alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Louise HAYNES, Appellant, v. James K. FROEHLICH et al., Appellees.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Dec. 3, 1954.

Jack A. Connor, Robt. E. Humphreys, Jr., of Humphreys, Jones, Beard & Con-nor, Owensboro, for appellant.

H. Randolph Kramer, Owensboro, for appellees.

STANLEY, Commissioner.

The appeal is from a judgment rendered upon a verdict for the defendants, James K. Froehlich and wife, in a suit upon their promissory note given the appellant, Louise Haynes, for $2,655 credited by several payments, which reduced the amount claimed to $1,938.75, with interest.

The attorney for the appellees, H. Randolph Kramer, has not filed a brief, although he has been repeatedly requested to do so. Under this condition we accept the appellant’s statements of the case without examining the record. RCA 1.260; Skaggs v. Ohio Valley Rock Asphalt Co., 292 Ky. 758, 166 S.W.2d 1005.

*380J. Millard Haynes, appellant’s husband, is a building contractor. The defendant, Froehlich, is her brother and was employed as a carpenter by her husband. Haynes erected a dwelling house for the Froehlichs and conveyed it to them. The note was executed to his wife in satisfaction of the balance due for the property after the application of proceeds of a mortgage loan. The note was executed simultaneously with the closing of the loan,

The appellees admit receiving the deed to the house, executing the note and making several payments on it. Release from the obligation was sought by pleading no consideration. The burden was, of course, on the defendants to sustain their plea by competent evidence. Their evidence was directed toward proving the agreed cost of the house, that the stun actually owed Haynes was less than the note and that it was never intended that it should be paid. There was no plea of fraud or mutual mistake. So far as the appellant’s statement in her brief goes, there was no claim in the pleading or in the evidence of a pro tanto avoidance. The defendants claimed they owed neither the payee nor her husband anything although they had made substantial payments on the note without raising any question about it. See Silver v. Overhead Door Co., 311 Ky. 650, 225 S.W.2d 115. They attempted to explain away the obligation by saying it was never intended that the note should be paid, and that it was given to Mrs. Haynes as a favor to her husband, who had said it was being executed in connection with the transaction so he would not get into some tax trouble.

It is well settled that evidence of a contemporaneous parol promise made to the payor of a note that he would not-be bound by it is inadmissible and will not be permitted to defeat the positive and unqualified written promise of a promissory note. Davis v. Poulos, 237 Ky. 763, 36 S.W.2d 373; Citizens National Bank of Glasgow v. Damron, 286 Ky. 43, 149 S.W.2d 762.

We are of opinion the trial court should have directed a verdict for the plaintiff because the defendants failed to prove by competent evidence their plea of no consideration.

The motion for an appeal is sustained: and the judgment is reversed.
Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order:

*Whereas,*                    the Foreign-Trade Zones Act provides for “ * * * the establishment * * * of foreign-trade zones in ports of entry of the United States, to expedite and encourage foreign commerce, and for other purposes,” and authorizes the Foreign-Trade Zones Board to grant to qualified corporations the privilege of establishing foreign-trade zones in or adjacent to U.S. Customs ports of entry;                

*Whereas,*                    the Board's regulations (15 CFR part 400) provide for the establishment of special-purpose subzones when existing zone facilities cannot serve the specific use involved, and when the activity results in a significant public benefit and is in the public interest;                

*Whereas,*                    the Indianapolis Airport Authority, grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 72, has made application to the Board for authority to establish special-purpose subzone status at the separator and decanter centrifuge equipment parts warehousing/distribution (non-manufacturing) facility of Alfa Laval Distribution, Inc., located in Indianapolis, Indiana (FTZ Docket 50-98, filed November 5, 1998);                

*Whereas,*                    notice inviting public comment has been given in the                     **Federal Register**                     (63 FR 63451, November 13, 1998); and,                

*Whereas,*                    the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and Board's regulations are satisfied, and that approval of the application is in the public interest;                

*Now, Therefore,*                    the Board hereby grants authority for subzone status at the separator and decanter centrifuge equipment parts warehousing/distribution facility of Alfa Laval Distribution, Inc., located in Indianapolis, Indiana (Subzone 72N), at the location described in the application, and subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including § 400.28. The scope of authority does not include activity conducted under FTZ procedures that would result in a change in tariff classification.                

Signed at Washington, DC, this 18th day of January 2000 .

Robert S. LaRussa,

Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import Administration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board. 

