alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 118 (Friday, August 3, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1426-E1427]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

       RECOGNIZING THE OPENING OF THE LEMAY--AMERICA'S CAR MUSEUM

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. ADAM SMITH

                             of washington

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, August 2, 2012

  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize The LeMay--
America's Car Museum, located in Tacoma, Washington for opening its 
doors to the Pacific Northwest this summer. The LeMay Museum is one of 
the largest automobile museums in the world and will attract people of 
all ages with its modern look and unique history.
  The museum, named after Harold LeMay, honors one of the most 
accomplished businessman from Tacoma, Washington. Harold was born in 
Yakima, Washington in 1919, but grew up in the Pierce County area where 
he pursued his love for motorized vehicles. As a young entrepreneur, he 
became associated with an automobile business in the Lincoln District 
of Tacoma. From there, he built Harold LeMay Enterprises, joined dozens 
of community organizations, and began his impressive automobile 
collection.
  Harold and his wife, Nancy LeMay, owned one of the largest privately-
owned collections of automobiles, motorcycles, trucks, and other 
motorized vehicles in the world. The LeMays formed the Harold E. LeMay 
Museum, a charitable organization that would donate their automobile 
collection to benefit the community Harold adored. In November 2003, 
just a few years after Harold's passing, the museum's board of 
directors approved the proposal to open The LeMay--America's Car Museum 
in the City of Tacoma.
  Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I congratulate The 
LeMay--America's Car Museum. The museum showcases the history behind 
America's admiration for automobiles and Harold's inspiring story.

[[Page E1427]]

                          ____________________
```
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 Quarterly Report of Medical Connections Holdings, Inc.  (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:





1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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 results of operation of the Company.





3. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.









Date: August 11, 2010
By:
/s/ Brian NeillBrian NeillChief Financial Officer
#### Robert J. Skrabalak et al., Respondents, v Jerome F. Rock, Appellant.

— Appeal from that part of an order of the Supreme Court (Fischer, J.), entered July 12, 1990 in Broome County, which denied defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to timely provide a complaint and extended plaintiffs’ time in which to file said complaint.

Contrary to defendant’s contention, Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion by denying defendant’s motion to dismiss due to plaintiffs’ minimal and nonprejudicial 11-day delay in serving the complaint *(see, Lehigh Val. R. R. Co.*v *North Am. Van Lines, 25*AD2d 923; Siegel, Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C3012:12, at *977658). In any event, the affidavit and proof submitted by plaintiffs in opposition to defendant’s motion adequately demonstrated the alleged merits of the claim *(see, Mufalli v Ford Motor Co.,*105 AD2d 642) as well as the fact that the delay in service was excusable *(see, Mineroff v Macy’s & Co.,*97 AD2d 535).

Mahoney, P. J., Weiss, Yesawich Jr., Crew III and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4326 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4326

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 200 West North Street in Normal, Illinois, as the ``Sgt. Josh 
                         Rodgers Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. SGT. JOSH RODGERS POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 200 West North Street in Normal, Illinois, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Sgt. Josh Rodgers Post Office''.
    (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 ``Sgt. Josh 
Rodgers Post Office''.

            Passed the House of Representatives November 29, 2018.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
115th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 4326

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 200 West North Street in Normal, Illinois, as the ``Sgt. Josh 
                         Rodgers Post Office''.
```
#### Anna Hornecker et al., Plaintiffs, *v.*Fred Weisse, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Nonjury Trial Term, Nassau County,

January 30, 1959.

*918*MoSherry & Guardino*for plaintiffs.

*Flood & De Vito*for defendant.

Bernard S. Meyer, J.

