alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### McDONALD v. STATE.

No. 23303.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 13, 1946.

T. R. Odell, of Haskell, for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

The offense is possessing intoxicating liquor in a dry area for the purpose of sale. The punishment assessed is a fine of $150.

The appellant, together with other members of his family, lived in a semi-business house known as the Green Lilly Cafe. Three rooms were used for sleeping purposes; a fourth was a kitchen, in which meals were sometimes served to others. The arrangement of the premises, the proximity of the rooms to the kitchen, and its use, are not clearly shown. The premises were searched by the marshal, who found two pint bottles of whisky in a pasteboard box under a bed, which appellant admitted belonged to him. He also found a pint bottle, about half full of whisky, in the kitchen and two quarts of wine in a suit case or trunk in another room. This container was locked and evidence fixing it in the possession of appellant’s immediate family is not as,clearly shown as might be if a more definite description of the premises were given. In fact, we cannot be certain just where the- state’s evidence places the container with the wine. We are of the opinion that the pint bottle containing some whisky, in the kitchen, is not shown to be under the control of appellant and cannot be utilized, together with the two pints of whisky, to make a prima facie case. If the state’s evidence may be construed from the state’s standpoint, to place the two-quarts of wine in appellant’s possession, then the jury would be authorized under proper instruction to find him guilty as. charged. In view of another trial of the case, we would suggest that this evidence be clarified if possible.

In our opinion bills of exception Nos. 8, 12, 13 and 14 reflect reversible error. Objection to the introduction of certain testimony was overruled by the court *217with explanation, in the presence and hearing of the jury, that it was admitted for a certain purpose and with a certain effect. This we consider in violation of Article 707, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P., which says that the judge shall not discuss or comment on the weight of the evidence, or its bearing in the case. This is a mandatory provision of the statute and requires a reversal of the case. Herridge v. State, 127 Tex.Cr.R. 284, 76 S.W.2d 522; Wilson v. State, 140 Tex.Cr.R. 424, 145 S.W.2d 890; McIntyre v. State, 141 Tex.Cr.R. 497, 149 S.W.2d 966.

Other bills complain of evidence from witnesses who say they purchased whisky at the house of appellant. In view of the nature of the premises, this evidence would not be admissible against appellant unless he is shown to have some connection with it.

The judgment of the trial court is reversed and the cause is remanded.
|                                                                                           
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                           
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                             
|View History: Annual                                                                       
|View History: Annual                                                                       
|View History:                                                                              
|                                                                                           
|Texas--RRC District 5 Shale Proved Reserves Extensions and Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                           
|                                                                                           
|Texas--RRC District 5 Shale Proved Reserves Extensions and Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                           

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0      | 510    | 316    | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 1      | 2      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

EASTERN DISTRICT 

OMAR JACKSON, 

 Petitioner 

 v. 

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF 

PHILADELPHIA COUNTY, ET AL., 

DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF 

PHILADELPHIA COUNTY, ET AL., 

 Respondents 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 120 EM 2014 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 29th day of September, 2014, the Application for Leave to File 

Original Process is GRANTED. The Petition for Writ of Mandamus and/or Extraordinary 

Relief is DENIED to the extent it requests extraordinary relief and GRANTED to the 

extent it requests mandamus relief. The court of common pleas is DIRECTED to 

adjudicate Petitioner’s pending filing within 90 days.
CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
      a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;b)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation
of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles;c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; andd)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
  a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;
andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 Date: November 9, 2009
    /s/ Laura W. ThomasLaura W. ThomasSenior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4710 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Carbonic Acid, Dimethyl Ester, Polymer 

with 1,6-Hexanediol. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 25, 2012 

Mr. GUTHRIE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Carbonic Acid, Dimethyl 

Ester, Polymer with 1,6-Hexanediol. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CARBONIC ACID, DIMETHYL ESTER, POLYMER 

4 WITH 1,6-HEXANEDIOL. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

6 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

7 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

8 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Carbonic Acid, Dimethyl 

Ester, Polymer with 1,6- 

Hexanediol (CAS No. 

