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

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3297 

To amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to authorize 

the use of funds for the inclusion in domestic violence education programs 

of information on legal rights available to teenage victims of dating 

violence. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 16, 2013 

Ms. KELLY of Illinois introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 

of 1965 to authorize the use of funds for the inclusion 

in domestic violence education programs of information 

on legal rights available to teenage victims of dating 

violence. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Teen Dating Violence 

5 Education Act of 2013’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 The Congress finds as follows: 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3297 IH

1 (1) Girls and women between the ages of 16 

2 and 24 are the most vulnerable to domestic violence, 

3 experiencing the highest per capita rates of non-fatal 

4 intimate partner violence. 

5 (2) One-third of teens report experiencing some 

6 kind of abuse in their romantic relationships, includ7 ing verbal and emotional abuse. 

8 (3) Approximately 1 in 5 adolescent girls report 

9 being physically or sexually hurt by a dating part10 ner. 

11 (4) Forty percent of teenage girls ages 14 to 17 

12 report knowing someone their age who has been hit 

13 or beaten by a boyfriend. 

14 (5) Twenty-six percent of girls in grades 9 to 

15 12 have been the victim of physical abuse, sexual 

16 abuse, or date rape. 

17 (6) Teenagers who are the victims of dating vio18 lence often do not know the legal actions they can 

19 take to put an end to the violence they are experi20 encing. These teenagers often do not inquire into 

21 legal actions they can take because of the perceived 

22 stigma of dating violence. 

23 (7) The cost of intimate partner violence annu24 ally exceeds $5.8 billion, including $4.1 billion in di25 rect health care expenses. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3297 IH

1 (8) Domestic violence has been estimated to 

2 cost employers in the United States up to $13 billion 

3 each year. 

4 (9) In the United States, rape is the most cost5 ly crime to its victims, totaling $127 billion a year, 

6 including medical costs, lost earnings, pain, suf7 fering, and lost quality of life 

8 SEC. 3. INCLUSION IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE EDUCATION 

9 PROGRAMS OF INFORMATION ON LEGAL 

10 RIGHTS AVAILABLE TO TEENAGE VICTIMS OF 

11 DATING VIOLENCE. 

12 Paragraph (2) of section 5571(c) of the Elementary 

13 and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 

14 7275(c)) is amended— 

15 (1) by striking ‘‘and are designed’’ and insert16 ing ‘‘, are designed’’; and 

17 (2) by inserting ‘‘, and include information spe18 cific to the State involved regarding the legal rights 

19 available to teenage victims of dating violence’’ be20 fore the period. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 213 (Thursday, November 2, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 65869]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-28117]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Mental Health; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meetings.
    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personnel information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Mental Health Special 
Emphasis Panel.
    Date: November 20, 2000.
    Time: 3:00 PM to 5:00 PM.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Neuroscience Center, National Institutes of Health, 6001 
Executive Blvd., Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Mary Sue Krause, Med, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute 
of Mental Health, NIH, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., 
Room 6138, Bethesda, MD 20892-9606, 301-443-6470.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Mental Health Special 
Emphasis Panel.
    Date: November 21, 2000.
    Time: 3:30 PM to 4:30 PM.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Neuroscience Center, National Institutes of Health, 6001 
Executive Blvd., Bethesday, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Mary Sue Krause, Med, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute 
of Mental Health, NIH, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., 
Room 6138, Bethesda, MD 20892-9606, 301-443-6470.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.242, 
Mental Health Research Grants; 93.281, Scientist Development Award, 
Scientist Developmental Award for Clinicians, and Research Scientist 
Award; 93.282, Mental Health National Research Service Awards for 
Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: October 24, 2000.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 00-28117 Filed 11-1-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

 

I, Michael J. Post,President, Treasurer and Chief Executive Officer of Gasel Transportation LinesInc. (the “Registrant”), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that, based on my knowledge:

 

1.                                       The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of theRegistrant for the period ended June 30, 2004 (the “Report”) fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

 

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

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to GaselTransportation Lines, Inc. and will be retained by Gasel Transportation Lines,Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff uponrequest.

 
| Dated: | August 19, 2004 |   | By:                               | /s/ Michael J. Post |
|--------|---------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------|--------------------------|
|   |                      |   | Michael J. Post                   |
|   |                      |   | President, Treasurer &  Chief |
|   |                      |   | Executive Officer                 |

 

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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                      15,235,692
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  129,699
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            15,908,006
<PP&E>                                       3,563,438
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,486,931)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              19,158,596
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,189,528
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        13,417
<OTHER-SE>                                  13,120,581
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                19,158,596
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               129,699
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,626,142
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              48,775
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,311,530)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (3,311,530)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,311,530)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.25)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.25)
        

</TABLE>
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________

NO. 09-12-00121-CV

____________________

CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S, LONDON AND CERTAIN 

LONDON MARKET INSURANCE COMPANIES, Appellants

V.

