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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1998             JUL-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1997             AUG-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1997             OCT-31-1996
<CASH>                                           4,390                   5,112
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   34,334                  29,976
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,983                   1,536
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                53,979                  48,990
<PP&E>                                         118,108                 123,508
<DEPRECIATION>                                  30,734                  24,816
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 181,211                 156,673
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           26,014                  23,982
<BONDS>                                         55,258                  58,868
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                           421                     420
<OTHER-SE>                                      96,882                  71,813
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   181,211                 156,673
<SALES>                                         40,810                  35,615
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                42,324                  35,942
<CGS>                                           12,461                  11,147
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   26,619                  23,569
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   390                     171
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,122                   1,011
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 14,193                  11,191
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,642                   4,604
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,551                   6,587
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                   (482)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,551                       0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .48                     .35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .48                     .35
        

</TABLE>
#### New Haven Clock and Watch Co., Plaintiff, *v.*McLean Development Laboratories, Inc., Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County,

January 28, 1959.

*Alfred, Rice*for defendant.

*S. David Leibowitt*for plaintiff.

Aron Steuer, J.

Defendant moves to vacate a warrant of attachment on the ground that the statement in the affidavit “over and above all counterclaims known to defendant ” is false. Both the facts and the law are quite clear. Defendant owed plaintiff over $22,000 of which he paid $10,000. On being asked for the balance he called attention to the fact that he had claims, some $4,000 in excess of the balance. Plaintiff’s affairs were in confusion at the time and trustees in bankruptcy had taken them over. There were conferences and correspondence and the matter was left with plaintiff seeking to verify defendant’s claims in its books. The law is quite clear that an attaching *38creditor who is aware of a counterclaim asserted by the defendant must set it out and show how his claim exceeds that asserted against him *(Livingston*v. *Lakwits,*25 Misc. 119).

As against this plaintiff says that in the bankruptcy proceedings a plan of reorganization was adopted and approved by the court. In that plan unsecured creditors received stock of the plaintiff to the extent of 15% of their claims. The plan purported to bind all creditors, whether assenting or not. Defendant filed no claim and received no stock. It is argued that to allow defendant to assert his claim now prefers him over other creditors. Such sophistry cannot bolster a weak argument; it can even nullify a good one. It is true that the reorganization order might prove an impediment to the assertion of a positive claim but it could never operate to prevent a setoff.

The affidavit in support of the attachment gives no true picture of the situation and the attachment must be vacated.
**For fastest processing, please attach this form and a PDF shipping label in an email to DairySanitaryCerts@ams.usda.gov.

DA-246 (01/2013)

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program.  (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

 To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CENTEX
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY L.P.'S MARCH 31, 1997, FORM 10-K IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000818764
<NAME> CENTEX DEVELOPMENT CO.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                             625
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,233
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     38,918
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  42,978
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           500
<OTHER-SE>                                      33,003
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    42,978
<SALES>                                          9,026
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,026
<CGS>                                            8,307
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,307
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    719
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                719
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       719
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00
        

</TABLE>
##### 



Exhibit 32.4
  SECTION 1350
    CERTIFICATION OF
    AMEREN ENERGY GENERATING COMPANY
    (required by Section 906 of the
    Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)
  Form 10-K Form 10-K),
  (1)
    The
    Form 10-K
    fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
    15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m
    or 78o(d)); and(2)
    The information contained in the
    Form 10-K
    fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
    condition and results of operations of the Registrant.  Date:
    February 29, 2008
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    HomeExplore the Capitol CampusThe Art Collection
President's Room Chandelier

This bronze chandelier provides light for the President's Room of the U.S. Capitol.
        
                  The Basics
      
Artist
      
Cornelius & Bake

Materials
    Bronze

Year
    1864

Location
      
President's Room

U.S. Capitol Building

Hanging in the center of the President's Room is an elaborate 18-arm bronze chandelier embellished with allegorical statuettes mingled with figures of George Washington and Benjamin Franklin.

It was made by Cornelius & Baker in 1864 and cost $900. All other gas-burning chandeliers were removed from the U.S. Capitol Building following the gas explosion in 1898, but this one survived by being electrified. Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1424 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1424

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           November 13, 2019

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To amend title 38, United States Code, to ensure the Secretary of 
  Veterans Affairs permits the display of Fallen Soldier Displays in 
                          national cemeteries.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Fallen Warrior Battlefield Cross 
Memorial Act''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR FALLEN SOLDIER DISPLAYS IN NATIONAL 
              CEMETERIES.

