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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4806 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4806

To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on certain battery operated ice 
                             cream makers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 25, 2012

Mr. Scott of Virginia introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on certain battery operated ice 
                             cream makers.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN BATTERY OPERATED ICE CREAM MAKERS.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00        Battery operated    Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          single serve ice                                                  12/31/2015
                          cream makers
                          (provided for in
                          subheading
                          (8509.40.00).....

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5063 

To extend the suspension of duty on certain organic pigments and dyes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 27, 2012 

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

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the suspension of duty on certain organic pigments 

and dyes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN ORGANIC PIGMENTS AND DYES. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.32.07 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 certain organic pigments and dyes) is amended by striking 

7 the date in the effective period column and inserting ‘‘12/ 

8 31/2015’’. 

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

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


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5063 IH

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

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

April 1, 2013

h0325

Order 

April 1, 2013

145286

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 145286

COA: 308278

Oakland CC: 2004-195148-FH

DIONNE DAVON JORDAN,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 8, 2012 order of 

the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to 

meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
#### MCDONALD et ux. v. JOSKE’S OF TEXAS.

No. 12681.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

May 12, 1954.

Rehearing Denied June 9, 1954.

G. Woodson Morris, Charles R. Hancock, San Antonio, for appellants.

Carl Wright Johnson, Edward P. Fahey, San Antonio, for appellee.

POPE, Justice.

Plaintiff, E. L. McDonald and his wife, have appealed from a judgment rendered on an instructed verdict. The plaintiffs alleged that Mrs. McDonald slipped on some grapes while descending a stairway leading to the basement in defendant’s store. Plaintiffs asserted certain specific grounds of negligence. They stated that the defendant was negligent (1) in not removing or causing to be removed, some grapes that were on the steps of the stairway, and (2) in not exercising reasonable care in order to discover the presence of the grapes on the steps in question before plaintiff used the stairway. Plaintiffs then asserted that defendant was guilty of negligence generally for “not maintaining the steps in question in a reasonably safe condition for its customers.”

The case was tried on the theory that Mrs. McDonald slipped on some grapes, but the proof wholly failed to establish that the plaintiff slipped on any grapes. However, in the course of the trial the plaintiff Mrs. McDonald stated, with reference to the steps: “The lighting was very bad at that time * * ” Plaintiffs contend that statement entitled them to an issue inquiring whether the steps in question were maintained in a reasonably safe condition.

When one pleads and relies upon ’ specific acts or omissions of negligence, it is not proper to submit issues as to negligence in general terms. To inquire whether defendant maintained the steps in a reasonably safe condition is to submit an ■issue “general in nature portraying the whole of . plaintiff’s pleadings; thus con*476cealing under a mass of generalities the facts relied upon for recovery.” Missouri-Kansas-Texas R. Co. v. Roberts, Tex.Civ.App., 225 S.W.2d 198, 202; Panhandle & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Villarreal, Tex.Civ.App., 153 S.W.2d 350. Clary v. Morgan Motor Company, Tex.Civ.App., 246 S.W.2d 936, 937, expressly declares that an inquiry should not be made whether a defendant “failed to maintain the premises in a safe condition”. See 41 Tex.Jur., Trial-Civil Cases, § 270.

The court properly granted the instructed verdict. The judgment is affirmed.
**Exhibit 10.4.2**

 

**Loan No. ML0936T1A**

 

**FIRST AMENDMENT TO PROMISSORY NOTE AND SUPPLEMENT**

** **

**THIS****FIRST AMENDMENT TO PROMISSORY NOTE AND SUPPLEMENT**** **(this “Amendment”) isentered into as of September 12, 2005, between **MONARCHUTILITIES I L.P.**(formerly known as Tecon Water Company, L.P.), aTexas limited partnership (the “Company”), and **CoBANK,ACB, **a federally charteredinstrumentality of the United States****(“CoBank”).

 

**BACKGROUND**

 

The Company and CoBank are parties to a PromissoryNote and Supplement dated as of May 1, 2002 and numbered ML0936T1 (the “Supplement”).Since the date of the Supplement, the Company has changed its name from TeconWater Company, L.P. to Monarch Utilities I L.P. The parties now desire to amendthe Supplement to reflect the change in the Company’s name.