101325–00–2) (provided for 

in subheading 3907.99.01) Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4710 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
|                                                                
|----------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                  
|View History: Annual                                            
|View History: Annual                                            
|View History:                                                   
|                                                                
|Idaho Plant Fuel Consumption of Natural Gas (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                
|                                                                
|Idaho Plant Fuel Consumption of Natural Gas (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        | 16     | 50     | 59     | 52     | 47    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 6      | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 5/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 6/28/2024
Exhibit 4.316

 

/Emblem of the Russian Federation/

 

FEDERAL SERVICE FOR SUPERVISION IN THE SPHERE OF COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND MASS MEDIA

 

LICENSE

 

No. 161213 dated April 28, 2018

 

For Rendering

 

mobile radio telephone services

 

This License is granted to

 

Public Joint Stock Company

 

Mobile TeleSystems

 

Primary State Registration Number of a Legal Entity 
 (Individual Entrepreneur) (OGRN, OGRNIP)

 

1027700149124

 

Tax Identification Number (TIN)

 

7740000076

 











 

Location address (place of residence):

 

4, Marksistskaya Str., Moscow, 109147

 

The territory covered by telecommunications services is specified in the Appendix.

 

This License is granted for a term:

 

until April 28, 2023.

 

This License is granted by decision of the licensing body - Order dated December 26, 2017 No. 799-рчс

 

Appendix being an integral part of this license is executed on 3 sheets.

 

	
Deputy Head
    	
/signature/ O.A.   Ivanov
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
Stamp here

Official seal:
    MINISTRY OF TELECOM AND   MASS
   COMMUNICATIONS
   OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
   FEDERAL SERVICE FOR SUPERVISION
   IN THE SPHERE
   OF COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION
   TECHNOLOGY
   AND MASS MEDIA
   PSRN 1087746736296
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 In connection with the Quarterly Report of SIFCO Industries, Inc. (Company) on Form 10-Q/A
for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (Report), I, Jeffrey P. Gotschall, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive 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; and  (2)
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company. /s/ Jeffrey P. GotschallJeffrey P. GotschallChairman of the Board andChief Executive OfficerMay 23, 2005
 This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-Q/A pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed
filed by SIFCO Industries, Inc. for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended (the Exchange Act). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by
reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except
to the extent that SIFCO Industries, Inc. specifically incorporates it by reference. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to SIFCO
Industries, Inc. and will be retained by SIFCO Industries, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 1
|                                                                                                            
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                            
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                              
|View History: Annual                                                                                        
|View History: Annual                                                                                        
|View History:                                                                                               
|                                                                                                            
|Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves Adjustments (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                            
|                                                                                                            
|Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves Adjustments (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                            

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 7     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 8      | -3     | 6      | -2     | 1      | 0      | 3      | -3     | -6     | -2    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 17     | -3     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 183 (Wednesday, September 20, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 56942]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-24326]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING MEETING: National Science Foundation, National Science 
Board Executive Committee.

DATE AND TIME: September 27, 2000, 2 p.m.-3:30 p.m. Closed Session.

PLACE: The National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Room 
1205, Arlington, VA 22230.

STATUS: This meeting will be closed to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Closed Session (2 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.)
    NSF FY 2002 Budget
    NSF/OIG FY 2002 Budget

Marta Cehelsky,
Executive Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-24326 Filed 9-18-00; 3:40 pm]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
Exhibit 10.1
 This note has not been registered under the Securities Act of as amended (the
Securities Act), or any state securities laws. neither this note nor any interest or
participation herein may be reoffered, sold, assigned, transferred, pledged, encumbered or
otherwise disposed of in the absence of such registration unless such transaction is exempt from,
or not subject to, the registration requirements of the Securities Act.
 Communications,
  No. 1
$75,000,000
    
    March 13,2008
 For Value Received, Communications, Company), Arnos Corp., Seventy Five Million Dollars PIK
Amount).
  Notes) Note Purchase Agreement),
 1




---



##### 



XO Communications,LLCBy
    /s/ Carl J. GrivnerIts CEO & MANAGER 2
support of its decision. The adopted findings of fact, conclusions of law, and orders constitute the 

final decision of the board. The department shall serve written notice of the findings, conclusions, 

and order on all parties to the proceeding.

