alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
*OPINION ISSUED AUGUST 16, 2007*

#### WILLIAM H. AMTOWER VS. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS

*20(CC-06-085)

Claimant appeared *pro se.*

Jason C. Workman, Attorney at Law, for respondent

PER CURIAM:

Claimant brought this action for vehicle damage which occurred when his 2001 Chevrolet Impala struck a rock when he was traveling on U.S. Route 50 near Augusta, Hampshire County. U.S. Route 50 is a road maintained by respondent in Hampshire County. The Court is of the opinion to deny this claim for the reasons more fully set forth below.

The incident giving rise to this claim occurred at approximately 8:30 p.m. on February 19, 2006. U.S. Route 50 is a three-lane road at the location of claimant’s incident. Mr. Amtower was driving behind two tractor trailers when he noticed one of the tractor trailers swerve to the left. Claimant stated that it was then that he noticed rocks in the road. Mr. Amtower testified that he tried to avoid the rocks but could not and his vehicle struck a rock. Claimant stated that the rock appeared to be between ten and fourteen inches in diameter. Claimant’s vehicle sustained damage to the front driver side tire and rim totaling $366.25. Claimant’s insurance deductible was $250.00.

The position of the respondent was that it did not have notice of the rocks on U.S. Route 50. Chris Corbin, County Administrator for respondent in Hampshire County, testified that this is not an area that typically has rock falls. He stated that there are rock falls along this stretch of U.S. Route 50 perhaps once a year.

It is a well-established principle that the State is neither an insurer nor a guarantor of the safety of motorists upon its highways. *Adkins v. Sims,*130 W.Va. 645, 46 S.E.2d 81 (1947). To.hold respondent liable, claimant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that respondent had actual or constructive notice of the road defect at issue and a reasonable amount of time to take corrective action. *Chapman*v. *Dept. of Highways,*16 Ct. Cl. 103 (1986); *Pritt v. Dept. of Highways,*16 Ct. Cl. 8 (1985). In rock fall claims, this Court has held that the unexplained falling of a rock onto a highway without a positive showing that respondent knew or should have known of a dangerous condition posing injury to person or property is insufficient to justify an award. *Coburn v. Dept. of Highways,*16 Ct. Cl. 68 (1985).

In the present claim, claimant has not established that respondent failed to take adequate measures to protect the safety of the traveling public on U.S. Route 50 in Hampshire County. There was no evidence presented at the hearing of this matter to show that respondent knew or should have known about the rock fall along U.S. Route 50 at the time of claimant’s incident. While the Court is sympathetic to claimant’s plight, the fact remains that there is no evidence of negligence on the part of respondent upon which to base an award.

In accordance with the findings of fact and conclusions of law stated herein above, the Court is of the opinion to and does deny this claim.

Claim disallowed.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1345

To designate the Federal building located at 280 South First Street in

San Jose, California, as the ‘‘Robert F. Peckham United States Courthouse and Federal Building’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 16, 1993

Mr. MINETA (for himself and Mr. EDWARDS of California) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Public Works and

Transportation

A BILL

To designate the Federal building located at 280 South

First Street in San Jose, California, as the ‘‘Robert

F. Peckham United States Courthouse and Federal

Building’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 The Federal building located at 280 South First

5 Street in San Jose, California, shall be known and des6 ignated as the ‘‘Robert F. Peckham United States Court7 house and Federal Building’’.
2

•HR 1345 IH

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal

4 building referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be

5 a reference to the ‘‘Robert F. Peckham United States

6 Courthouse and Federal Building’’.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1026 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1026

  To repeal the first section of Public Law 93-462 to limit departing 
  Members' purchases of office equipment and office furnishings from 
                        their district offices.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 22, 1993

  Mr. Inglis introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To repeal the first section of Public Law 93-462 to limit departing 
  Members' purchases of office equipment and office furnishings from 
                        their district offices.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That the first section 
of the Act entitled ``An Act to authorize the disposition of certain 
office equipment and furnishings, and for other purposes'' (Public Law 
93-462; 88 Stat. 1388; 2 U.S.C. 59a) is repealed.