 

**NOW, THEREFORE,**forgood and valuable other consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which arehereby established, the parties agree as follows:

 

**SECTION 1.         Amendment**.  Thename of the Company is hereby amended from “Tecon Water Company, L.P.” to “MonarchUtilities I L.P.”. Wherever in the Supplement the name “Tecon Water Company,L.P.” appears, it shall be deemed to mean “Monarch Utilities I L.P.”

 

**SECTION 2.         Confirmation**. This Amendment reflects the entire understanding between the partieswith respect to the subject matter hereof. Except as modified hereby, theSupplement shall remain in full force and effect as written.

 

**IN WITNESS WHEREOF**, the parties have caused this Amendment to be executed as of the dateshown above by their duly authorized officers:

 
|   |   | **CoBANK, ACB**,                      |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|   |   | a federally chartered instrumentality |
|   |   | of the United States                  |
|   |   |                                  |
|   |   | By:                                   | /s/ Illegible |
|   |   | Name:                                 | Illegible |
|   |   | Title:                                | Vice President |
|   |   |                                  |
|   |   | **MONARCH UTILITIES I L.P.,**         |
|   |   | a Texas limited partnership           |
|   |   |                                  |
|   |   | By:                                   | Texas Water Services Group, LLC, |
|   |   |                                  | a Texas limited liability company |
|   |   |                                  | General Partner |
|   |   |                                  |   |
|   |   |                                  | By: | /s/ Shelley Farnham |
|   |   |                                  | Name: | Shelley Farnham |
|   |   |                                  | Title: | Vice President and Secretary |
|        |        |                                       |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |

 

----
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference of our report included in this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended September 30, 2000, of Southern California Edison Company into the
previously filed Registration Statements which follow:

     Registration Form               File No.                  Effective Date
     -----------------               --------                  --------------
      Form S-3                      33-50251                 September 21, 1993
      Form S-3                      333-44778                September 7, 2000




ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP
ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

Los Angeles
November 13, 2000
#### VALENZUELA v. STATE.

No. 24602.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 9, 1949.

None on appeal, for appellant

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

This is a conviction for robbery' by assault, with punishment assessed at. confinement in the penitentiary for" life, so fixed by reason of a prior conviction for an offense of the same nature.-'

At the outset, we are met with the motion of the State to dismiss the appeal because of the escape of the appellant pending the appeal.

Whether the appellant effected his escape within the meaning of that term as announced in Loyd v. State, 19 Tex.App. 137, and Johnson v. State, 41 Tex.Cr.R. 9, 51 S.W. 911 and 54 S.W. 598, is such a close question that we have decided the motion to dismiss the appeal should be and is hereby overruled.

Appellant’s guilt of robbery by assault while exhibiting a pistol is shown by the testimony of the injured party. The defense of alibi was rejected by the jury. The facts support the jury’s finding.

In the development of its case the State showed that some two days after the robbery appellant was arrested and there was taken from his person-a-pistol, which was afterward identified as having been used in the robbery. To the introduction of this testimony, as also the introduction in evidence of the pistol, appellant objected, his ground of objection being that, the pistol was obtained as a result of an unlawful and illegal arrest. The only fact proved as a result of the arrest was that appellant was found in possession of the pistol which was identified as having been used ■ in 'the' robbery. ' "

It is noted that, upon more than one occasion, appellant, while testifying ■ as' a witness in his own behalf, -admitted 'having had possession of the pistol' at the time of the arrest and contended, in that • conriec- ■ tion, that he had purchased the pistol, naming the person from whom the purchase had been made.

It is thus made to appear that appellant, by his own testimony, put in evidence the very fact to which 'he was objecting. He cannot, therefore, be heard to', complain. See Soble v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 218 S.W. 2d 195; and authorities there cited.

Upon the jury’s finding appellant guilty of the primary, offense of robbery by assault and a previous conviction for an; offense, of like 'nature,' the punishment *240of life imprisonment was fixed by tbe statute, Art. 62, P.C. No necessity existed, therefore, for the jury to fix punishment in its verdict. Gerard v. State, 91 Tex.Cr.R. 374, 238 S.W. 924; Ware v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 207 S.W.2d 868.

Other bills of exception appearing have been examined and are overruled without discussion.