CHICAGO BRIDGE & IRON COMPANY, Appellee

________________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 9th District Court

Montgomery County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 12-03-02362 CV

________________________________________________________________________

ORDER

The record for this appeal has been filed under seal. See generally Tex. R. Civ. P. 

76a. The parties’ briefs include portions of the sealed record and previously ordered 

protective measures will be defeated if the briefs are published. Accordingly, we direct 

the Clerk of the Court to seal the briefs that have been filed in this appeal, subject to a 

motion to unseal the briefs. Additional briefs filed by the parties in this appeal may be 

filed under seal. 

ORDER ENTERED October 10, 2012.

PER CURIAM

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
#### HARRIS v. CITY OF PORT ARTHUR.

No. 9993.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Austin.

Dec. 19, 1951.

Carruth & Gray by William T. Gray, Port Arthur, for appellant.

A. A. DeLee, Port Arthur, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

J. Wylie Harris, appellant, sued appellee, City of Port Arthur, for $4000 alleged to be due him as a commission of 1% on the sale of $400,000 of bonds of the City of Port Arthur. The suit was based upon a written agreement between appellant and the city.

The city, on June 22, 1950, filed a motion to strike appellant’s petition on the ground that the alleged contract was against public policy and void and because the petition did not allege compliance with certain provisions of the City Charter.

On the same date the city filed a plea in abatement based substantially on the same grounds as was the motion to strike, exceptions and an answer to- appellant’s petition and a cross-action. The cross-action was based upon allegations that the city had previously paid appellant $20,000 under the contract, alleged by the city to be void, and that the city was entitled to recover this amount, with interest, and for which it prayed.

On the 7th of February, 1951 the court took up the plea in abatement filed by the city and after a hearing and due consideration sustained such plea on March 19, 1951 and rendered judgment dismissing appellant’s suit “at the cost of plaintiff without prejudice to the rights of the plaintiff to file a new suit hereon.”

This is the judgment from which this appeal was taken.

In our opinion it is not an appealable judgment. It does not either expressly or by implication dispose of the cross-action *717of the city against appellant and is, therefore, not a final judgment. Davis v. McCray Refrigerator Sales Corporation, 136 Tex. 296, 150 S.W.2d 377; Works v. Phoenix Auto Finance Co., Tex.Civ.App., Fort Worth, 219 S.W.2d 840; Panas v. State of Texas, Tex.Civ.App., Austin, 244 S.W.2d 288.

The appeal is dismissed.

Dismissed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                  MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          3,124,083
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   2,819,527
<ALLOWANCES>                                       10,000
<INVENTORY>                                    13,725,160
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               20,142,397
<PP&E>                                          5,578,674
<DEPRECIATION>                                  1,508,846
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 24,423,243
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           5,918,170
<BONDS>                                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                        4,626,400
<OTHER-SE>                                      8,483,201
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   24,423,243
<SALES>                                        16,543,574
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               16,543,574
<CGS>                                           7,471,357
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   3,735,849
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  238,608
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 5,097,760
<INCOME-TAX>                                    2,056,300
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             3,041,460
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                    3,041,460
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0.87
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0.80



</TABLE>
Exhibit 99.2

ESSEX PORTFOLIO, L.P.



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with this annual report of Essex Portfolio, L.P.
on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31,
2003 (the"Report"), I, Michael J. Schall, Chief Financial Officer of Essex
Property Trust, Inc., the general partner of the registrant Essex Portfolio, L.P.,
hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18,
Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my
knowledge:

(1)  the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

(2)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company at the dates and for the periods indicated.







Date: March 12, 2004

/s/ Michael J. SchallMichael J. Schall
Chief Financial Officer

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



<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000096988
<NAME> MARLTON TECHNOLOGIES, INC
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                       1,545,580
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,428,464
<ALLOWANCES>                                   133,597
<INVENTORY>                                  2,052,874
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,652,289
<PP&E>                                       4,972,617
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,624,111
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,793,550
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,317,600
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    20,536,496
<OTHER-SE>                                 (11,126,949)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,793,550
<SALES>                                     20,509,117
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            20,509,117
<CGS>                                       19,945,963
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               19,945,963
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             104,084
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                532,184
<INCOME-TAX>                                   158,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            374,184
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   374,184
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0.096
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.093



</TABLE>
<TABLE>
                        LIBERTY FINANCIAL COMPANIES, INC.

