alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The State, ex rel. Stine, *v.*McCaw, Chief of Div. of Aid for Aged, et al.

(No. 27626

Decided May 22, 1940.)

*15
      *Mr. M. Ray Allison,*for relatrix.

*Mr. Thomas J. Herbert,*attorney general, and *Mr. John P. Walsh,*for respondents.

Matthias, J.

The question presented is merely whether, under the civil service laws of Ohio, a position may be abolished and the duties thereof combined with another position which at that time is being *16held by a civil service employee appointed provisionally when such abolishment results in the discharge of a civil service employee holding her position as the result of a competitive examination.

It is well established in Ohio that the power to create a position in the civil service includes the power to abolish the position, particularly where the purpose of the abolishment of such position is that of economy or improvement in the public service. 7 Ohio Jurisprudence, 594, Section 87; *Curtis, Safety Dir.,*v. *State, ex rel. Morgan,*108 Ohio St., 292, 140 N. E., 522; *Vansuch, Dir. of Pub. Safety & Service,*v. *State, ex rel. Fetch,*112 Ohio St., 688, 148 N. E., 232; *State, ex rel. Miller,*v. *Witter, Dir. of Dept. of Indus. Relations,*114 Ohio St., 122, 150 N. E., 431.

The evidence in the record does not indicate that the consolidation of the two positions and the assignment of the duties theretofore performed by Miss Stine to Mrs. Hixenbaugh were for the reason or purpose of any improper or unlawful discrimination against Miss Stine.

The sole remaining question is whether the fact that Mrs. Hixenbaugh was at the time a provisional appointee affects the legality of the transaction. It recently has been held that a provisional employee is an employee within the civil service law and has tenure of office until a successor is duly appointed from an eligible list resulting from a competitive examination. Hence, the rights of the provisional appointee are the same as those of the person appointed as the result of a competitive examination except that the former may be displaced when a properly qualified civil service employee who has acquired eligibility by competitive examination is appointed to succeed him.

An order abolishing a civil service position is ineffective where a new appointee is named to perform the same duties; but where there is a substantial merger of two positions for the purpose of economy with *17no proof of ulterior motive or purpose on the part of the employing officer, or discrimination upon political, religious or other improper grounds, a writ of mandamus will not be granted to require reinstatement of an employee discharged as a result of such merger.

*Writ denied.*

Weygandt, C. J., Day, Williams and Hart, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 214 (Friday, November 3, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 66280]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-28269]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice No. 3448]


Defense Trade Advisory Group; Notice of Open Meeting

    The Defense Trade Advisory Group (DTAG) will meet in open session 
beginning at 8:30 a.m. on Tuesday, November 21, 2000, in Room F-3420 at 
the National Foreign Affairs Training Center (NFATC), 4000 Arlington 
Blvd., Arlington, VA. The membership of this advisory committee 
consists of private sector defense trade specialists, appointed by the 
Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs, who advise 
the Department on policies, regulations, and technical issues affecting 
defense trade.
    As the DTAG has not met in plenary session for some time, this 
meeting is primarily organizational in nature and will focus on 
establishing future work programs.
    Members of the public may attend the open session as seating 
capacity allows, and will be permitted to participate in the discussion 
in accordance with the Chairman's instructions.
    As access to the Department of State facilities is controlled, 
persons wishing to attend the meeting must notify the DTAG Executive 
Secretariat by COB Thursday, November 16, 2000. If notified after this 
date, the DTAG Secretariat cannot guarantee that State's Bureau of 
Diplomatic Security can complete the necessary processing required to 
attend the November 21 plenary.
    Each non-member observer wishing to attend should provide his/her 
name, company or organizational affiliation, date of birth, and social 
security number to the DTAG Secretariat by fax to (202) 647-4232 
(Attention: Mike Slack). A list will be made up for Diplomatic Security 
and the Reception Desk at the NFATC Visitor Center. Attendees must 
present a valid photo ID for entry.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Slack, DTAG Secretariat, U.S. 
Department of State, Office of Regional Security and Arms Transfers 
(PM/RSAT), Room 7424 Main State, Washington, DC 20520-2422. Phone: 
(202) 647-2882, Fax (202) 647-9779.

    Dated: October 30, 2000.
Timothy J. Dunn,
Executive Secretary, Defense Trade Advisory Group.
[FR Doc. 00-28269 Filed 11-2-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-25-P
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 125 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES 125

   Concerning the establishment of independent inspectors general at 
                      international organizations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 21, 1993

  Ms. Snowe submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
   Concerning the establishment of independent inspectors general at 
                      international organizations.