Attest:

**Dennis Puccinelli,**

*Acting Executive Secretary.*

[FR Doc. 00-2587 Filed 2-3-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5403 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Iprodione. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2012 

Ms. HOCHUL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Iprodione. 

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

3 SECTION 1. IPRODIONE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.01.51 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 Iprodione) is amended— 

7 (1) by striking ‘‘2.4%’’ and inserting ‘‘Free’’; 

8 and 

9 (2) by striking the date in the effective period 

10 column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 

11 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

12 subsection (a) apply with respect to goods entered, or 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5403 IH

1 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

2 the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4754 

To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on Reactive Blue 269. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 25, 2012 

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on Reactive Blue 

269. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REACTIVE BLUE 269. 

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: 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4754 IH

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Reactive Blue 269 (3,10- 

Bis[(2-aminopropyl)amino] 

-6,13-dichloro-4,11- 

triphenodioxazinedisulfonic 

acid reaction products with 

2-amino-1,4- 

benzenedisulfonic acid, 2- 

[(4-aminophenyl) 

sulfonyl]ethyl hydrogen 

sulfate and 2,4,6-trifluoro1,3,5-trifluoro-1,3,5-triazine, sodium salts) (CAS 

No. 191877–09–5) (provided for in subheading 

3204.16.30) ....................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

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 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
|                                                                                           
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                           
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                             
|View History: Annual                                                                       
|View History: Annual                                                                       
|View History:                                                                              
|                                                                                           
|Texas - RRC District 10 Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Adjustments (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                           
|                                                                                           
|Texas - RRC District 10 Crude Oil + Lease Condensate 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                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | -3    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | -12    | -3     | 10     | -14    | 25     | -11    | 3      | 6      | -1     | -5    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 15     | 73     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
#### DAWE v. STATE.

No. 23043.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 7, 1945.

Percy Foreman, of Plouston, for appellant.

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

DAVIDSON, Judge.

Burglary is the offense; the punishment, three years in the penitentiary. <

After giving notice of appeal and before adjournment of the term of court at which he was convicted, appellant was released from custody pending his appeal upon an appeal bond.

*109Under the provisions of Art. 818, C.C.P., an appeal bond may be given only “after the expiration” of the term of court at which he was convicted.

To obtain release upon appeal before adjournment of the term of court, a recognizance is necessary. Arts. 816, 817, C.C.P. Templeton v. State, 132 Tex.Cr.R. 577, 105 S.W.2d 1100; Bloss v. State, 79 Tex.Cr.R. 617, 187 S.W. 487; King v. State, 83 Tex.Cr.R. 304, 203 S.W. 52.

The appeal is 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.
Exhibit
32.1




PRINCIPAL
EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350




In
connection with the annual report of Eagle Bulk Shipping Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on or about the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Sophocles Zoullas, Principal 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.




A
signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon
request.




Date:
March 2, 2009




/s/ Sophocles
Zoullas


Sophocles
Zoullas


Chief
Executive Officer
|                                                                                                                   
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                   
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                     
|View History: Annual                                                                                               
|View History: Annual                                                                                               
|View History:                                                                                                      
|                                                                                                                   
|Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves from Less than 200 Meters Deep (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                                   
|                                                                                                                   
|Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves from Less than 200 Meters Deep (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                                   

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |        |        | 23,424 | 22,606 | 22,509 | 22,166 | 21,530 | 20,579 | 18,997 | 17,918
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 17,666 | 15,513 | 14,423 | 12,224 | 10,433 | 8,964  | 8,033  | NA     |        |       
|- = 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: June 30, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 125)]
[Notices]               
[Page 37782-37783]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr30jn10-42]                         

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

 
Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Paducah, 
KY

AGENCY: Department of Energy (DOE).

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental 
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Paducah. The Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that 
public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal Register.

DATES: Thursday, July 15, 2010, 6 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Barkley Centre, 111 Memorial Drive, Paducah, Kentucky 42001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Reinhard Knerr, Deputy Designated 
Federal Officer, Department of Energy Paducah Site Office, Post Office 
Box 1410, MS-103, Paducah, Kentucky 42001, (270) 441-6825.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make 
recommendations to DOE-EM and site management in the areas of 
environmental restoration, waste management and related activities.