                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 38 Engrossed in House (EH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 38

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
Making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2009, and for 
                            other purposes.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That the Continuing 
Appropriations Resolution, 2009 (division A of Public Law 110-329) is 
amended by striking

              

 the date specified in section 106(3) and inserting ``March 11, 2009''.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 6, 2009.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
111th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                             H. J. RES. 38

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2009, and for 
                            other purposes.
```
103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1385

AN ACT

To amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe

intoxicated.be used to prosecute persons driving whileStreets Act of 1968 to allow formula grants to
103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1385

AN ACT

To amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets

Act of 1968 to allow formula grants to be used to prosecute persons driving while intoxicated.

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

3 SECTION 1. GRANT PROGRAM DESCRIPTION.

4 Section 501(b) of title I of the Omnibus Crime Con5 trol and Safe Streets Act of 1968 is amended—

6 (1) by striking the period at the end of para7 graph (21) and adding ‘‘; and’’; and

8 (2) by adding at the end the following:
2

•HR 1385 EH

1 ‘‘(22) programs for the prosecution of driving

2 while intoxicated and the enforcement of other laws

3 relating to alcohol use and the operation of motor

4 vehicles.’’.

Passed the House of Representatives September 21,

1993.

Attest:

Clerk.
<PAGE>

                    ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF EXTENDED MATURITY DATE

Virbac Corporation, PM Resources, Inc., St. Jon Laboratories, Inc., Francodex
Laboratories, Inc., Delmarva Laboratories, Inc. and Virbac AH, Inc. are the
Borrowers under the Secured Subordinated Promissory Note dated as of April 9,
2004 and the Secured Subordinated Promissory Note dated April 29, 2004, both in
favor of Virbac S.A. (the "Notes"). Capitalized terms used herein but not
otherwise defined shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Notes.

The Extended Maturity Date under the Notes is July 9, 2005. Under Section 2(b)
of the Notes the Maturity Date may be extended for up to three periods of three
months. Virbac S.A. hereby agrees to extend the Maturity Date under the notes
until October 9, 2004. This Acknowledgement of Extended Maturity Date does not,
under any circumstances, constitute a waiver of the automatic extension to
Maturity Date set forth in Section 2(b) of the Notes.

Agreed to and acknowledged this 3rd day of June, 2004:

VIRBAC S.A.

/s/ Eric Maree
__________________________           ________________________
Name: Eric Maree                              Date
Title: President of the Management Board
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                  1000
<CURRENCY>                    Dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                               JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                 SEP-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                     1
<CASH>                                             89
<SECURITIES>                                   12,711
<RECEIVABLES>                                     155
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                1,714
<PP&E>                                             35
<DEPRECIATION>                                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 17,052
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             142
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                           65
<OTHER-SE>                                     11,050
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   17,052
<SALES>                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    0
<CGS>                                             359
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     359
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                2,609
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,060)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (425)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (635)
<DISCONTINUED>                                    239      
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (396)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.06)
        

</TABLE>
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1481 

To authorize certain States to prohibit the importation of solid waste from 

other States, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 12, 2009 

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

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To authorize certain States to prohibit the importation of 

solid waste from other States, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Solid Waste Compact 

5 Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. AUTHORITY TO PROHIBIT IMPORTATION OF SOLID 

7 WASTE. 

8 (a) AMENDMENT.—Subtitle D of the Solid Waste 

9 Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6941 et seq.) is amended by add10 ing at the end the following new section: 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

•HR 1481 IH

1 ‘‘AUTHORITY TO PROHIBIT IMPORTATION OF SOLID

2 WASTE

3 ‘‘SEC. 4011. A State whose State plan has been ap4 proved under section 4007 may prohibit the importation 

5 into that State of solid waste from outside that State.’’. 

6 (b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents for 

7 such subtitle D is amended by adding at the end the fol8 lowing new item: 

‘‘Sec. 4011. Authority to prohibit importation of solid waste.’’. 

9 SEC. 3. ALTERNATIVE SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL METHODS. 

10 (a) AMENDMENT.—Subtitle A of the Solid Waste 

11 Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.) is amended by add12 ing at the end the following new section: 

13 ‘‘ALTERNATIVE SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL METHODS

14 ‘‘SEC. 1009. The Administrator shall, in consultation 

15 with the States and other interested persons, identify in16 novative alternative solid waste disposal methods, and es17 tablish and publish technical guidance regarding the im18 plementation of such methods. Within one year after the 

19 date of the enactment of this section, and from time to 

20 time subsequently as warranted by changing cir21 cumstances, the Administrator shall transmit to the Con22 gress a report summarizing the Administrator’s activities 

23 under this section.’’. 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
3 

•HR 1481 IH

1 (b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents for 

2 such subtitle A is amended by adding at the end the fol3 lowing new item: 

‘‘Sec. 1009. Alternative solid waste disposal methods.’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1268 