This is an action for personal injuries suffered when the plaintiff was struck by defendant’s automobile while plaintiff was on the 33rd Street sidewalk in Manhattan. The testimony, which establishes that plaintiff was about to enter Grimbel’s Department Store and that defendant’s car mounted the curb at an angle, crossed the sidewalk and struck plaintiff and the department store window at approximately the same time, would be sufficient, unexplained by any other evidence, to establish the negligence of defendant and the freedom of plaintiff from contributory negligence. *(Locicero*v. *Messina,*239 App. Div. 635.) There is here further evidence of defendant’s negligence in his inability to state whether his brakes were ever applied after the car had left the roadway and begun to travel across the sidewalk.

The evidence concerning damages was sharply disputed. Plaintiff and her employer testified that she was regularly employed three days a week as a saleslady prior to the accident, but were unable to produce any records substantiating their statements. Plaintiff’s attending physician was not called, but plaintiff makes claim for his services by showing an indefinite number of visits and the total amount paid. Even if the court were to take judicial notice of the rates charged by general practitioners in the community, there is no evidence here to show the number of visits for which charge was made. Accordingly, in the computation of damages this item has been excluded. Plaintiff was examined by a neurologist who gave a diagnosis of post-concussion syndrome as evidenced by anxiety, depression, insecurity, intolerance to noise, continuing head*919ach.es and dizziness, and of a nerve root injury in the cervical area, but was unable definitely to state that the nerve root injury was permanent or whether operative procedures would be required to correct it. He did testify that the anxiety and nervousness would in his opinion respond to psychiatric care.

The court finds that plaintiff’s injuries occurred as a result of the negligence of the defendant and without any contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiffs and resulted in damage to the plaintiff wife in the amount of $8,000 and to her husband in his action for loss of services and medical expenses in the amount of $2,000.

This constitutes the decision of the court under section 440 of the Civil Practice Act and all motions on which decision was reserved at the trial are disposed of accordingly.

Settle judgment.
# C_2008260EN.01001001.xml

| 11.10.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 260/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.10.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 260/10

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia Murcia (Spain) lodged on 30 July 2008 — Aurelio Choque Cabrera v Delegación del Gobierno en Murcia

(Case C-348/08)

(2008/C 260/17)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Superior de Justicia Murcia

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Aurelio Choque Cabrera

Applicant:

Defendant: Delegación del Gobierno en Murcia

Defendant:

Question referred

Should Article 62(1) and (2)(a) of the Treaty Establishing the European Community and Articles 5, 11 and 13 of Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 establishing a Community Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) (1) be interpreted as precluding national legislation, and the case-law which interprets it, which permits the substitution of the expulsion of any ‘third country national’ who does not have documentation authorising him to enter and remain in the territory of the European Union by the imposition of a fine?

1

---

(1)  OJ 2006 L 105, p. 1.

1

---
# Haywood - Appalachian Regional Commission

- Creating PPE for Nurses and School Officials in Western North Carolina STEMwork in western North Carolina (WNCSTEMwork) is a teacher professional development initiative of the Kenan Institute for Engineering, Technology, and Science at North Carolina State University. With ARC support, this program supports six middle and high school teachers from ten counties as they develop their capacity to lead and sustain STEM workforce education. In April [&#8230;]The post Creating PPE for Nurses and School Officials in Western North Carolina appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- Southwestern Commission Executive Director Sarah Thompson Email s&#97;&#114;&#x61;&#x68;&#x40;&#x72;e&#103;&#105;&#111;&#x6e;&#x61;&#x2e;or&#103;The post Southwestern Commission appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Rodolfo Grajales, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Broomer, J.), rendered February 8, 1989, as amended October 2, 1989, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, without a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, to hear and report on that branch of the defendant’s motion which was to suppress physical evidence, and the appeal is held in abeyance in the interim. The Supreme Court, Kings County, is to file its report with all convenient speed.

