alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EPA Holds Hearing on Global Warming Rules

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today held a public

hearing to gather input on the agency’s plan to work with states to

control global warming pollution. The plan creates a backup measure

to ensure that businesses can continue to get permits in states with

out-of-date regulations.

In response the Sierra Club issued the following statements.

“The science is clear, the Supreme Court has ruled and now EPA is

taking action—global warming is a threat to our health and wellbeing.

Like soot, smog and mercury, we should be working to limit the

amount of global warming pollution released into our air. We’re

pleased that EPA is taking steps in that direction and that the agency

is working with states to make the transition as smooth as possible.

The measures discussed today are essential to cleaning up the most

polluting facilities while making sure that businesses continue to get

the permits they need to create more clean energy jobs,” said Glen

Besa, Director of the Sierra Club-Virginia Chapter.

Addressing climate disruption and global warming pollution is a key

piece of moving us towards a clean energy economy and away from

dirty power sources like coal,” said Antigone Ambrose, an organizerwith the Sierra Club who attended the EPA hearing.

“Virginia is currently in compliance with EPA rules and it is important

that we remain in compliance,” said Ambrose, “If climate skeptics

McDonnell and Cuccinelli derail the process in Virginia, we will simply

turn over our permitting authority to the EPA instead of doing it

ourselves. That is something the EPA would rather not do andsomething that Virginia business certainly doesn’t want.”
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATE OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



This Certificate is being delivered pursuant to the requirements of Section 1350 of Chapter 63 (Mail Fraud) of Title 18
(Crimes and Criminal Procedures) of the United States Code and shall not be relied on by any person for any other purpose.



The undersigned, who is the President and Chief Executive Officer of CCF Holding Company (the small business issuer), hereby certifies as
follows:



The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the small
business issuer (the Report), which accompanies this Certificate, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and all information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the small business issuer.



Dated this 15th day of August, 2005.



/s/ David B. TurnerDavid B. Turner, President and Chief Executive Officer




A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the small business issuer and will be retained by the small business issuer and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
**EXECUTIVE      EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT**

** **
**AUXILIO,      Inc., a Nevada corporation**

**   **
** **
** **
**.**

----

**.  **

** **
**:**

----

----

** **
** **

** **

----

----

**,**

----

**, **

** **
** **

----

----

**EXHIBIT      A**

**INCENTIVE      COMPENSATION PLAN**

| 1.   | The                Executive Bonus Plan will be based on 10% of EBITDA for 2008 and                2009.  The bonus due, if any, will be paid on an annual basis in                March based on the relevant 10K filed with the SEC.  The EBITDA                described in this Exhibit A is calculated as if the bonus to be paid                to                the Executives has not been paid and therefore the expense has not                been                accrued and counted as an expense on the Company’s income                statement. |
|----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | The                Executive Commission Plan will be based on 15% commission from net                cash                flow generated from equipment sales to customers. The commission                due, if                any, will be paid in the pay period following the payment of the                cash                amount due from the customer. |
|----------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
#### CULLUM et al. v. CULLUM.

No. 5172.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Amarillo.

June 10, 1940.

Sturgeon & Sturgeon, of Pampa, for appellants.

A. A. Lumpkin, of Amarillo, for appellee.

FOLLEY, Justice.

This is an appeal from a judgment in a suit filed by the appellee against the appellants and H.'T. Bender seeking a judgment for debt upon a note and foreclosure of an alleged lien upon a truck of the alleged value of $600. Judgment for $767.43 was rendered in favor of the appellee against the appellants only, but without foreclosure.

The appellants have filed no'briefs-in this court. The appellee has filed a brief in which he asks that we affirm the judgment.

Finding no fundamental error in the record the judgment is affirmed. National Indemnity Underwriters of America v. Shelton, Tex.Civ.App., 115 S.W.2d 1140; McCulley v. Foster et al., Tex.Civ.App., 123 S.W.2d 705, and authorities cited.
#### In the Matter of Board of Cooperative Educational Services et al., Appellants, v BOCES III Faculty Association, Respondent.