Whereas as a result of the March 1, 1993, report by then United Nations Under 
        Secretary General for Administration and Management, the Honorable 
        Richard Thornburg, concern has been raised about the United Nation's 
        deficiencies in dealing with fraud, waste, and abuse: Now, therefore, be 
        it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of the Congress that--
            (1) the President should pay urgent attention to persuading 
        the Secretary General of the United Nations to take immediate 
        steps to implement the recommendations contained in the March 
        1, 1993, report, giving prominent attention to the finding that 
        the United Nations urgently needs the establishment of a strong 
        and independent office of inspector general for the purposes of 
        internal program and administrative audit and efficiency 
        review;
            (2) the reports and findings of an inspector general should 
        be fully available to member states;
            (3) the President should seek to persuade other 
        international organizations of which the United States is a 
        member to establish independent inspectors general, where 
        applicable, in addition to other steps to develop effective 
        means to eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse;
            (4) all program and administrative audit and efficiency 
        reviews should be fully available to the governing bodies of 
        such organizations; and
            (5) the President should include as a condition of new 
        membership (or renewal of suspended membership) in any major 
        international organization that the international organization 
        have effective program and administrative audits and efficiency 
        reviews which are provided to member states as expeditiously as 
        possible after such reports and findings are made.

                                 <all>
```
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED September 4, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-60048 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee

v. CHRISTOPHER SANDS Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC No. 2:06-CR-23-ALL
Before REAVLEY, SMITH and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Christopher Sands was convicted by a jury of being a felon in possession ofa firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) and was sentenced to 120 months of imprisonment. He challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction. This court reviews his sufficiency challenge to see whether a reasonable trier of fac t could have found that the evidence established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Government, giving the Government the benefit ofall reasonable inferencesNo. 07-60048

2 and credibility choices. See United States v. Bell , 678 F.2d 547, 549 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc); see also United States v. Inocencio, 40 F.3d 716, 724 (5th Cir. 1994). Sands does not challenge the Government’s proof on any of the elements of the offense; instead, he contends that the evidence establishes that he was forced to handle a gun to defend himselfand that he therefore cannot be guilty
as a matter of law. The defense of justification was presented to the jury and included in the court’sjury instructions. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the evidence was sufficient to support a finding of guilt and a rejection ofthe theory ofjustification. Specifically, reasonable jurors could rationally conclude that Sands did not possess the gun in self defense because therewas noimminent danger of harm and/or because he placed himself in danger based on eyewitness testimony that the victim did not have a gun prior to or after the shooting; eyewitness testimony that only one or two shots
were fired, and two bullets were recovered from the victim’s body; the fact that
nogun other than Sands’ was discovered at the crime scene; the fact that the .32 caliber gun Sands’ mother surrendered to police three days after the event, which gun was purportedly the victim’s, did not match the .34 caliber spent casing officers recovered from the scene; and Sands’ own admission to investigating officers immediately following the incident that he was the first to pull a gun, not the victim. The essence of Sands’ argument on appeal is that the jury should have accepted his version ofevents, which established all ofthe required elements of the justification defense. However, this court will not reweigh the evidence or second-guess the jury’s credibility determinations. U nited States v. Mathes, 151 F.3d 251, 252 (5th Cir. 1998). The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
#### HOWARD et al. v. CITY OF HARLAN.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

March 27, 1953.

*524Edward G. Hill, Harían, for appellants.

C. A. Cornelius, Harían, for appellee.

CULLEN, Commissioner.

The action involves the validity of a $100,000 bond issue voted by the citizens of the city of Harlan, for recreational facilities. The lower court adjudged that the statutes were fully complied with in calling the election; the election was validly held; the bonds will not exceed the constitutional debt limit of the city; the tax for retirement of the bonds is not limited to the rate specified in Section 157 of the Kentucky Constitution; and the ordinance for issuance of the bonds was validly adopted.

An examination of the record discloses that the judgment is correct in all respects.

Judgment affirmed.
**Exhibit
      32**




**CERTIFICATION
      OF THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**




Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002, the undersigned officer of Feris International, Inc. (the “Company”)
      hereby certifies that, to his knowledge:




(i)  The
      Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the fiscal year ended December
      31, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
      amended; and




(ii)  The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Date:
                  February 21, 2007
              By:
              /s/
                  Patricia LinsonName:
                  Patricia LinsonTitle:
                  President
EXHIBIT 31.1
                                                                    ------------
I, C. Dean McLain, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Western Power &
Equipment Corp.;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of
a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.   The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

     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) 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; and