The court erred when it relied upon its review of the Grand Jury minutes to summarily deny the defendant’s original motion for suppression of the physical evidence *(see, People v Pavesi,*144 AD2d 392). The court also erred when it summarily denied a renewed motion to suppress. The factual averments before the court were sufficient to warrant a hearing on the issue of probable cause to arrest and the seizure of a gun *294from the defendant *(see, People v Miller,*162 AD2d 248; *People v Huggins,*162 AD2d 129). Accordingly, a hearing is directed and the appeal is held in abeyance in the interim. Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.2


          CERTIFICATIONS 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 E Com Ventures, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending August 2, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on September 16, 2003 (the "Report"), I, A.
Mark Young, 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, to my knowledge:

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

                                                By:   /s/ A. Mark Young
                                                  ----------------------------
                                                      A. Mark Young
                                                      Chief Financial Officer
                                                      October 6, 2003
ORDER OF THE COURT (Eighth Chamber)

3 March 2009

Case C-268/08 P

**Christos Michail**

**v**

**Commission of the European Communities**

(Appeal – Civil service – Articles 12a and 24 of the Staff Regulations – Psychological harassment – Duty to provide assistance – Distortion of facts – Errors in the legal assessment of the facts)

**Appeal:**against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber) of 16 April 2008 in Case T‐486/04 *Michail* v *Commission* by which that court dismissed the appellant’s action for annulment of the Commission’s implied rejection of 20 March 2004
of the appellant’s application for assistance under Article 24 of the Staff Regulations. Infringement of Article 12 of the
Staff Regulations. Psychological harassment. Distortion of the facts. Errors in the legal classification of the facts

**Held:**The appeal is dismissed. Mr Michail is ordered to pay the costs.

**Summary**

*Appeals – Grounds – Mere repetition of the pleas and arguments put forward before the Court of First Instance – Error of law
relied on not identified – Inadmissible*

*(Art. 225 EC; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 112(1),
first para., (c))*
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Frank, McClanahan and Senior Judge Willis 

COLEMAN HOMES, INC. AND 

 CINCINNATI CASUALTY COMPANY 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

 

v. Record No. 1769-06-2 PER CURIAM 

 DECEMBER 19, 2006 

WILLIAM JASON LYNCH 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (Calvin W. Fowler, Jr.; Misty D. Evans; Williams Mullen, A 

Professional Corporation, on briefs), for appellants. 

 (Wesley G. Marshall, on brief), for appellee. 

 Coleman Homes, Inc. and its insurer appeal a decision of the Workers’ Compensation 

Commission finding that William Jason Lynch proved permanent and total work incapacity 

causally related to his October 14, 1993 work-related brain injury. Essentially, appellants 

contend the commission erred in accepting the testimony of claimant’s treating physicians and 

not that of their medical experts. 

 “A question raised by conflicting medical opinion is a question of fact.” Dep’t of Corr. v. 

Powell, 2 Va. App. 712, 714, 347 S.E.2d 532, 533 (1986). “Decisions of the commission as to 

questions of fact, if supported by credible evidence, are conclusive and binding on this Court.” 

Manassas Ice & Fuel Co. v. Farrar, 13 Va. App. 227, 229, 409 S.E.2d 824, 826 (1991). “The fact 

that there is contrary evidence in the record is of no consequence.” Wagner Enters., Inc. v. 

Brooks, 12 Va. App. 890, 894, 407 S.E.2d 32, 35 (1991); see also American Filtrona Co. v. 

Hanford, 16 Va. App. 159, 428 S.E.2d 511 (1993). The commission gave greater weight to the 

 *

 Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication. 
- 2 - 

opinion of claimant’s treating physicians. See United Airlines, Inc. v. Sabol, 47 Va. App. 495, 

501, 624 S.E.2d 692, 695 (2006) (holding that the commission, in weighing the medical 

evidence, is entitled to “give[] great weight to the treating physician’s opinion”). 

 We have reviewed the record and the commission’s opinion and find that this appeal is 

without merit. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the commission in its final 

opinion. See Lynch v. Coleman Homes, Inc., VWC File No. 165-92-78 (June 23, 2006). We 

dispense with oral argument and summarily affirm because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process. See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27. 

