alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Gladys MITCHELL et al., Appellants, v. W. A. LANGLEY, Appellee.

No. 2257.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Eastland.

Dec. 4, 1942.

Kennemer & Armstrong, of Dallas, for appellant.

Sullivan & Sullivan, of Big Spring, for appellee.

LESLIE, Chief Justice.

The above styled and numbered cause was heretofore consolidated with cause number 2315, styled W. A. Langley, Appellant v. John Norris, Appellee, 167 S.W.2d 603, and submitted at the same time as the latter with the understanding and agreement that in the event the Norris case, 2315, was affirmed by the appellate court, no recovery would be sought by Mitchell et al. against W. A. Langley in the instant cause. That is, in such event the judgment in the trial court in favor of Defendant Langley should be affirmed.

After due consideration of the numerous contentions presented in the Norris case, No. 2315, this court, in an opinion handed down November 27, 1942, affirmed the judgment of the trial court therein. In view of the above understanding of the litigants, made known to this court at the time the Norris case was submitted and orally argued, and in the light of the con-*614elusions expressed in this court’s opinion affirming the judgment of the trial court in the Norris case, it follows that the judgment below in the instant case should be affirmed. It is so ordered.
#### RELIANCE LIFE INSURANCE CO., Appellant, v. John B. MOTHERAL, Jr., Appellee.

No. 14643.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Fort Worth.

Oct. 13, 1944.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 1, 1944.

John T. Pearson and John T. Gano, both of Fort Worth, for appellant.

Cal Estill, of Fort Worth, for appellee.

BROWN, Justice.

This is a companion case to No. 14642, styled Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Motheral, this day decided by us, 183 S.W.2d 677. Judgment for plaintiff and the insurer appeals. The provision of the policy of insurance in the instant suit is: “Disability will bet *680deemed to be total when it is of such an extent that the insured is prevented thereby from engaging in any occupation or performing any work for compensation or financial gain, and such total disability will be presumed to be permanent when it is present and has existed continuously for not less than ninety days.”

What we have said in 183 S.W.2d 677 applies to the instant case.

The judgment of the trial court is reversed and the cause remanded.
IV

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 168

Relating to the Republic of China on Taiwan’s rejoining the United Nations.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 19, 1993

Mr. ROHRABACHER submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was

referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Relating to the Republic of China on Taiwan’s rejoining

the United Nations.

Whereas China has been a divided nation since 1949, and the

Government of the Republic of China on Taiwan (ROC)

and the People’s Republic of China on the Chinese mainland have since exercised exclusive jurisdiction over separate parts of China;

Whereas United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758

(1971) does not constitute a conclusive settlement of the

issue of China’s seat in the United Nations resulting

from the division of China;

Whereas the Government of the ROC acknowledges that two

equal and distinct political entities exist within divided

China;
2

HCON 168 IH

Whereas the Republic of China is currently the fourteenth

largest trading nation in the world; its gross national

product is the world’s twentieth largest; its annual per

capita income exceeds US$10,000; its foreign exchange

reserves exceed US$80,000,000,000; and has become the

world’s seventh largest investor outside its own borders;

Whereas twenty-one million Chinese people on Taiwan enjoy

the benefits of democracy and a free market economy;

Whereas the Republic of China has actively joined other nations in responding to international disasters and crises;

has undertaken assistance programs for less-developed

nations; and has in other ways fulfilled regional and

global responsibilities;

Whereas the ROC has already joined several important multinational organizations in recent years, including Asia/Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and the Asian Development Bank, and its admission into these organizations

has been supported by the United States;

Whereas a consensus to rejoin the United Nations has

emerged in the Republic of Taiwan, and the ROC Government has launched a campaign to pursue full membership in the United Nations without prejudice to the current position of the People’s Republic of China in the

United Nations;

Whereas, there is precedence for parallel representation for

divided nations in the United Nations. Both North and

South Korea are United Nations members, as were East

and West Germany; and

Whereas ROC membership in the United Nations is in conformity with the United Nations principal of universality

and will contribute to the peace and stability of the Pa-
3

HCON 168 IH

cific region, and therefore, ROC membership in the

United Nations is supportive of the interests of the

United States: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that it should

3 be the policy of the United States Government to support

4 readmitting the Republic of China to the United Nations.

