alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The STATE of Utah, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Galveston Sonny SCOTT, Defendant and Appellant.

No. 13889.

Supreme Court of Utah.

Oct. 2, 1975.

Phil L. Hansen, of Phil L. Hansen & Associates, Salt Lake City, for defendant and appellant.

Vernon B. Romney, Atty. Gen., Earl F. Dorius, Asst. Atty. Gen., Salt Lake City, for plaintiff and respondent.

HENRIOD, Chief Justice.

Appeal from a manslaughter conviction. Affirmed.

Scott killed one Gray with a pistol, —after a few days of feuding. He says *he*was victimized because 1): On his motion to have the jury take a view of the premises, the arena of the bloodletting, the trial court restricted the participants in such view to three bailiffs and the jurors, but would let neither Scott, his lawyer, nor the lawyer for the State go along; and 2): That the trial court erroneously prevented defense counsel from pointing out to the jury that there had been an affray between the parties a couple of days before, involving a rifle. The court concluded that the question of self-defense which defendant had raised was determinable as of the time of the homicide, — which we think was not error.

As to 1) Defendant claimed no Constitutional or other statutory or absolute right to participate in the view. Such a view is discretionary according to most authorities, and is governed in Utah by Title 77-31-26, Utah Code Annotated 1953, which affirms such principle when it says “When *in the opinion of the court”*such view is proper, “it may order the jury to be conducted in a body, in the custody of an officer” and to return them into court, etc. Nothing therein gives the defendant or counsel any right or even privilege to be included in the court’s discretionary order and hence we see no prejudicial error in the action of the court.

ELLETT, CROCKETT, TUCKETT and MAUGHAN, JJ., concur.
21207

#### State v. Choo

Vacated
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  EXHIBIT 4.4.18
                                 AMENDMENT NO. 1

                                       TO

                                RIGHTS AGREEMENT

            AMENDMENT NO. 1, dated as of August ___, 1999 the "Amendment"), to
the Rights Agreement, dated as of April 16, 1997 (the "Rights Agreement"), by
and between Quorum Health Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"),
and First Union National Bank of North Carolina, a national banking association
(the "Rights Agent").

            WHEREAS, the parties hereto desire to amend the Rights Agreement as
set forth below.

            NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows:

            1. The definition of "Acquiring Person" set forth in Section 1(a) of
the Rights Agreement is hereby amended by adding at the end of such definition
the following:

            "Notwithstanding the foregoing, none of Welsh, Carson, Anderson &
            Stowe VIII. L.P., a Delaware limited partnership ("WCAS VIII"), WCAS
            Management Corporation ("WCAS Management") and each other person
            that shall become a "Purchaser" pursuant to Section 6.07 of the
            Securities Purchase Agreement dated as of August 18, 1999 (the
            "Securities Purchase Agreement") by and among the Company, WCAS VIII
            and WCA Management (each such other person, WCAS VIII and WCA
            Management being referred to collectively as the "Purchasers") shall
            be deemed to be an Acquiring Person unless and until the Purchasers
            in the aggregate become the Beneficial Owners of greater than 30% of
            the Voting Shares."

            2. Each party hereto represents and warrants that (i) the execution,
delivery and performance of this Amendment by such party have been duly
authorized by all necessary corporate action and (ii) this Amendment constitutes
a valid and binding agreement of such party.

            3. This Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts and
each of such counterparts shall for all purposes be deemed to be an original,
and all such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same
instrument.

            4. This Amendment shall be deemed to be a contract made under the
laws of the State of Delaware and for all purposes shall be governed by and
construed in accordance with the laws of such State applicable to contracts made
and to be performed entirely within such State.
<PAGE>   2
            IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to
be duly executed and attested, all as of the date and year first above written.


                              QUORUM HEALTH GROUP, INC.

