alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of the Accounting of Ruby M. Stern, as Administratrix of the Estate of Harry L. Marks, Deceased.

Surrogate’s Court, Kings County,

March 12, *1959.*

*Hyman Herman*for petitioner.

*Peter Campbell Brown, Corporation Counsel (Charles M. Fox*of counsel), for City of New York, respondent.

*Mortimer M. Kassell*for State Tax Commission, respondent.

*Cornelius W. Wichersham, Jr., United States Attorney (Robert A. Morse*of counsel), for United States Treasury Department, respondent.

*A. M. & F. P. Luongo*for Anthony Scarlota, respondent.

Maximilian Moss, S.

In this accounting proceeding the court is required to make a determination as to the manner of payment to creditors and priorities to be accorded. In Schedule D-l of her account, the administratrix designated seven general creditors of deceased as “ Preferred Creditors ” together with the United States Internal Revenue Bureau, New York State Tax Commission and City of New York. The United States Government filed its claim for unpaid income taxes. A stipulation entered into on behalf of the City of New York provides for its claim for sales taxes.

The United States Code (tit. 31, ch. 6, § 191) provides that whenever the estate of any deceased debtor, in the hands of executors or administrators, is insufficient to pay all the debts due from the deceased, the debts due to the United States shall be first satisfied. This priority is further established by sub*397division 1 of section 212 of the Surrogate’s Court Act, and has long been acknowledged *(Matter of Phillips,*169 Misc. 86, 90, citing opinion of Chief Justice Marshall in *United States*v. *Fisher, 2*Crunch [6 U. S.] 358, 395 [1805]). Similarly, the City of New York is entitled to priority in the payment of its claim for unpaid sales taxes since the unpaid sales tax is a debt due the State *(Matter of McClatchey,*170 Misc. 696, 701; *Matter of Brown Print Co.,*285 N. Y. 47). The remaining creditors named in Schedule D-l, share pro rata, being general creditors within. the same class, 'there is no preference among them *(Woodruff*v. *Claflin Co.,*198 N. Y. 470, 473). Payments to creditors shall be made as herein directed.

Settle decree on notice.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JU NE 22, 2018

NO. 03

- 17

- 00541

- CV

Passion Love Black, Appellant

v.

Franklin D. Murray, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 4 OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PUR YEAR, PEMBERTON, AND BOURLAND

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION

— OPINION BY JUSTICE PEMBERTON

This is an appeal from the order signed by the tr i a l court on August 11, 2017

. Having reviewed

the record , it appears that the C ourt lacks jurisdiction over the appeal. Therefore, the C ourt

dismisses the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay

costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
# C_2021028EN.01000701.xml

| 25.1.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 28/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 28/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 19 November 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Heilbronn — Germany) — Criminal proceedings against ZW

(Case C-454/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Citizenship of the Union - Article 21 TFEU - Right to move and reside freely in the territory of the Member States - Criminal offence specifically concerning international child abduction - Restriction - Justification - Child protection - Proportionality)

(2021/C 28/09)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Heilbronn

Party in the main proceedings

ZW

Intervener: Staatsanwaltschaft Heilbronn

Operative part of the judgment

Article 21 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding the application of a Member State’s legislation under which the retention by a parent of a child from his appointed carer in another Member State attracts criminal penalties even in the absence of force, threat of serious harm or deception, whereas where such retention takes place in the territory of the first Member State, the same act is punishable only if recourse is had to force, threat of serious harm or deception.

---

(1)  OJ C 280, 19.8.2019.

---
NO. 07-02-0515-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

APRIL 1, 2003

______________________________

TERRY ANTHONY WILSON,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

Appellee

_________________________________

FROM THE 181ST DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY;

NO. 45,476-B; HON. JOHN B. BOARD, PRESIDING

_______________________________

ABATEMENT AND REMAND

__________________________________

Before QUINN, REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.

Terry Anthony Wilson (appellant) appeals his conviction for possession of a

controlled substance. The clerk’s and reporter’s records were filed on February 10, 2003.