Æ
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

LUIS BENJAMIN LOPEZ,

Petitioner,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, et al.,

Respondents.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Civil Action No. 3:22-CV-0883-X-BT

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND 

RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE

JUDGE

The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a 

recommendation in this case. (Doc. 30). No objections were filed. The District 

Court reviewed the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation for plain 

error. Finding none, the Court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions, and 

Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. 

Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Lopez’s Motion (Doc. 27). The Clerk of the 

Court is INSTRUCTED to REOPEN this case. 

IT IS SO ORDERED this 9th day of November, 2023.

____________________________________

BRANTLEY STARR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:22-cv-00883-X-BT Document 33 Filed 11/09/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 471
#### The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, *v.*Arnold Schildhaus, Defendant.

Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York,

April 17, 1958.

*642
      *Arnold Schildhaus,*defendant in person.

*Frank S. Hogan, District Attorney,*for plaintiff.

Benjamin Gassman, P. J.

Defendant demurs to the information herein on four grounds. Only two of the four grounds specified need be considered on this motion. In substance, they allege that the information is legally, insufficient in that it does not specifically set forth the charge against the defendant.

All criminal actions in this court must be prosecuted by informations made by the District Attorney. (Code Crim. Pro., § 742.) Through the filing of such informations this court acquires jurisdiction to hear and determine misdemeanors *(People*v. *Perrin,*170 App. Div. 375). The information must contain *facts*setting forth the nature of the charge against the defendant and the acts constituting it, so as to enable the defendant to prepare for trial and prevent his being tried again for the same offense *(People*v. *Kasloff,*54 N. Y. S. 2d 455). The information cannot be supplemented or pieced out by affidavits in the Magistrates’ Court *(People*v. *Zambounis,*251 N. Y. 94).

The information must charge the offense in plain, concise, intelligible language, stating facts without conclusions or evidence. (Pe*ople*v. *Patrick,*175 Misc. 997.) It must describe or identify the acts or facts constituting the offense, with accuracy, exactness and precision *(People*v. *Zambounis, supra).*

The information under attack charges the defendant with *“*the crime of violating Multiple Dwelling Law” and alleges that *“*the said defendant on or about November 18, 1957, and prior thereto, at the City of New York, in the County of New York, being the agent and having the management and control of the multiple dwelling 212-214 West 141st Street, unlawfully did permit divers violations in and about the said premises, and the same were maintained as a nuisance with conditions therein which were dangerous to human life and detrimental to health. ’ ’

In the light of the forgoing decisions, the information falls far short of the legal requirements. It fails to allege the specific acts claimed to have been committed by the defendant. The *643charge that the defendant violated the Multiple Dwelling Law, without setting forth the particular acts constituting such violation, is insufficient. *(People ex rel. Sandman*v. *Tuthill,*79 App. Div. 24; *People*v. *Wacke,*77 Misc. 196; *People*v. *Rockwell,*123 N. Y. S. 2d 201; *People*v. *Pillion,*78 Hun 74.) While the information should be liberally construed, in determining its sufficiency, it must, nevertheless, allege a specific crime. *(People*v. *Zeigler,*144 Misc. 803; *People*v. *Hiley,*33 Misc. 168.)

Accordingly, the demurrer is allowed and the information is dismissed.
EXHIBIT
23.1








CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-61231) pertaining to the 1998 stock option plan of PDI,
Inc.,  Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-60512) pertaining to
the 2000 Omnibus Incentive Plan of PDI, Inc. and Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-123312) pertaining to the 2004 Stock Award and Incentive Plan of
PDI, Inc. of our reports dated March 7, 2008, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements and schedule of PDI, Inc. and the effectiveness of internal
control over financial reporting of PDI, Inc., included in the Annual Report
(Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2007.