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to stay arbitration of a grievance under a collective bargaining agreement, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Jones, J.), dated May 12, 1989, which dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the the Supreme Court’s finding that the arbitration clause of the subject collective bargaining agreement is broad enough to encompass the parties’ dispute. Any ambiguity as to whether the employees of the petitioner’s "Alternative High School” are teachers covered by the agreement, is a matter of contract interpretation for the arbitrator to resolve *(see, Matter of Sachem Cent. School Dist. [Sachem Cent. Teachers Assn.],*156 AD2d 568; *Matter of Salmon Riv. Cent. School Dist. [Salmon River Teachers Assn.],*80 AD2d 939, 940; *see also, Matter of South Colonie Cent. School Dist. v Longo,*43 NY2d 136; *Matter of Board of Educ. v Watertown Educ. Assn.,*74 NY2d 912, 913).

We have reviewed the petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J. P., Lawrence, Kunzeman and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
#### Ex parte McCUISTION.

No. 21801.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 15, 1941.

Saunders & Saunders, of San Antonio, and McKie & Hill, of San Marcos, for appellant.

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

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was convicted of swindling, his punishment being fixed at two years in the penitentiary. He gave notice of appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeals, and the trial court fixed his bail pending appeal at the sum of two thousand dollars. Subsequently, through a habeas corpus proceeding before the same trial court he sought a reduction of bail. The trial court refused such reduction and remanded appellant, from which order this appeal is prosecuted.

The statement of facts brought before us in this habeas corpus proceeding shows that an unsuccessful effort has been made to furnish bail in the sum of two thousand dollars, but that, in all probability, sureties could be obtained to make bond in the sum of one thousand dollars.

“The ability to make bail is to be re-' garded * * Subdivision 4, Art. 281, Code Cr.Proc. This, however, is not the controlling feature. Subdivisions 1, 2 and 3 of said article read as follows:

> *“1.*The bail shall be sufficiently high to give reasonable assurance that the undertaking will be complied with.

> *“2.*The power to require bail is not to be so used as to make it an instrument of oppression.

> “3. The nature of the offense and the circumstances under which it was committed are to be considered.”

The facts developed on the trial were, of course, known to the trial judge when he was called upon to fix the amount of bail pending appeal, and thus, he was apprised of “the nature of the offense and the circumstances under which it was committed,” and in that respect occupies a much more favorable position than does this court, which does not have before it in this proceeding the evidence on the original trial, but knows only from the indictment the nature of the offense charged.

*834We are cited by appellant to cases in which bail has been reduced, and by the State to cases where the refusal to reduce bail has been sustained. Particular cases are of little aid in matters of this kind except as they illustrate the application of general principles, as each case necessarily rests upon the particular facts thereof.

We find ourselves unwilling to hold as a matter of law that the amount of bail fixed by the trial court in this instance was the exercise of such power in an oppressive manner, or that the amount of such bail was excessive.

The judgment is affirmed.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). E H / R es ear ch NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON

UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. J ESU S A LV A REZ- RA M O S, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 09- 30198 D. C . No . 2 : 0 7 - C R - 0 2 1 2 5 - R HW ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe E a s t e rn D i s tr i c tof W a s hi ngt on R obe rtH . W ha l e y , S e ni orD i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng

S ubm i tt e d F e brua ry16, 2010 ** B efo re: F E RN A N D E Z , G O U L D , an d M . S M IT H , C i rcu i tJu d g es. Je sus A l vare z- R am os appeal s f rom the 71 -m on th sent ence i m po se d fol l ow i ng hi s gui l ty- pl eaconv i ct i on for bei ng an i l l egal al i en i n the U ni t ed S t at es 

# FI LED MA R 05 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSE H / Res ea r ch 09- 30198 2 a f te rd e p o rta tio n , in v io la tio n o f 8 U .S .C . § 1 3 2 6 . W e h a v e ju r is d ic tio n p u r s u a n t to 2 8 U . S. C. § 1 2 9 1 , a n d w e a f f i rm. A l va r e z - R a m os c ont e nds tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourtpr oc e dur a l l ye rr e d by appl y i ng a n upw a r d de pa rtur e unde rU . S . S . G . § 4A 1. 3, ba s e d on i t s de t e rm i na t i on th ath i s cri m i n al h i st o ry cat eg o ry u n d erst at edh i s cri m i n al h i st o ry. H e al so cont ends thathi s s ent ence i s s ub st ant i vel y unrea sonabl e bec ause i ti s gre at erthan n e c e s s a ry . T h e r e c o r d r e f le c ts th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt d idn o t p r o c e d u r a llye rrin its c a l c ul a t i on of