                              By: ______________________________
                                  Name:
                                  Title:


                              FIRST UNION NATIONAL BANK OF
                                 NORTH CAROLINA


                              By: ______________________________
                                  Name:
                                  Title:
Exhibit 10.4
                                  ------------



                                    ADDENDUM
                       TO THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BY AND
              BETWEEN PAUL E. LICATA AND CCC GLOBALCOM CORPORATION



This addendum to that one and certain  Employment  Agreement  dated February 16,
2001 between the Parties is executed  and  incorporated  as an integral  part of
such Agreement.

WHEREAS,  the Board of Directors  of the Company (the  "Board") has made Paul E.
Licata  ("Employee") an offer of employment to serve as Chief Executive  Officer
of the Company.

WHEREAS,  Employee  has  accepted  the  Board's  offer  of  employment  as Chief
Executive Officer, effective August 16, 2002.

NOW THEREFORE,  in return for Employee accepting the position of Chief Executive
Officer, the Company and Employee agree to the following:

(1) Employee will be issued an additional 500,000 shares of the Company's Common
Stock,  in addition to the  500,000  shares  agreed to in Section 4.1 (a) of the
Employment Agreement.

(2) The Company  shall pay to Employee an annual base salary of  $220,000.00  or
such higher rate as may from time to time be determined  in the sole  discretion
of the Board,  provided  that the  Compensation  Committee  of the Board and the
Board shall review  Employee's  base salary on an annual basis.  Employee's base
salary shall be paid in substantially equal semi-monthly installments.

(3) All other terms of Employee's Employment Agreement to remain the same.




AGREED AND ACCEPTED

EMPLOYEE                                    CCC GLOBALCOM CORPORATION

/s/Paul E. Licata                            /s/Z. A. Hakim
--------------------------                  ------------------------------
Paul E. Licata                                       Z. A. Hakim

Date :_____________________                 Date :_________________________
NPRM Economic Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2013-0938

Directorate ID 2012-SW-057-AD

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 37 helicopters of U.S. Registry.

We estimate that operators may incur the following costs in order to comply with this 

AD. At an average labor rate of $85 per hour, inspecting LH and RH frame No. 9 would 

require about 3 work-hours, for a cost per helicopter of $255 and a total cost to U.S. 

operators of $9,435 per inspection cycle. Repairing a cracked frame No. 9 would require 

about 20 work-hours, and required parts would cost about $10,000, for a cost per 

helicopter of $11,700.
#### State v. Brown

23756

03/12/2002

Affirmed
Exhibit 32.2

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 Annual Report of Pamrapo Bancorp, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K
for the period ending December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Kenneth D. Walter, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/    KENNETH D.
WALTERKenneth D. WalterChief Financial Officer


March 16, 2007
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
Henry Mower Rice Statue
        
                  The Basics
      
Artist
      
Frederick E. Triebel

Materials
    Marble

Year
    1916

Location
      
National Statuary Hall

This statue of Henry Mower Rice was given to the National Statuary Hall Collection by Minnesota in 1916.

Henry Rice was born on November 29, 1816, in Waitsfield, Vermont. Because of his father's death when Rice was quite young, he lived with friends. After primary education he studied law for two years. When he was 18, he moved to Detroit and participated in the surveying of the canal route around the rapids of Sault Ste. Marie between Lake Superior and Lake Huron. In 1839 he secured a job at Fort Snelling, near what is now Minneapolis. He then became a fur trader with the Winnebago and Chippewa Indians, attaining a position of prominence and influence. Rice was trusted by the Indians, and he was instrumental in negotiating the United States treaty with the Ojibwe Indians in 1847.

He lobbied for the bill to establish Minnesota Territory and then served as its delegate to the U.S. Congress from 1853 to 1857. His work on the Minnesota Enabling Act during those years facilitated Minnesota's statehood. In 1858 Rice was elected one of its first senators. He served until 1863 and was not a candidate for re-election; he was an unsuccessful candidate for governor in 1865.