Thus, appellant’s brief was due on March 12, 2003. However, one was not filed on that

date. By letter, this Court notified appellant’s counsel of the expired deadline and directed

him to respond to our letter by Monday, March 31, 2003, or the appeal would be abated
2

to the trial court pursuant to TEX.R.APP.P. 38.8. That date has lapsed, and appellant still

has yet to file a brief. 

Consequently, we abate this appeal and remand the cause to the 181st District

Court of Potter County (trial court) for further proceedings. Upon remand, the trial court

shall immediately cause notice of a hearing to be given and, thereafter, conduct a hearing

to determine the following:

1. whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal;

2. whether appellant is indigent and entitled to appointed counsel; and,

3. whether appellant has been denied the effective assistance of

counsel due to appellate counsel’s failure to timely file an appellate

brief. See Evitts v. Lucey, 469 U.S. 387, 394, 105 S.Ct. 830, 834-35,

83 L.Ed.2d 821, 828 (1985) (holding that an indigent defendant is

entitled to the effective assistance of counsel on the first appeal as of

right and that counsel must be available to assist in preparing and

submitting an appellate brief). 

We further direct the trial court to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law

addressing the foregoing subjects. Should the trial court find that appellant desires to

pursue this appeal, is indigent, and has been denied effective assistance of counsel, then

we further direct the court to appoint new counsel to assist in the prosecution of the

appeal. The name, address, phone number, telefax number, and state bar number of the

new counsel who will represent appellant on appeal must also be included in the court’s

findings of fact and conclusions of law. Furthermore, the trial court shall also cause to be

developed 1) a supplemental clerk’s record containing the findings of fact and conclusions

of law and 2) a reporter’s record transcribing the evidence and argument presented at the

aforementioned hearing. Additionally, the trial court shall cause the supplemental clerk’s
3

record to be filed with the clerk of this court on or before May 1, 2003. Should additional

time be needed to perform these tasks, the trial court may request same on or before May

1, 2003.

It is so ordered.

Per Curiam

Do not publish.
## F I F T H 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
Case No. 5D 2 3

- 2479 LT Case No. 2018

- CF

- 1388

_____________________________
C LIFFORD M ILLER , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

3.800 A ppeal from the Circuit Court for Hernando County

. Daniel B. Merritt, Jr. , Judge

. Clifford Miller, Lowell, pro se.

As hley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Roberts J. Bradford, Jr., Assistant Attorney Ge ne r al, Dayto n a B ea ch , for Appellee.

February 6, 2024

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.

M AKAR , J AY , and H A RRIS , JJ., concur

.2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4305 

To amend the Federal Crop Insurance Act to prohibit payments of premium 

subsidy for harvest price policies. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 8, 2017 

Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To amend the Federal Crop Insurance Act to prohibit 

payments of premium subsidy for harvest price policies. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Harvest Price Subsidy 

5 Prohibition Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON PREMIUM SUBSIDY FOR HARVEST 

7 PRICE POLICIES. 

8 Section 508(e) of the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 

9 U.S.C. 1508(e)) is amended by adding at the end the fol10 lowing: 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4305 IH

1 ‘‘(9) PROHIBITION ON PREMIUM SUBSIDY FOR

2 HARVEST PRICE POLICIES.—Notwithstanding any 

3 other provision of law and beginning with the 2018 

4 reinsurance year, the Corporation may not pay any 

5 amount of premium subsidy in the case of a policy 

6 or plan of insurance that is based on the actual mar7 ket price of an agricultural commodity at the time 

8 of harvest.’’. 

Æ 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 890 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 890

Expressing support for the Arctic Council and commemorating the Arctic 
                       Council 20th anniversary.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 22, 2016

    Mr. Larsen of Washington (for himself, Mr. Young of Alaska, Ms. 
 Pingree, Mrs. Radewagen, Ms. DelBene, Mr. Courtney, Mr. Connolly, Mr. 
Sensenbrenner, Ms. McCollum, Mr. Schiff, Mr. Meeks, and Ms. Brownley of 
 California) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                    the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Expressing support for the Arctic Council and commemorating the Arctic 
                       Council 20th anniversary.