the a dvi s orys e nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne r a nge orc ons i de r a t i on of the 18 U . S . C . § 3553( a ) f

a c t or s , a nd tha tthe s e nt e nc e i s s ubs t a nt i ve l yr e a s onabl e i n l i ght o f th e to ta lityo f

th e c ir c u m s ta n c e s . Se e U n ite d S ta te s v . Ca r ty , 520 F . 3d 984, 993 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 8 ) ( e n b a n c ) ; s e e al s o U ni te d State s v . Hi

gue r a-L lam os , 574 F . 3d 1 2 0 6 , 1 2 1 0 - 1 2 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 9 ) . AF F I RME D.
#### BLACK v. STATE.

No. 20967.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 24, 1940.

Rehearing Denied June 28, 1940.

A. R. Eidson, of Hamilton, and Tom L. Robinson, of Gatesville, for appellant. '

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

The offense is murder; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for three years.

*626It was charged in the indictment, in substance, that appellant, with malice aforethought, killed John L. Leach by striking him with a brush axe. The death of deceased grew out of a dispute appellant and deceased had had relative to some land. At the time appellant killed deceased he and deceased were with a surveyor who had been employed to make a survey of the land in an effort to properly divide it between, appellant and deceased. According to the testimony of the state, appellant, without provocation, struck deceased with a brush axe. According to appellant’s version, he (appellant) acted in self-defense in striking deceased. Deceased thereafter died from the wound he had received at the hands of the appellant.

No bills of exception are brought forward.

The charge of the court appears to have adequately presented the case to the jury.

The judgment is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of'the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-28,785-06
IN RE REGINA LD EUGENE HALL, Relator
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF M ANDAM US CAUSE NO. MA1856155-A IN THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 1 F ROM DALLAS COUNTY
Per curiam . O R D E R Relator has filed a motion for leave to file an application for a writ of mandamus under this Court’s orig inal jurisdiction. He contends that he filed an application for a writ of habea s corpus in Dallas County

and his applica tion has not been prope rly forwa rded to this Court. Respondent, the District Clerk of Dallas County , shall forwa rd Relator’s habea s application to this Court, respond that Relator has not filed a habea s application in Dallas County , or forward
a copy of an order desig nating issues toge ther with corr espondenc e documenting the date the State
rec eived Relator’s habea s application. See T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07, § 3(c) and (d); T E X . R. A P P . P. 73.4(b)( 5). This motion for leave to file will be held. Respondent shall comply with this order within thirty

day s from the da

te of this order
.2

Filed: Jul y

28, 2021 Do not publish
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 233 (Monday, December 4, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 75666]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-30754]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Boundary Establishment for North Fork of the Middle Fork of the 
Willamette National Wild and Scenic River, Willamette National Forest, 
Lane County, OR

AGENCY: Forest Service. USDA.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service, Washington Office, is transmitting 
the final boundary of the North Fork of the Middle Fork of the 
Willamette National Wild and Scenic River to Congress.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Randy Dunbar, Willamette National 
Forest, 211 East 6th Avenue, Eugene, Oregon 97440, phone 541-465-6541.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The North Fork of the Middle Fork of the 
Willamette Wild and Scenic River boundary is available for review at 
the following offices: USDA Forest Service, Recreation, Yates Building, 
14th and Independence Avenues SW., Washington, DC 20024; Pacific 
Northwest Regional Office, 333 SW. First Avenue, Portland, Oregon 
97204; and, Willamette National Forest, 211 East 6th Avenue, Eugene, 
Oregon 97440.
    The Omnibus Oregon Wild and Service Rivers Act (Public Law 100-557) 
of October 28, 1998, designated the North Fork of the Middle Fork of 
the Willamette River, Oregon, as a National Wild and Scenic River, to 
be administered by the Secretary of Agriculture. The final decision on 
delineation of a river corridor boundary is based on the North Fork of 
the Middle Fork of the Willamette Wild and Scenic River Decision Notice 
and Environmental Assessment dated January 9, 1992. Unless changed by 
Congress, the boundary decision will be implemented ninety days after 
Congress receives the transmittal.