■No error appearing, the judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> UT
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    1,704,317
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                     35,153
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         171,204
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       183,146
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,093,820
<COMMON>                                        40,918
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      307,484
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            379,062
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 727,464
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           620,597
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                 101
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                 119,485
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                      229
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 625,944
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                2,093,820
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      221,295
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            11,526
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     175,298
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     186,824
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         34,471
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                             (2,517)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  31,954
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        13,736
<NET-INCOME>                                    18,218
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   18,218
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        22,506
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                       10,989
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          14,672
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        


</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**Certification of Chief ExecutiveOfficer**

**Pursuant to Section 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002**

**(18 U.S.C. § 1350)**

 

In connection with the quarterly report of SouthWestWater Company (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,2008 (the “Report”), I, Mark A. Swatek, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18U.S.C. §1350), that:

 

1)              to my knowledge, the Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2)              the information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.

 
| Dated:  August 11, 2008 | /s/  MARK A. SWATEK      |
|------------------------------|--------------------------|
|                         | Mark  A. Swatek          |
|                         | Chief  Executive Officer |

 

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

<PAGE>
<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Consolidated Statement of Income and the Consolidated Statement of Financial
Position and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000093397
<NAME> AMOCO CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                             122
<SECURITIES>                                       535
<RECEIVABLES>                                     2868
<ALLOWANCES>                                        17
<INVENTORY>                                       1270
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  5311
<PP&E>                                           51499
<DEPRECIATION>                                   28439
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   31549
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             5213
<BONDS>                                           5257
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          2552
<OTHER-SE>                                       13130
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     31549
<SALES>                                          19955
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 23021
<CGS>                                            14876
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    14876
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  4931
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 303
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   1250
<INCOME-TAX>                                       282
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                968
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       968
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.01
        

</TABLE>
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4801 

To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on certain portable slow cookers. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 25, 2012 

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on certain portable 

slow cookers. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN PORTABLE SLOW COOKERS. 

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

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Portable Slow Cooker with 

single locking clip lid (provided for in subheading 

8516.79.00) ....................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 4801 IH

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

2 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 

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

4 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# AGENCY:

 Export-Import Bank of the United States.

# ACTION:

 Notice.

# SUMMARY:

 Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 the Export-Import Bank of the United States is submitting to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request to review and approve a revised exporter and banker survey which expired on February 28, 1999. The purpose of the survey is to fulfill a statutory mandate (the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945, as amended, 12 U.S.C. 635) which directs Ex-Im Bank to report annually to the U.S. Congress any action taken toward providing export credit programs that are competitive with those offered by official foreign export credit agencies. The Act further stipulates that the annual report on competitiveness should include the results of a survey of lending institutions to determine whether their export financing is competitive with that of their foreign counterparts.

                        Accordingly, Ex-Im Bank is requesting that the proposed survey (EIB No. 00-02) be sent to approximately 50 respondents, split equally between bankers and exporters. The new survey is the same as in previous years as it asks bankers and exporters to evaluate the competitiveness of Ex-Im Bank's programs vis-a                                                -vis foreign export credit agencies. However, it has been modified in order to account for newer policies and to capture enough information to provide a better analysis of our competitiveness.                    

# DATES:

 Written comments should be received on or before March 6, 2000.

# ADDRESSES:

 Direct all written comments or requests for additional information to David Rostker, Office of Management and Budget, Information and Regulatory Affairs, New Executive Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20503, (202) 395-3897.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

 Carlista Robinson (202) 565-3351

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

*Type of Request:*                     Revision.                

*Annual Number of Respondents:*                     50.                

*Annual Burden Hours:*                     50.                

*Frequency of Reporting or Use:*                     Annual survey.                

Dated: January 31, 2000.

Carlista Robinson,

Agency Clearance Officer.

[FR Doc. 00-2507  Filed 2-3-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6690-01-M
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

 

In connection with the Annual Report of LegendsFinancial Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for theperiod ending December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Thomas E. Bates, Jr.,Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)                                  The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities andExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

 
|   | /s/ Thomas E. Bates, Jr.         |   |
|--------|---------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Thomas E. Bates, Jr.             |
|   | Executive Vice President and          |
|   | Chief Financial Officer               |
|   | Legends Financial Holdings, Inc. |
|   | March 30, 2005                   |

 

1

----