/s/Ernst
& Young LLP


Iselin,
New Jersey


March 7,
2008
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                         5
       
<S>                                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                              SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      1,149,670
<SECURITIES>                               10,292,437
<RECEIVABLES>                              18,474,729
<ALLOWANCES>                                  835,000
<INVENTORY>                                   308,453
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           35,445,235
<PP&E>                                     13,425,029
<DEPRECIATION>                              3,252,188
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             61,058,103
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      16,763,606
<BONDS>                                       849,171
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                       92,707
<OTHER-SE>                                 42,702,619
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               61,058,103
<SALES>                                    21,194,296
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           48,896,128
<CGS>                                       2,284,532
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              16,176,549
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           22,152,540
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            186,954
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            11,305,797
<INCOME-TAX>                                3,750,812
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         7,554,985
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                7,554,985
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0.80
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.80
        

</TABLE>
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Legal Services Corporation

# TIME AND DATE:

The Operations and Regulations Committee of the Legal Services Corporation Board of Directors will meet on November 10, 2000. The meeting will begin at 11:30 a.m. and continue until the Committee concludes its agenda. 

# LOCATION:

Marriott at Metro Center, 775 12th Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 

# STATUS OF MEETING:

Open. 

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

 

1. Approval of agenda. 

2. Approval of the minutes of the Committee's meeting of September 18, 2000. 

3. Staff report on the status of actions relating to 45 CFR Part 1628 (Recipient Fund Balances) and the proposed Property Acquisition and Management Manual. 

4. Consider and act on potential rulemaking action implementing the findings of the Erlenborn Commission. 

5. Consider and act on Report of the Regulations Review Task Force. 

6. Consider and act on other business. 

7. Public comment.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR INFORMATION:

Victor M. Fortuno, Vice President for Legal Affairs, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary, at (202) 336-8800. 

# SPECIAL NEEDS:

Upon request, meeting notices will be made available in alternate formats to accommodate visual and hearing impairments. Individuals who have a disability and need an accommodation to attend the meeting may notify Shannon Nicko Adaway, at (202) 336-8800. 

Dated: November 1, 2000. 

Victor M. Fortuno, 

Vice President for Legal Affairs, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-28461 Filed 11-1-00; 4:56 pm] 

BILLING CODE 7050-01-P
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 191 (Monday, October 3, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 61134]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-25446]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 7618]

Waiver of Restriction on Assistance to the Central Government of 
the Central African Republic

    Pursuant to Section 7086(c)(2) of the Department of State, Foreign 
Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2010 (Div. F, Pub. 
L. 111-117) as carried forward by the Full-Year Continuing 
Appropriations Act, 2011 (Div. B, Pub. L. 112-10) (``the Act''), and 
Department of State Delegation of Authority Number 245-1, I hereby 
determine that it is important to the national interest of the United 
States to waive the requirements of Section 7086(c)(1) of the Act with 
respect to the Central African Republic and I hereby waive such 
restriction.
    This determination shall be reported to the Congress, and published 
in the Federal Register.