Rice also served as a member of the board of regents of the University of Minnesota from 1851 to 1859 and was president of the Minnesota Historical Society. As a United States Commissioner during 1887-1888 he continued to negotiate treaties with the Indians. He died on January 15, 1894, while on a visit to San Antonio, Texas. 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
Breadcrumb

1. Home

2. Print 

3. Pdf 

4. Node 

5. Entity Print 

Mobile Data Collection Tools

Last Modified: 

Print

APHIS PPQ End User Tools group supports Field Operations in electronic mobile data

collection. This assistance includes workflow documentation and recorded training

supporting the use of mobile devices and mobile applications.

Training Events and Documents

Training Events 

Locate the training event, mark your calendar, and click on the link to attend.

General Training Documents 

Document support on all things mobile data collection, including the Apple iPad and

mobile data applications such as ArcGIS Field Maps, ArcGIS Survey123, eTRAP, and

IPHIS.

Pest Program-Specific Training Documents 

Document support on all pest programs currently using national electronic mobile

data collection solutions.
Training Request

General and pest program specific training documents are created as applications

are configured for the new year. Watch for updates often. Direct questions to Mark

Crane.

Click on the link below to submit a request for support from End User Tools.

Support Request (End User Tools)

Video Catalog 

Training videos are provided as an alternative if scheduling does not permit live

attendance and users are encouraged to review regularly. Use the Search box to

locate video training by keyword.

Loading...
#### State v. Atapuai

25148

08/14/2003

Affirmed
Let’s Keep Our Poultry 

Healthy Together

#DefendTheFlock

www.aphis.usda.gov/animalhealth/defendtheflock

Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service

Program Aid No. 2239

Issued May 2019

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Report Sick Birds: 1-866-536-7593
H. Res. 421 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

September 17, 2015. 

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall 

be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 3134) to 

provide for a moratorium on Federal funding to Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. All points of order 

against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment 

printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be considered as adopted. The 

bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of 

order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. 

The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 

bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to 

final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour 

of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and 

ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce or their respective designees; and (2) one motion 

to recommit with or without instructions. 

SEC. 2. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 

order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 3504) to amend 
2 

•HRES 421 EH 

title 18, United States Code, to prohibit a health care practitioner from failing to exercise the proper degree of care in 

the case of a child who survives an abortion or attempted 

abortion. All points of order against consideration of the bill 

are waived. The bill shall be considered as read. All points 

of order against provisions in the bill are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and 

on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided 

and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of 

the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective designees; 

and (2) one motion to recommit. 

SEC. 3. Upon passage of H.R. 3134 the House shall be 

considered to have: (1) stricken all after the enacting clause 

of S. 764 and inserted in lieu thereof the provisions of H.R. 

3134, as passed by the House; and (2) passed the Senate bill 

as so amended. 

SEC. 4. Upon passage of H.R. 3504 the House shall be 

considered to have: (1) stricken all after the enacting clause 

of S. 1603 and inserted in lieu thereof the provisions of H.R. 

3504, as passed by the House; and (2) passed the Senate bill 

as so amended. 
3 

•HRES 421 EH 

SEC. 5. House Resolution 408 is laid on the table. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
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 CampusGrounds Features
State of Massachusetts Tree, Liberty Elm
        
                  The Basics
      
Materials
    Liberty Elm

Year
    1993

Location
      
Capitol Square, N.E.

U.S. Capitol Grounds

                  View on Map

Text on the Plaque

U.S. Capitol Grounds 
Memorial Tree

*Ulmus americana 'libertas'*
(Liberty Elm)

Planted by 
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy

To Honor the State of Massachusetts

October 22, 1993
          
    
      Image Gallery
    
    The Liberty Elm tree on the U.S. Capitol Grounds during spring.

The Liberty Elm tree on the U.S. Capitol Grounds during spring.
    Tree.