    Section 2403 of title 38, United States Code, is amended by adding 
at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(d)(1) Subject to standards established by the Secretary, the 
Secretary shall permit the display of a Fallen Soldier Display in any 
national cemetery.
    ``(2) In this subsection, the term `Fallen Soldier Display' means a 
memorial monument in honor of fallen members of the Armed Forces that 
may include a replica of an inverted rifle, boots, helmets, and 
identification tag.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives November 12, 2019.

            Attest:

                                             CHERYL L. JOHNSON,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
28260

#### State v. Gomez

Affirmed
#### State v. Randles.

27087

11/08/2006

Rejected

112 Hawai'i 192, 145 P.3d 735
;l" 

St. Mary's Healthcare Center 

October 14, 2011 

Mr. Dennis DeVany 

Chief, Essential Air Service Division 

Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington DC 20590 

Re: Pierre, SD air service to Minneapolis and East 

Dear Mr. DeVany: 

+CATHOLIC HEALTH 

INITIATIVES" 

St. Mary's Healthcare Center is the only hospital in Pierre, the Capital City of South Dakota. We 

are also the only hospital serving 14 counties in Central South Dakota. Our health care center 

depends on quality air service to Minneapolis and points East for our employees, medical staff, 

visiting and temporary medical staff, recruitment of staff, patient and resident family visits, and the 

business of health care in rural South Dakota. 

This past month is a good example of how we depend on service through Minneapolis. We have an 

interim Chief Financial Officer who lives in Florida, and travels to work here for three-week 

periods and will continue to do so for about a year. We have had a visiting oncologist from the East 

Coast fly here for one week a month for six months. We have traveling nurses and other health care 

professionals who help us with medical staff shortages for one to six months, flying in and out 

usually through the Minneapolis route. 

Recruitment of physicians and other vital medical staff is a complex and difficult issue for rural 

South Dakota. Not having an eastbound connection will only further hamper our recruitment and 

retention efforts and this will affect our services and quality of care to our patients and residents. 

As part of Catholic Health Initiatives, St. Mary's Healthcare Center employees attend training, 

education, and conferences each month, with a majority of these flying through Minneapolis. 

Connections through Denver are often not timely for connecting to the East and South, which 

causes us to loose staff productive time and causes additional costs to travel. 

A spirit of innovation, a legacy of rare. 801 E Sioux Avenue Pierre, SO 57501-3323 
/ 

Mr. Dennis DeVany 

October 14, 2011 

Page 2 

We would urge you to reverse the Department of Transportation's decision that service to Denver is 

adequate essential air service. It is far from adequate for us to meet the schedules, connections, and 

travel costs associated with limited seats and flights to Denver only and will hurt our operation and 

the people we serve. 

Sincerely, 

l /A~ ~~t~ 

~eph Messmer 

Interim CEO/President
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-1792
THELMA V. ALLEN, Widow of Thomas G. Allen, Petitioner, versusDIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (94-676-BLA) Submitted: October 10, 1997 Decided: November 12, 1997 Before MURNAGHAN and ERVIN, Circuit Judges and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thelma V. Allen, Petitioner Pro Se. Cathryn Celeste Helm, Christian P. Barber, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks review of the Benefits Review Board's decision and order affirming the administrative law judge's denial of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C.A. §§ 901-945 (West 1986 & Supp. 1996). Our review of the record discloses that the Board's decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Allen v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs , BRB No. 94-676- BLA, (B.R.B. July 26, 1996). We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
21365

#### State v. Jones

Affirmed
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-4773
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ZARINA HAFIZUDDIN, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CR-95-9-L, CA-96-1423-L) Submitted: December 19, 1996 Decided: January 3, 1997 Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Gary Wilmer Christopher, FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant. John Francis Purcell, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant filed an untimely notice of appeal. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The time periods for filing notices of appeal are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods are "mandatory and jurisdictional." Browder v. Director, Dep't of Corrections , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson , 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). In a criminal case, a defendant has ten days within which to file in the district court notices of appeal from judgments or final orders. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b). The district court may, upon a showing of excusable neglect, extend by thirty days the time for filing a notice of appeal. See United States v. Reyes , 759 F.2d 351, 353 (4th Cir.), cert. denied , 474 U.S. 857 (1985).The district court entered its order on May 26, 1995; Appellant's notice of appeal was filed on Sept. 17, 1996. Appellant's failure to note an appeal within the ten-day appeal period and the thirty-day permissible extension period leaves this court without jurisdiction to consider the merits of Appellant's appeal. Wetherefore dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
May 4, 2006