    Dated: November 28, 2000.
Nancy Graybeal,
Deputy Regional Forester.
[FR Doc. 00-30754 Filed 12-1-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 19.2

[LOGO]
The Chase Manhattan Bank
450 West 33rd Street
New York, NY 10001




 31-Feb-98


To the Holders of:

Fleetwood Credit 1997-B Grantor Trust
$337,750,000 6.40% Asset-Backed Certificates, Class A


The following information is being provided to you for the calendar year 
1997 pursuant to Section 14.10 of the Standard Terms and Conditions 
of Agreement effective September 1, 1997.  Detailed below are the 
monthly payment factors (per $1,000 of original issuance) for 
interest, principal, and fees and compensation paid to the Servicer.  
The information can be utilized for preparation of federal income 
tax returns.  Should you have any further questions regarding the 
use of this information, please consult your tax counsel.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                         Fees and Compensation Pool Realized
               Interest      Principal   Paid to Servicer      Losses on
                                                               Distribution
                                                               Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>           <C>           <C>         <C>                   <C>
October        5.333333      17.411258   0.833300             $  -
November       5.240473      21.330060   0.818800             $ 25,215.96
December       5.126713      16.729307   0.801000             $ 38,878.11 
</TABLE>



THE CHASE MANHATTAN BANK
as Trustee and Paying Agent


<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 19.2

[LOGO]
The Chase Manhattan Bank
450 West 33rd Street
New York, NY 10001




31-Feb-98


To the Holders of:

Fleetwood Credit 1997-B Grantor Trust
$12,250,000 6.65% Asset-Backed Certificates, Class B


The following information is being provided to you for the calendar year 
1997 pursuant to Section 14.10 of the Standard Terms and Conditions of 
Agreement effective September 1, 1997.  Detailed below are the 
monthly payment factors (per $1,000 of original issuance) for 
interest, principal, and fees and compensation paid to the Servicer.  
The information can be utilized for preparation of federal income 
tax returns.  Should you have any further questions regarding the 
use of this information, please consult your tax counsel.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                         Fees and Compensation Pool Realized
               Interest      Principal   Paid to Servicer      Losses on
                                                               Distribution
                                                               Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>           <C>           <C>         <C>                   <C>
October        5.541667      17.411258   0.833300             $  -
November       5.445179      21.330060   0.818800             $ 25,215.96
December       5.326975      16.729307   0.801000             $ 38,878.11 
</TABLE>



THE CHASE MANHATTAN BANK
as Trustee and Paying Agent<PAGE>
V

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1271

For the relief of Peter J. Montagnoli.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 9, 1993

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

Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

For the relief of Peter J. Montagnoli.

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

3 That the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and di4 rected to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not other5 wise appropriated, to Peter J. Montagnoli of Las Vegas,

6 Nevada, the sum of $8,000, in full satisfaction of all his

7 claims against the United States for reimbursement for

8 the expenses he incurred from July 1970 through May 7,

9 1973, in securing the reimbursement of his disability in10 surance benefits under the Social Security Act which were

11 terminated in September 1970.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 237 (Friday, December 8, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76947-76948]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-30972]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 00-2681, MM Docket No. 00-97; RM-9865]


Digital Television Broadcast Services; Richmond, VA

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission, at the request of Central Virginia Educational 
Telecommunications Corporation, licensee of noncommercial station WCVE-
TV, substitutes DTV Channel *42 for station WCVE-TV's assigned DTV 
Channel *24a at Richmond, Virginia. See 65 FR 36808, June 12, 2000. DTV 
Channel *42 can be allotted to Richmond at coordinates ( 37-30-46 N. 
and 77-36-06 W.) with a power of 100, HAAT of 327 meters and with a DTV 
service population of 1097 thousand.
    With this action, this proceeding is terminated.

DATE: Effective January 16, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam Blumenthal, Mass Media Bureau, 
(202) 418-1600.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Report and Order, MM Docket No. 00-97, adopted November 30, 2000, and 
released December 1, 2000. The full text of this Commission decision is 
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC Reference Center, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC. The 
complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the 
Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Services, 
Inc., (202) 857-3800, 1231 20th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Digital television broadcasting, Television.

    Part 73 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended 
as follows:

PART 73--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334. 336.


Sec. 73.622  [Amended]

    2. Section 73.622(b), the Table of Digital Television Allotments 
under Virginia, is amended by removing DTV Channel *24d and adding DTV 
Channel *42 at Richmond.


[[Page 76948]]


Federal Communications Commission.
Barbara A. Kreisman,
Chief, Video Services Division, Mass Media Bureau.
[FR Doc. 00-30972 Filed 12-7-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-U