Whereas, on September 19, 1996, the Arctic Council was established with the 
        signing of the Ottawa Declaration;
Whereas the Arctic Council is an intergovernmental body that promotes 
        international cooperation on Arctic issues;
Whereas the United States along with Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, 
        Russia, and Sweden comprise the Arctic Council member states;
Whereas the Arctic Council offers a platform in the international arena for 
        indigenous communities to ensure they have a voice about what happens in 
        their region;
Whereas the Arctic Council helps the Arctic remain a stable zone of peaceful 
        international interaction;
Whereas the Arctic Council serves to ensure safe, sustainable tourism and 
        commercial maritime traffic in the region;
Whereas the Arctic Council works to protect the Arctic marine environment and 
        address the impacts of climate change;
Whereas the Arctic Council provides a collaborative forum for scientific 
        research on topics including ocean acidification, sea floor mapping, and 
        future Arctic Ocean navigability; and
Whereas the United States current chairmanship of the Arctic Council offers an 
        opportunity to promote and implement our policy objectives: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives supports the Arctic 
Council's work and remains committed to ensuring that the United States 
fulfills its responsibilities as an Arctic nation and asserts 
leadership on issues affecting the Arctic.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>






                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1


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



This certification is provided pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and accompanies the annual report on Form 10-K
(the "Form 10-K")for the year ended June 30, 2003 of Craftmade International,
Inc. (the "Company").

I, James R. Ridings, the Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company certify that, to my knowledge:

         1.       the Form 10-K 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 Form 10-K fairly presents, in
                  all material respects, the financial condition and results of
                  operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods
                  presented in the Form 10-K


September 29, 2003                          /s/ James. R. Ridings
                                            ---------------------
                                            James R. Ridings
                                            Chairman of the Board,
                                            President and
                                            Chief Executive Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-K
pursuant to Item 601(b) (32) of Regulation S-K and Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63
of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part of
the Form 10-K.



                                      -26-
#### Werner, Admr., Appellant, *v.*The New York, Chicago & St. Louis Rd. Co., Appellee.

(No. 32092

Decided March 22, 1950.)

*Messrs. Boggs, Boggs & Boggs*and *Mr. Marcus Downing,*for appellant.

*Messrs. Williams é Eversman, Mr. John F. Jones-.*and *Messrs. Betts & Betts,*for appellee.

*462It is ordered and adjudged that this appeal as of right be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason that no debatable constitutional question is involved.

*Appeal dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Matthias, Hart, Zimmerman, Stewart, Turner and Tart, JJ., concur.
#### In the Matter of Joel Hentz, Appellant, v State of New York Office of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, et al., Respondents.

— Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in decision at Supreme Court, Underwood, J. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Suffolk County, Underwood, J. — Article 78.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Denman, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ.
# C_2010148EN.01000601.xml

| 5.6.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 148/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.6.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 148/6

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 15 April 2010 — Claudia Gualtieri v European Commission

(Case C-485/08 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Seconded national expert - Daily subsistence allowance - Principle of equal treatment)

2010/C 148/08

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Claudia Gualtieri (represented by: P. Gualtieri and M. Gualtieri, avvocati)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 10 September 2008 in Case T-284/06 Gualtieri v Commission, by which that court dismissed the application for annulment of the decision of the Commission of 30 January 2006 rejecting the applicant’s claim for adjustment, following her divorce, of the amount of the allowances payable under Article 17 of Commission Decision C(2002) 1559 of 30 April 2002 laying down the rules applicable to national experts on secondment, as amended.

Gualtieri

Commission

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Ms Gualtieri to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Ms Gualtieri to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 32, 7.2.2009.

1

---
Long, Sandra (FAA) 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Adams, Barbara (FAA) 

Thursday, January 08, 2015 12:05 PM 

Long, Sandra (FAA) 

FW: ALPA Petition Exemption 

From: Comstock, Kevin, Engineering & Air Safety [mailto:Kevin.Comstock@alpa.org] 

Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2015 9:56AM 

To: Adams, Barbara (FAA) 

Subject: RE: ALPA Petition Exemption 

Barbara, 

Please withdraw our petition for exemption- docket number 201 4-082 1. 

