT

The Board of Directors
Brenton Banks, Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
Form S-8 of Brenton Banks, Inc. of our report dated February 7, 1997,
relating to the  consolidated statements of condition of Brenton Banks, Inc.
and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1996 and 1995 and the related
consolidated statements of operations, changes in common stockholders'
equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 1996 which report appears in the December 31, 1996, annual report
on Form 10-K of Brenton Banks, Inc.


                                       /s/ KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
                                       KPMG Peat Marwick LLP


Des Moines, Iowa
March 25, 1996
     289
<PAGE>   1

                                                                     EXHIBIT 11

                       CAPITAL INVESTMENT OF HAWAII, INC.
                                AND SUBSIDIARIES

                      Computation of Loss Per Common Share



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                        YEARS ENDED JULY 31,
                                                    -------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       1998          1997          1996          1995          1994
                                                    -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------
<S>                                                 <C>              <C>            <C>          <C>           <C>      
Loss from continuing operations                     $  (615,884)     (420,934)      (17,033)     (247,298)     (514,690)

Gain (loss) from discontinued operations                349,017      (426,050)     (356,325)     (560,628)     (908,763)
                                                    -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------

        Net loss applicable to common shareholders  $  (266,867)     (846,984)     (373,358)     (807,926)   (1,423,453)
                                                    ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========

Divided by weighted average number of common
      shares outstanding during the year              1,032,683     1,032,683     1,032,683     1,032,683     1,032,683
                                                    ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========

Loss per common share:
      Continuing operations                                (.60)         (.41)         (.02)         (.24)         (.50)
      Discontinued operations                               .34          (.41)         (.34)         (.54)         (.88)
                                                    -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------

                     Net loss                              (.26)         (.82)         (.36)         (.78)        (1.38)
                                                    ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========
</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

November 25, 2020

a1118 

# Order

Clerk November 25, 2020

161569

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 161569

COA: 353093

Ottawa CC: 19

- 042918

- FH

GARY AUSTIN EPPLETT,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 29, 2020 order of

the Court of Appeals is con sidered. Because defendant met the requirements in MCR

7.204(A)(2)(e), the trial court erred when it denied defendant’s motion to enter claim of

appeal. MCR 6.425(G)(1)(e). Pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to

appeal, we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration as on leave

granted of defendant’s resentencing argument.