     c) 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 (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.   The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

     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; and

     b) 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:   December 15, 2005


/s/ C. Dean McLain
-------------------------------------
C. Dean McLain
President and Chief Executive Officer
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION (CPSC) 

Statement of Regulatory Priorities 

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (the Commission) is charged with protecting the 

public from unreasonable risks of death and injury associated with consumer products. To achieve this 

goal, the Commission: 

• develops mandatory product safety standards or bans when other, less restrictive, efforts are 

inadequate to address an unreasonable risk of injury, or where required by statute; 

• obtains repair, replacement, or refund of the purchase price for defective products that present a 

substantial product hazard; 

• develops information and education campaigns about the safety of consumer products; 

• participates in the development or revision of voluntary product safety standards; and 

• follows congressional mandates to enact specific regulations. 

Unless directed otherwise by congressional mandate, when deciding which of these approaches 

to take in any specific case, the Commission gathers and analyzes the best available data about the 

nature and extent of the risk presented by the product. The Commission’s rules require the Commission 

to consider, among other factors, the following criteria when deciding the level of priority for any particular 

project: 

• frequency and severity of injury; 

• causality of injury; 

• chronic illness and future injuries; 

• costs and benefits of Commission action; 

• unforeseen nature of the risk; 

• vulnerability of the population at risk; and 

• probability of exposure to the hazard. 

Significant Regulatory Actions: 

1

Regulations.gov Tuesday, November 26, 2013 Regulatory Plan
Currently, the Commission is considering one rule that would constitute a “significant regulatory action” 

under the definition of that term in Executive Order 12866: 

1. Flammability Standard for Upholstered Furniture 

Under section 4 of the Flammable Fabrics Act (FFA), the Commission may issue a flammability 

standard or other regulation for a product of interior furnishing if the Commission determines that 

such a standard is needed to adequately protect the public against unreasonable risk of the 

occurrence of fire leading to death or personal injury or significant property damage. The 

Commission’s regulatory proceeding could result in several actions, one of which could be the 

development of a mandatory standard requiring that upholstered furniture meet mandatory 

labeling requirements, resist ignition, or meet other performance criteria under test conditions 

specified in the standard. 

2

Regulations.gov Tuesday, November 26, 2013 Regulatory Plan
<PAGE> 
                           EXHIBIT 3.4

                      CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                              OF THE
                    CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                    OF ROCHESTER TELEPHONE CORP.

          Under Section 805 of the Business Corporation Law

     We, the undersigned, DENISE K. GUTSTEIN and GREGG C. SAYRE,
being respectively President and Secretary of ROCHESTER TELEPHONE
CORP. (the "Corporation"), do hereby CERTIFY that:

     FIRST:  The name of the corporation is ROCHESTER TELEPHONE
CORP.

     SECOND: The Certificate of Incorporation of the Corporation
was filed in the Department of State of the State of New York on
December 9, 1994, under the original name of R-NET CORP.

     THIRD:  The Certificate of Incorporation is hereby amended to
change the name of the Corporation.

     FOURTH: To accomplish the foregoing amendment, Article 1 of
the Certificate of Incorporation is hereby amended to read:

     1.     The name of the corporation is:

            FRONTIER TELEPHONE OF ROCHESTER, INC.

     FIFTH:  The Amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation was
authorized by the Board of Directors of the Corporation followed
by a vote of the holders of a majority of all outstanding shares
entitled to vote thereon at a meeting of shareholders pursuant to
Section 502 of the Business Corporation Law of the State of New
York.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed and
subscribed this Certificate of Amendment of the Certificate of
Incorporation of the Corporation this 18th day of September, 1997.

                                        /s/ Denise K. Gutstein
                                        -----------------------
                                        Denise K. Gutstein
                                        President

                                        /s/ Gregg C. Sayre
                                        ------------------------
                                        Gregg C. Sayre
                                        Secretary
<PAGE>
<PAGE>2
STATE OF NEW YORK)
COUNTY OF MONROE ) SS:

Denise K. Gutstein and Gregg C. Sayre, being duly sworn, depose
and say that they are the persons who signed the foregoing
certificate of amendment; that they signed said certificate in
the capacity set beneath their signatures thereon; that they
have read the said certificate and know the contents thereof; and
that the statements contained therein are true to their own
knowledge.

/s/ Denise K. Gutstein                  /s/ Gregg C. Sayre
----------------------                  -------------------------
Denise K. Gutstein                      Gregg C. Sayre
President                               Secretary


Subscribed and sworn to before
me on September 18, 1997.

/s/ Alexis A. Spinelli
------------------------
     Notary Public
EXHIBIT 32.1 TO 10-QSB

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection with the quarterly report of Prologic Management Systems,
Inc. (the  "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2004, as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"), I, James M. Heim, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, to
the best of my  knowledge,  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 for the periods presented.



                               /S/ JAMES M. HEIM
                               -----------------------------------
                               James M. Heim
                               Chief Executive Officer
                               Prologic Management Systems, Inc.
                               November 10, 2004