Thanks, 

Kevin Comstock 

Sr. Training & Qualification Specialist 

Air Line Pilots Association, International 

(703) 689-4176 

(800) 424-2470
# C_2009220EN.01003003.xml

| 12.9.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 220/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.9.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 220/30

---

Order of the President of the Court of 14 May 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Poland

(Case C-435/08) (1)

1

2009/C 220/59

Language of the case: Polish

Language of the case: Polish

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 301, 22.11.2008.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>

     This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from the
consolidated audited financial statements of Lahaina Acquisitions,  Inc. for the
twelve-month  period ended  September 30, 2000, and is qualified in its entirety
by reference to such consolidated audited financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000855684
<NAME>                        LAHAINA ACQUISITIONS INC
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     US Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                  SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                               1
<CASH>                                         272,297
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               272297
<PP&E>                                         262,298
<DEPRECIATION>                                 60,480
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 7,483,750
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          11,163,992
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (3,259,097)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   7,483,750
<SALES>                                        3,059,219
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               12,068,236
<CGS>                                          1,234,700
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  14,785,189
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (1,556,632)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             826,936
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,987,257)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,987,257)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.12)





</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 113 (Thursday, July 26, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5327]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

           By Mr. NEAL:
       H.R. 6206.
       Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant 
     to the following:
       Article I, Section 8, Clause 1
       ``The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, 
     Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for 
     the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; 
     but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform 
     throughout the United States.''
       Sixteenth Amendment
       ``The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on 
     incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment 
     among the several States, and without regard to any census or 
     enumeration.''
```
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-22-00319-CV

COLUMBIA MEDICAL CENTER OF 

ARLINGTON SUBSIDIARY, L.P. D/B/A 

MEDICAL CITY ARLINGTON AND HCA

INC., Appellants

V.

JARED BUSH, JR., INDIVIDUALLY AND 

AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE 

OF IREILLE WILLIAMS-BUSH,

DECEASED, AND NEXT FRIEND OF J.B.

AND L.B., MINORS, Appellee

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 17th District Court

of Tarrant County (017-312807-19)

April 20, 2023

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Wallach

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial 

court is reversed and the case is remanded to the trial court with instructions to 

dismiss the claims of Appellee Jared Bush, Jr., Individually and as Representative of 
the Estate of Ireille Williams-Bush, Deceased, and Next Friend of J.B. and L.B., 

Minors against Appellants Columbia Medical Center of Arlington Subsidiary, L.P. 

d/b/a Medical City Arlington and HCA INC. with prejudice and to rule on 

Appellants’ request for attorney’s fees under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code 

Section 74.351(b)(1) and (2).

It is further ordered that Appellee Jared Bush, Jr., Individually and as 

Representative of the Estate of Ireille Williams-Bush, Deceased, and Next Friend of 

J.B. and L.B., Minors shall pay all of the costs of this appeal, for which let execution 

issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By __/s/ Mike Wallach__________________

 Justice Mike Wallach
From: Frey, Nathan J. <Nathan_J._Frey@omb.eop.gov> 

Sent: Sunday, August 2, 2015 10:37 AM 

To: Culligan, Kevin; McCabe, Janet; Tsirigotis, Peter; Harvey, Reid; Vasu, Amy; Hutson, 

Nick; Fruh, Steve; Jones, Toni 

Cc: Shelanski, Howard; Mancini, Dominic J. 

Subject: Concluding Review Under EO 12866 and 13563 -- Clean Power Plan Rules 

Hello everyone, 

I am writing to inform you that OIRA has officially concluded its review under EO 12866 and 13563 

of the following three EPA rules: 

 

2060-AQ91 Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions From New, 

Modified, and Reconstructed Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units 

 

2060-AR33 Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: 

Electric Utility Generating Units 

 

2060-AS47 Federal Plan for Regulating Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Electric 

Generating Units 

 

Thank you to everyone and your teams for a tremendous job well done on these important rules. 

All the best, 

 

Nathan