    Dated: August 1, 2011.
Thomas Nides,
Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources.
[FR Doc. 2011-25446 Filed 9-30-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-26-P
```
#### McCARTY v. COMMONWEALTH.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Oct. 10, 1952.

W. S. Jett, Jr., Winchester, for appellant.

J. D. Buckman, Jr., Atty.. Gen., for appellee.

CLAY, Commissioner.

Appellánt was convicted of grand larceny and sentenced to one year in the penitentiary. The evidence established that after following the complaining witness home, he picked up her pocketbook where she had left it in her front yard and made off with it. It contained $50 in cash, and later, it was returned with $10 missing therefrom. The charge in the indictment was stealing the money. Appellant’s.defense was that he had taken the pocketbook “just for fun”. Appellant testified that he and one Horn, who was jointly indicted with him and convicted in a separate trial, had agreed to take'the pocketbook when they saw the complaining witness on her way home.

For reversal appellant first contends his demurrer to the indictment should have been sustained because- it was indefinite. There is no merit in this contention.

He next urges that the court should have granted a continuance because of the absence of a witness. The affidavit filed with the motion, alleging what this witness would testify, shows that the evidence wás irrelevant and immaterial, and the court did not abuse its discretion in overruling the motion.

It is next contended the court should have dismissed the jury on appellant’s motion for the reason that the panel had earlier heard his brother tried on a charge of murder. The brother was acquitted, and appellant’s theory is that the jury would be prejudiced against him because two members of the same familly were tried on criminal charges at the same term of court. This is a unique contention, but there is nothing in our Code or decisions which would require dismissal of the jury under these circumstances. Section 210 of the Criminal Code of Practice specifies seven grounds of implied bias. This is not one of them, and we see no reason for adding it as an additional ground. In the first place, we cannot reasonably assume the jury would be prejudiced against appellant. In the Second place, it would disrupt the orderly administration of justice if defendants could demand a new jury .panel *874simply because a relative had been tried on a wholly unrelated charge at the same term of court. It was not error to overrule this motion.

Appellant next urges he was entitled to an instruction on petit larceny. However, the uncontradicted testimony of the complaining witness was that the pocketbook contained, when taken, $50.

Appellant lastly contends that the Commonwealth failed to prove a felonious intent. The admissions of appellant and the other evidence in the case were amply sufficient to sustain a finding of the jury that appellant did intend to steal the money in the pocketbook.

The judgment is affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 217 (Wednesday, November 8, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67020-67021]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-28771]


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

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD


Agenda; Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND DATE: 9:30 a.m., Tuesday, November 14, 2000.

PLACE: NTSB Board Room, 429 L'Enfant Plaza, S.W. Washington, D.C. 
20594.

STATUS: Open to the Public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:   
7302  Highway Accident Report: School Bus and Dump Truck

[[Page 67021]]

Collision, Central Bridge, New York, on October 21, 1999.

NEWS MEDIA CONTRACT: Telephone: (202) 314-6100.
    Individuals requesting specific accommodation should contact Mrs. 
Barbara Bush at (202) 314-6220 by Friday, November 9, 2000.

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Rhonda Underwood (202) 314-6065.

    Dated: November 3, 2000.
Rhonda Underwood,
Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-28771 Filed 11-6-00; 10:50 am]
BILLING CODE 7533-01-M
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

RAYMOND BUTLER, §

§

Plaintiff, §

§

V. § No. 3:22-cv-507-E

§

LVNV FUNDING, LLC, §

§

Defendant. §

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND 

RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a 

recommendation in this case. No objections were filed. The District Court reviewed 

the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation for plain error. Finding 

none, the Court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the 

United States Magistrate Judge.

SO ORDERED: July 25, 2022.

Case 3:22-cv-00507-E-BN Document 8 Filed 07/25/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 36
MANAGEMENT'S REPORT ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE INTERNAL
CONTROL STRUCTURE RELATIVE TO THE SERVICING OF
AUTOMOBILE LOAN RECEIVABLES


The management of the Bank is responsible for establishing and maintaining
the internal control structure.  In fulfilling this responsibility,
estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the expected
benefits and related costs of control procedures.  The objectives of an
internal control structure are to provide management with reasonable, but
not absolute, assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss from
unauthorized use or disposition, and that transactions are executed in
accordance with management's authorization and recorded properly to permit
the preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles.

We have performed an evaluation of the effectiveness of the Bank's
internal control structure based on the criteria established in Internal
Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission ("COSO") relative to the servicing
of automobile loan receivables owned by Chevy Chase Auto Receivables Trusts
Series 1995-2, 1996-1, 1996-2, 1997-1, 1997-2, 1997-3, 1997-4, 1998-1
and 1998-2 (collectively referred to as the "Trusts" herein) as of
September 30, 1999, and we have determined that the Bank maintained an
effective internal control structure over financial reporting relative
to the servicing of automobile loan receivables owned by the Trusts as
of September 30, 1999.

However, there are inherent limitations in the effectiveness of any internal
control structure, including the possibility of human error and the
circumvention or overriding of controls.  Accordingly, even an effective
internal control structure can provide only reasonable assurance with
respect to reliability of financial statements and safeguarding and
management of assets.  Furthermore, the effectiveness of any internal
control structure can change with changes in circumstances.



_______________________		_________________________
Kevin B. Cashen		         	Larry C. Cain
Senior Vice President 	   	Senior Vice President



_______________________		__________________________
George P. Clancy, Jr.   		Stephen R. Halpin, Jr.
Executive Vice President 	Executive Vice President and
			                      	Chief Financial Officer

October 20, 1999