The Liberty Elm tree on the U.S. Capitol Grounds during summer.
    The Liberty Elm tree on the U.S. Capitol Grounds during winter.

The Liberty Elm tree on the U.S. Capitol Grounds during winter.

      Previous Image
        Next Image

          The Liberty Elm tree on the U.S. Capitol Grounds during spring.
      Tree.
      The Liberty Elm tree on the U.S. Capitol Grounds during winter. 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
IV 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 133 

Relating to consideration of the bill (H.R. 240) appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 

2015. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 2, 2015 

Mr. KING of Iowa (for himself, Mr. DUNCAN of South Carolina, Mr. GOHMERT, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. SALMON, Mr. FLEMING, Mr. 

JONES, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. ROHRABACHER, Mr. BYRNE, Mr. RICE of 

South Carolina, Mr. YOHO, Mr. GRIFFITH, Mr. LAMALFA, Mr. OLSON, 

Mr. BARLETTA, Mr. NUGENT, Mr. BUCK, Mr. PALAZZO, and Mr. SANFORD) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules 

RESOLUTION 

Relating to consideration of the bill (H.R. 240) appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the 

fiscal year ending September 30, 2015. 

1 Resolved, That any motion pursuant to clause 4 of 

2 rule XXII relating to the bill H.R. 240 may be offered 

3 only by the Majority Leader or his designee. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-7809

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

SEAN BRADSHER,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at 

Huntington. Robert C. Chambers, District Judge. (3:17-cr-00025-1)

Submitted: May 19, 2020 Decided: June 4, 2020

Before AGEE and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Sean Bradsher, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Sean Bradsher appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to compel. We 

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the 

reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Bradsher, No. 3:17-cr-00025-1 

(S.D.W. Va. Nov. 19, 2019). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 608 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 608

Recognizing the cultural and historical significance of Lunar New Year 
                                in 2016.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 8, 2016

  Ms. Meng (for herself, Mr. Ted Lieu of California, Mr. Al Green of 
    Texas, Ms. Lee, Ms. Judy Chu of California, Ms. Duckworth, Ms. 
  Velazquez, Mr. Schiff, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Takano, Ms. Bordallo, Mr. 
 Honda, and Mr. Peters) submitted the following resolution; which was 
      referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Recognizing the cultural and historical significance of Lunar New Year 
                                in 2016.

Whereas Lunar New Year begins on the second new moon following the winter 
        solstice, or the first day of the new year according to the lunisolar 
        calendar, and extends until the full moon 15 days later;
Whereas the 15th day of the new year, according to the lunisolar calendar, is 
        called the Lantern Festival;
Whereas Lunar New Year is often referred to as ``Spring Festival'' in various 
        Asian countries;
Whereas many religious and ethnic communities use lunar-based calendars;
Whereas Lunar New Year began in China more than 4,000 years ago and is widely 
        celebrated in East and Southeast Asia;
Whereas the Asian diaspora has expanded the Lunar New Year celebration into an 
        annual worldwide event;
Whereas Lunar New Year is celebrated by millions of Asian Americans, and by many 
        non-Asian Americans, in the United States;
Whereas Lunar New Year is celebrated with community activities and cultural 
        performances;
Whereas participants celebrating Lunar New Year travel to spend the holiday 
        reuniting with family and friends; and
Whereas Lunar New Year is traditionally a time to wish upon others good fortune, 
        health, prosperity, and happiness: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) recognizes the cultural and historical significance of 
        Lunar New Year;
            (2) in observance of this Lunar New Year, the Year of the 
        Monkey, expresses its deepest respect for Asian Americans and 
        all individuals throughout the world who celebrate this 
        significant occasion; and
            (3) wishes Asian Americans and all individuals who observe 
        this holiday a happy and prosperous new year.
                                 <all>
```
78 P.3d 340

SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I

September 26, 2003

24673

#### State v. Humel

Affirmed