                 EXHIBIT 12 - Statement re Computation of Ratios
                                 ($ in millions)
<CAPTION>



                                  Three Months Ended      Six Months Ended
                                       June 30                June 30
                                  ------------------      ----------------
                                   1997        1996        1997        1996
                                   ----        ----        ----        ----

<S>                              <C>         <C>          <C>          <C>   
   Pretax income                 $ 43.9      $ 34.0       $ 95.7       $ 70.3
   Add fixed charges:
     Interest on indebtedness       5.4         5.8         10.9         11.5
     Portion of rent 
      representing the interest 
      factor                        1.0         1.0          2.1          2.1
     Preferred stock dividends      0.3         0.3          0.5          0.5
     Accretion to face value
      of redeemable convertible 
      preferred stock               0.2         0.2          0.4          0.4
                                 ------      ------       ------       ------ 
     Income as adjusted          $ 50.8      $ 41.3       $109.6       $ 84.8
                                 ======      ======       ======       ======

Fixed charges:

   Interest on indebtedness      $  5.4      $  5.8       $ 10.9       $ 11.5
                                
   Portion of rent
    representing the interest 
    factor                          1.0         1.0          2.1          2.1
   Preferred stock dividends        0.3         0.3          0.5          0.5
   Accretion to face value of
    redeemable convertible 
    preferred stock                 0.2         0.2          0.4          0.4
                                 ------      ------       ------       ------
     Total fixed charges         $  6.9      $  7.3       $ 13.9       $ 14.5
                                 ======      ======       ======       ======

Ratio of earnings to fixed         
  charges                          7.36x       5.66x        7.88x        5.85x
                                 ======      ======       ======       ======
</TABLE>
#### SANDERS v. STATE.

No. 22486.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 14, 1943.

Jno. B. McNamara, of Waco, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge.

Under his plea of guilty of the offense of burglary, appellant was assessed a punishment of two years confinement in the penitentiary.

The record before us fails to contain a final judgment 'in that there is no adjudication by the trial court of appellant’s guilt upon the verdict and finding of the jury, in the absence of which this court is without jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.

The appeal is dismissed.
### NUMBER 13 - 13 - 005 79 - CR 

## COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

CHRISTOPHER LONG , A ppellant ,

v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, A ppellee

.

On a ppeal from the 24 th District Court of De Witt County, Texas.



## ORDER OF ABATEMENT
Before Justices Garza , Benavides, and Perkes

Order Per Curiam Appellant ’ s brief was due on February 17, 2014 . Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.8(b)(2), on March 11, 2014 , the Clerk of the Court notified appellant ’ s counsel that the brief had not been timely filed, requested counsel to file a response concerning the failure to file the brief within ten days, and warned counsel that2

the Court would abate and remand this cause to the trial court for appropriate findings if a response was not filed. Counsel has nevertheless failed to file either a response or an appellate brief in this matter. Accordingly, we now ABATE this appeal and REMAND the cause to the t rial court for further proceedings pursuant to Rule 38.8(b)(2) and (3) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Upon remand, the trial court shall utilize whatever means necessary to make appropriate findings and recommendations concerning the following : (1) whether appellant desires to prosecute this appeal; (2) why appellant's counsel has failed to file a brief and whether counsel has effectively abandoned the appeal; (3) whether appellant has been denied effective assistance of counsel; (4) whether ap pellant's counsel should be removed; and (5) whether appellant is indigent and entitled to court

- appointed counsel. If the trial court determines that appellant does want to continue the appeal, that present counsel should be removed, and that appellant is indigent and entitled to

court

- appointed counsel, the trial court shall appoint new counsel to represent appellant in this appeal. If new counsel is appointed, the name, address, telephone number, and state bar number of said counsel shall be included in an order appointing counsel. The trial court shall cause its finding s and recommendations, together with any orders it may enter regarding the aforementioned issues, to be included in a supplemental clerk's record. Furthermore, the trial court shall caus e a supplemental reporter's record of any proceedings to be prepared. The supplemental clerk's record and supplemental reporter's record, if any, shall be filed with the Clerk of this Court on or before the expiration of thirty days from the date of this order.3

It is so ORDERED. PER CURIAM Do not publish. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b).
D elivered and filed th e 15 th day of April, 2014

.