 Affirmed.
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Henry Van Wart, Deceased.

Surrogate’s Court, Westchester County,

July 13, 1959.

*William, J. Murden*for petitioners.

John J. Dillon, S.

The executors have instituted this independent proceeding for permission to sell a parcel of real property. The property in question constitutes the sole remaining asset of the trust created under Article “ third ” of the testator’s will. The present application is occasioned by reason of the following direction contained in Article “third”: in no event shall my place located at 956 Orchard Street, Peeks-kill, New York, be sold or disposed of, mortgaged or otherwise encumbered during the life of the trust herein created; it being my intention that this property shall remain in the trust estate until the death of the two beneficiaries for which it is created.”

The real property consists of a plot 50 by 150 feet and erected thereon is a two story two-family frame dwelling and a two-car garage. The improvements are in a great state of disrepair and require extensive renovation. As previously indicated there are no assets in the trust with which to pay for the necessary *953repairs and neither the income beneficiary nor anyone interested in the trust have sufficient assets with which to pay for such repairs.

In *Matter of Pulitzer*(139 Misc. 575, affd. 237 App. Div. 808) Surrogate Foley, in resolving an analagous dilemma, stated at page 579 that “ The law, in the case of necessity, reads into the will an implied power of sale. The law also assumes that a testator has sufficient foresight to realize that securities bequeathed to a trustee may become so unproductive or so diminished in value as to authorize their sale where extraordinary circumstances develop, or a crisis occurs.”

After carefully considering all of the factors herein the court determines that the sale of the real property is in the best interest of all parties concerned and is necessary in order to preserve the assets of the trust.

Accordingly, the application for authority to sell such real property and for the approval of the proposed contract of sale is granted.

Submit decree.
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 1, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________________

No. 02-10468

_______________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RICHARD VAN WEIR,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

Civil Docket #3:99-CR-54-1-R

_________________________________________________________________

Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and JONES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The court has carefully considered the appeal of Richard

Van Weir based on the briefs, the excellent oral arguments of

counsel, and pertinent parts of the record. Having done so, we

conclude that we have jurisdiction and that the district court did

not abuse its discretion in its award of restitution on remand. 
2

The case is not moot because Van Weir’s payments to the

victims was not a voluntary act due to the pendency of a court

order, and because remedial relief could be effectively ordered if

Van Weir’s appeal succeeds.

We review the amount of restitution ordered for abuse of

discretion. United States v. Reese, 998 F.2d 1275, 1283 (5th Cir.

1993). Van Weir contends that the calculations as to Generali and

UNI are without sufficient support, that the amount ordered

erroneously ignores the commission structure of the business, and

that the district court failed to offset the amount of loss of all

the victims by amounts they allegedly owed to Van Weir. Although

Van Weir’s arguments are not without force, they demonstrate

neither clear error not an abuse of discretion by the district

court. The amount of restitution was decidedly conservative, in

part because of Van Weir’s having destroyed records of hundreds of

pertinent policies for which no loss amount could be determined.

This court has held that when the restitution amount does not

exceed actual losses, an erroneous calculation of the amount is not

an abuse of discretion. United States v. Calbat, 266 F.3d 358,

365-66 (5th Cir. 2001). To the extent this restitution award

cannot be more than the total loss to the victims, the district

court did not abuse its discretion. Moreover, the offsets sought

by Van Weir from the victims do not, as is required, arise from the

same acts as those underlying his criminal conviction and are not

cognizable for these purposes. Id. at 365. 
3

Motion to dismiss DENIED, Judgment AFFIRMED.
# Carroll - Appalachian Regional Commission

- Mount Rogers Planning District Commission Executive Director Aaron Sizemore Email asizem&#111;&#114;&#101;&#64;&#109;&#114;&#112;&#x64;&#x63;&#x2e;&#x6f;&#x72;&#x67;The post Mount Rogers Planning District Commission appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.