To amend the Truth in Lending Act to prohibit issuance of residential 

mortgages to any individual who lacks a Social Security account number. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 3, 2009 

Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida (for herself, Mr. ROHRABACHER, Mrs. 

MYRICK, Mr. DUNCAN, and Mr. GALLEGLY) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend the Truth in Lending Act to prohibit issuance 

of residential mortgages to any individual who lacks a 

Social Security account number. 

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

3 SECTION 1. MORTGAGES PROHIBITED FOR PRINCIPAL 

4 RESIDENCES OF INDIVIDUALS WHO LACK SO5 CIAL SECURITY ACCOUNT NUMBERS. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 2 of the Truth in Lend7 ing Act (15 U.S.C. 1631 et seq.) is amended by adding 

8 at the end the following new section: 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
2 

•HR 1268 IH

1 ‘‘§ 140. Mortgages prohibited for principal residences 

2 of individuals who lack Social Security 

3 account numbers 

4 ‘‘Notwithstanding any provision of State law, no 

5 credit may be extended by any creditor to any consumer 

6 who lacks a Social Security account number in any con7 sumer credit transaction in which a security interest, in8 cluding any such interest arising by operation of law, is 

9 or will be retained or acquired in any property located 

10 within the United States which is or, upon the completion 

11 of the transaction, will be used as the principal residence 

12 of such consumer.’’. 

13 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

14 for chapter 2 of the Truth in Lending Act is amended 

15 by inserting after the item relating to section 139 the fol16 lowing new item: 

‘‘140. Mortgages prohibited for principal residences of individuals who lack Social Security account numbers.’’. 

Æ 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 283

JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the

fiscal year 1994, and for other purposes.
103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 283

JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year

1994, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That section 106(c) of Public Law 103–88, as amended

4 by Public Law 103–113, is further amended by striking

5 out ‘‘October 28, 1993’’ and inserting in lieu thereof

6 ‘‘November 10, 1993’’.

Passed the House of Representatives October 28,

1993.

Attest:

Clerk.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           1,322
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             288
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 2,675
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          24,096
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            23,911
<LOANS>                                         43,862
<ALLOWANCE>                                       (67)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  75,635
<DEPOSITS>                                      61,889
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,645
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            10
<OTHER-SE>                                      12,091
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  75,635
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,782
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,139
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   250
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 4,171
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,906
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,906
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            2,265
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       24
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  2,578
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    561
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         561
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       357
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .39
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.50
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                        91
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                    82
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                     (19)
<RECOVERIES>                                        20
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                   67
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                67
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002

 

In connection with the annual report of Worldwide Restaurant Concepts, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2005as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Charles L. Boppell, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)    The Report fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)    Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  August 3, 2005 | /s/ Charles  L. Boppell                |   |
|----------------------------|----------------------------------------|--------|
|                       | Charles L.  Boppell                    |
|                       | President  and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ernestine Martin, Appellant.

Judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Lowe, J.), rendered June 28, 1989, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the first degree and sentencing her to an indeterminate prison term of 3 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed, and the case is remitted to the Supreme Court, New York County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).

On November 20, 1988, defendant, a correction officer, shot Esam Moustaffa in the leg during a traffic altercation resulting from her blocking of traffic when she double-parked her car.

The failure of the People to give notice of their intent to introduce certain statements made by defendant (i.e., "It is my gun” and "I’m on the job”), pursuant to CPL 710.30, constituted harmless error. The statements had no impact on the proof at trial since there was no issue as to whom the gun belonged.

Although the court initially stated in its charge on the issue of justification that "a person may use deadly physical force *222which was used in this case”, the court later advised the jury that it had misspoken, and that it was up to the jury to decide if deadly physical force had been used. Furthermore, there was no requirement that the trial court marshal the evidence supporting the justification defense. CPL 300.10 only requires the trial court to state the material legal principles applicable to the case and so far as practicable explain the application of the law to the facts.

It was not necessary for the complainant to be charged as an interested witness as a matter of law because he filed a civil action. This evidence was before the jury which was charged to consider "whether any witness has shown bias or prejudices or has a personal or professional interest in the outcome of the case which might cause that witness to testify to something other than the truth or to color or embellish his testimony.” *(See, People v Gomez,*137 AD2d 556, 557, *lv denied*71 NY2d 896.)

We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Smith and Rubin, JJ.