24723

#### Gomes v. Hawaiian Elec. Co., Inc.

Affirmed
OFFICEOFTHEATTORNEYGENERALOFTEXAS AUSTIN

Hoaomblo charley LoOkhart stat* **TreasuTer** Aurtla, Texar D*u 81rt

reeeat dstm with tha 4 "Dsolaration of the lnstrumat IofArtisle 9049e,

f l8 followsr We0 provided,

in the offior of the County gietration Law8QZthir at no tax aball bo levied on lnetsments aeourtng an tmount of Two IIundred ($200.00) Dollars, or Isem. biter '- the sffoativo dats of thin AOt, eroept a8 hereinafter provided, QOsuoh fnrtrunent shall be filed or rooorded by any County Qlerk in thfs State until there ias6b,esn atiixod to auuhiastrumants &unps in aoaordanae wfth the pm~lsllons of thlkil8WttQll~ * * **

### 41

Eonoreblo War118 Lookhert, Page 2

The instrument under **conaideretlcn** is not emong those ttpe0lri0aiip named. Hence, if It la to be taxed, it must be by virtue of the alause levying the tex upon “all euoh inatruaente of a elntilar **nflture.R** In other words, a lien Intereat **must** be created by the **instrument** before it ir subject to the **tax.**

**Se are**  **of** the oplnicn that the instrument is not eubjeat to the **tax.** Theinetrurnent deoleree that the Houeing:Authority of the City of ‘J8aooholds **oerteln** described lend In trust for the benerlt or proepeotlve bondholder8 and the United Sttitee ?iousing Authority. The interest granted is the right to require the +Y’iaoo Koueing Authority to refrain frcm **dfspoelng** of the property exoept under oertain 

### olroumstanoes and to maintain **and** operate the hourlug projeotin a **oertain** menner. Thue, it is 88811 **that** no lien **interest is**  **created.** The **lnrtrument $6**  merelyr, ae lte title indicates, a WDeclarstion **of Truet.w** 

**our view**  ie further etrongthened by 8 paragraph fn the lnetrument, which wequote 

### as r0n0w8t

“In no event shell thie deolaretlon oi **trust be**  oonetrued a8 oonferring upon the holdsrr or any or the Bond8issued In pureuanoe or said Reeolutlon, or 0r any of the ooupone appertalnlng thereto, the remedy of foreoloeun or any other **remedy** pureuant to wfiioh they or any 02 **them may**  oaum the above-deebribed ,property to be eold or the title of the Authority thereto to be divested or iorfelted.n In view or the loregoing you ere r88peOtfully advired that the deeorlbed nBebleration of Truet* fa not subject to the etemptax Imposed by **krtiol.8** 90498, Vernon’8 Annotated Civil Statutes. Very tNly yours kTTCRW CF,NE~UAL 

# CF T3XhS
Exhibit 10.1







Fiscal Year 2019 Long-Term Incentive Awards for Pier 1 Imports, Inc.


Named Executive Officers


June 29, 2018







	
Named Executive Officer

	
 


Time-Based Restricted Stock*

	
 


Performance-Based Restricted Stock 


(EPS as adjusted)*


	
 


Alasdair B. James


President and Chief Executive Officer


 

	
250,000

	
500,000


	
 


Nancy A. Walsh


Executive Vice President and Chief 


Financial Officer


 

	
104,545

	
209,090


	
 


Michael R. Benkel


Executive Vice President, Global 


Supply Chain


 

	
49,090

	
98,182


	
 


Bhargav J. Shah


Senior Vice President, Chief 


Information Officer


 

	
57,954

	
115,910


	
 


Darla D. Ramirez


Principal Accounting Officer and 


Vice President – Controller of Pier 1 Imports, Inc.’s 


Operating Subsidiaries


 

	
22,500

	
15,000










*All equity awards were granted effective June 29, 2018 under the Pier 1 Imports, Inc. 2015 Stock Incentive Plan, as amended. The Performance-Based (EPS as adjusted) restricted stock award is shown at maximum performance.