Tentative Agenda

     Call to Order, Introductions, Review of Agenda
     Deputy Designated Federal Officer's Comments
     Federal Coordinator's Comments
     Liaisons' Comments
     Administrative Issues
     Presentations
     Subcommittee Chairs' Comments
     Public Comments
     Final Comments
     Adjourn
    Breaks Taken as Appropriate.
    Public Participation: The EM SSAB, Paducah, welcomes the attendance 
of the public at its advisory committee

[[Page 37783]]

meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with 
physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special 
accommodations due to a disability, please contact Reinhard Knerr at 
least seven days in advance of the meeting at the telephone number 
listed above. Written statements may be filed with the Board either 
before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral 
statements pertaining to agenda items should contact Reinhard Knerr at 
the address or telephone number listed above. Requests must be received 
five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to 
include the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal 
Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will 
facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make 
public comments will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present 
their comments.
    Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing or calling Reinhard 
Knerr at the address and phone number listed above. Minutes will also 
be available at the following Web site: http://www.pgdpcab.org/meetings.html.

    Issued at Washington, DC, on June 25, 2010.
Rachel Samuel,
Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-15905 Filed 6-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-6777

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff – Appellee, 

 v. 

DOMINICKE ANTOINE TRIGGS, 

 Defendant – Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior 

District Judge. (1:03-cr-00413-CMH-2; 1:07-cv-01055-CMH) 

Submitted: October 21, 2008 Decided: October 27, 2008 

Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Dominicke Antoine Triggs, Appellant Pro Se. Patricia Marie 

Haynes, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, 

Virginia, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

 Dominicke Antoine Triggs seeks to appeal from the 

district court’s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 

(2000) motion, and denying his motion for reconsideration of 

that order. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit 

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will 

not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the 

constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or 

wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district 

court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 

322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); 

Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have 

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Triggs has 

not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a 

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT 

for the 

WE STERN DI TRI T OF TEXA 

W O DIVISIO 1 

TKOJ{ONGO TE H OLOGY LL 

ll<ORO GO TEXAS LL , 

Plaintiff (s) 

"· 

LYFT,IN ., 

Dcfcndant(s). 

ND 

Civil Action No. 6:20-C\ -00258-ADA 

RETURN OF SERVICE 

·amc to my hand n Frida 1 , Ap.-il 3, 2020 at I I :20 AM, 

Executed at: 1999 BRY I STREET , S ITE 900 DALLA , TX 75201 

within the county of D LL AS at 12:41 PM , on Frida y, April 3, 2020. 

by deli verin g to the w ithin named: 

LYFT, INC. 

By deli veri ng to its Registered Agent, CT CORPORATIO S\ STE ! I 

Hy persunall y deliv erin g to its Authorized Agent, TERRI THONGSAVAT 

a true copy ir lhi 

Sll MMOt S I A CIVIL A TJO , FIR T MENDED COMPLAI T FOR PATENT 

11 FRI GEMENT and EXHIBITS A - E 

hav ing lir sl cnclor sccl thereon the dul e of the deli very. 

BEFORE ME, the under igned authority. 0 11 thi clay per nally appeared Ernesto art in Hencra \\ ho atter being July 

sworn 0 11 o:nh : tales: " ly 11aInc i Ernesto Martin Herrera . I am :i person 1m l less 1ha11 eighteen ( 18) years or ag · a11d I 

am compc1c11I lo 111nke tlti . oath . I am c1 rcsiclc11t or th Swtc of Texas. I hnve pcrso11al lrnowlcd !.!.c ()r Ili c facts n11d 

sta1e111enrs contained herein a11d aver that each is true and correct. I am nol a party t ) 11or rclnred \lr nl'li liated wi1h 111_ 

1 arty to this suit. I have no interest in 1hc omcomc of' the suit. I have never been convic ted r n lclnny or or a 

mi . demeanor ill\o h·ing 111 ral turpitude. I am fami liar wi 1h the Texas Rules or Civil Procedure. a11cl the Tcx:i ivi l 

Prm:Licc and R 111cdie, ' Hies as the_ apply Lo ervice of' pr cess. I a111 certified by the .Judicial !1n111ch Cen ific:11io11 

··0111111i ssio11 to del iver ci1:11io1L n11cl other 1w li ces from ,rny Di stri ct. ou111y and Jus1icc ·011rts in a11d for 1h Stnt1.: of' 

Texas in comp I iancc \,v· hJ"j IO and 501.2 of the TR ' i>. 

Hy : - --- l.JIICL- ....,__.__ 'tl---- _ _ __ ___ _______ _ 

Ernesto Martin llc1Tcn 1 - PSC- UI S- Exp I I/J0 /21 

sc rvcd (t,}s pccia Id clivery .com