Source: 14 SDR 50, effective October 4, 1987; 23 SDR 31, effective September 8, 1996.

General Authority: SDCL 34A-1-6, 34A-6-1.6, 34A-6-1.14, 34A-11-9, 45-9-13.

Law Implemented: SDCL 1-26-23, 1-26-25, 34A-1-43.

74:09:01:20. Board member conflict of interest. A board member who is personally 

related to a party involved in a contested case hearing by two degrees of consanguinity, who has a 

direct financial interest in a party involved in a contested case hearing through employment or by 

contract, or whose spouse is employed by or directly contracts with a party involved in a contested 

case hearing, may not participate in a contested case proceeding concerning that party. The member

shall make an oral statement of recusal on the record at the initiation of the hearing in the contested 

case. A recused member may not participate in board discussions or decision-making regarding 

that contested case proceeding.

Source: 40 SDR 198, effective May 29, 2014.

General Authority: SDCL 34A-1-6, 34A-6-1.6, 34A-6-1.14, 34A-11-9, 45-9-13.

Law Implemented: SDCL 1-26-27, 34A-1-21, 34A-1-43, 34A-1-44, 34A-1-45, 34A-1-46.

74:09:01:21. Board member potential conflict of interests. A potential conflict of interest 

is an indirect financial interest, or a personal relationship or another interest in a party involved in a 

contested case hearing or enforcement hearing that is different from that of the general public, that 

a reasonable person would believe might result in bias or prejudgment of a contested case hearing. 

Board members shall disclose any potential conflict of interest in a contested case proceeding on 

the record at the initiation of the hearing, or during the hearing if they become aware of the 

existence of a potential conflict of interest. Upon its own motion or the motion of a party, the board 

may recuse a member with a potential conflict of interest if it determines that the potential conflict 

of interest raises an unacceptable risk of bias or prejudgment in the contested case proceeding.

Source: 40 SDR 198, effective May 29, 2014.

General Authority: SDCL 34A-1-6, 34A-6-1.6, 34A-6-1.14, 34A-11-9, 45-9-13.

Law Implemented: SDCL 1-26-27, 34A-1-21, 34A-1-43, 34A-1-44, 34A-1-45, 34A-1-46.
#### BANKERS LIFE & CASUALTY COMPANY, appellant v. James A. PHILLIPS, appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Jan. 22, 1954.

H. R. Wilhoit, Grayson, for appellant.

O. F. Duval, Olive Hill, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We are affirming the judgment allowing recovery of $1,000 on a life insurance policy because the record does not disclose any error prejudicial to the appellant’s substantial rights.

Judgment affirmed.
#### Delmore TAYLOR, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 24023.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 28, 1948.

No appearance for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

KRUEGER, Judge.

Appellant has filed a verified motion in this case in which he requests that his appeal be dismissed. The motion is granted and the appeal is accordingly dismissed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court *of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court
#### The HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF DALLAS et al. v. David C. McCORD, Jr., et al.

No. A-2929.

Supreme Court of Texas.

Jan. 3, 1951.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 21, 1951.

H. P. Kucera, City Atty., H. L. Nichols, Asst. City Atty., and Scurry, Scurry & Pace, all of Dallas, for petitioner.

Coe & McCord, Ungerman, Hill & Un-german, Aubrey J. Roberts, Coke & Coke, and Walter B. Branan, all of Dallas, Chas. W. Duke, of San Antonio, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The application for writ of error is refused, no reversible error, but without thereby affirming the holding of the Court of Civil Appeals on the constitutional question decided in the last paragraph of its opinion, 234 S.W.2d 108.