alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Jeffrey Blee, Appellant, v State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Respondent.

In a proceeding to compel arbitration pursuant to CPLR 7503, the petitioner appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kassoff, J.), dated September 21, 1989, which dismissed the petition.

Ordered that the order and judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the petition is granted insofar as it seeks to compel arbitration, and the parties are directed to proceed to arbitration.

On March 21, 1987, the petitioner was a passenger in a car, owned and operated by his friend, which was involved in a one-car accident on the Ohio Turnpike. As a result of the accident the petitioner sustained bodily injuries. The petitioner received $50,000, the policy limit, from the insurer of the motor vehicle. In late October 1987, the petitioner mailed a letter to the respondent State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, which was his own insurance company, informing it that he was making a claim under the underinsured motorist provisions of the policy. The petitioner in addition mailed a signed statement relating the circumstances surrounding the accident. On November 27, 1987, the respondent sent a letter to the petitioner reserving its right to deny coverage on the ground that a settlement had been reached without its written consent, and by letter dated May 18, 1988, denied underinsured benefits based upon the exclusion in its policy for insureds who settle without its written consent.

Insurance Law § 3420 (d) requires written notice of a disclaimer to be given "as soon as is reasonably possible” after the insurer first learns of the accident or of grounds for *616disclaimer of liability or denial of coverage *(see, Zappone v Home Ins. Co.,*55 NY2d 131; *Hartford Ins. Co. v County of Nassau,*46 NY2d 1028; *Farmers Fire Ins. Co. v Brighton,*142 AD2d 547). It is settled law that if this provision applies, it is the carrier’s burden to explain its delay in notifying the insured of its disclaimer or denial, and that a reservation of rights letter does not constitute compliance with its requirements *(see, Zappone v Home Ins. Co., supra).*Under the circumstances, the respondent’s delay of more than six months in disclaiming was unreasonable as a matter of law and the respondent is estopped from making a disclaimer *(see, Hartford Ins. Co. v County of Nassau,*46 NY2d 1028, *supra; Farmers Fire Ins. Co. v Brighton, supra; Allstate Ins. Co. v Kuper,*140 AD2d 479; *Metropolitan Prop. & Liab. Ins. Co. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.,*119 AD2d 558; *Foremost Ins. Co. v Rios,*85 AD2d 677). Eiber, J. P., Sullivan, Balletta and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
APPA Follow up to EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234 and EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0044, RFL
9286-1 Pugh, Theresa to: Dom Mancini (dmancini@omb.eop.gov), Echols, Mabel E. 11/16/2011 05:46 PM Cc: Group A-AND-R-DOCKET, Gina McCarthy, LisaP Jackson, RobertJ Wayland, Janet McCabe, "Nipper, Joe", Bill Maxwell, "Sholars, Forrest"

Dear Mr. Mancini

This is a letter from Mark Crisson, APPA’s President & CEO, following our meeting with OMB on November 3, 2011. I regret that we did not get cards from many of the attendees at the meeting and we do not have all of their e mail addresses. I hope that a member of your staff will forward this thank you letter to them.

I am copying the EPA Air Docket with this letter. We note that the handouts from our meeting are already in the OMB Docket.

Thank you again for the meeting.

Theresa Pugh

Theresa Pugh Director, Environmental Services

APPA 1875 Connecticut Ave, NW
Suite 1200 Washington, D. C. 20009 202 467 2943 (direct) 202-495-7443 personal fax number Note new e-mail address: TPugh@publicpower.org

omb thank you FINAL Version 11-16-2011.pdf
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5                   
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                              SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          1,461
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   3,681
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (175)
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                8,514
<PP&E>                                          7,744
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (4,594)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 70,591
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          15,065
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                     2,382
<COMMON>                                           39
<OTHER-SE>                                     36,359
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   70,591
<SALES>                                         7,021
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                7,021
<CGS>                                           9,069
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   9,069
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (224)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,096)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (380)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (716)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   (308)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  (746)
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,593)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.43)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1558 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1558

 To suspend until December 31, 1998, the duty on 6-Acetyl-1,1,2,3,3,5-
                            hexamethylindan.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 31, 1993

  Mr. Gilman introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To suspend until December 31, 1998, the duty on 6-Acetyl-1,1,2,3,3,5-
                            hexamethylindan.

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

SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON 6-ACETYL-1,1,2,3,3,5-HEXAMETHYLINDAN.

    Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of 
the United States is amended by inserting in numerical sequence the 
following new subheading:

      

       ``  99     6-Acetyl- 1,1,2,3,3,5-                   No Change        No Change        On or before 12/   
                   hexamethylindan (provided                                                  31/1998         ''
                   for in subheading                                                                           .
                   2914.30.00)...............  Free                                                             

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendment made by section 1 applies with respect to goods 
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 
15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.

                                 <all>
```
----

**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. |
|----------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
Excerpt of 2005 Endorsement of Company's Accident Insurance Policy



 EXHIBIT 10.10 
  

					
	

	  	 Blanket Accident Insurance
  

		
	 	  	Endorsement
			
	 	  	Policy Period	  	JANUARY 1, 2005 TO JANUARY 1, 2006
			
	 	  	Effective Date	  	JANUARY 01, 2005
			
	 	  	Policy Number	  	6404-48-82
			
	 	  	Policyholder	  	RYERSON TULL, INC.
			
	 	  	Name of Company	  	FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
			
	 	  	Date Issued	  	FEBRUARY 8, 2005
	
	The following amends the Blanket Accident Insurance Contract:
	
	 ENDORSEMENT -
 JANUARY 1,
2005
 RENEWAL

		
	 	  	THE POLICY PERIOD, WHEREVER IT APPEARS IN THE POLICY, IS EXTENDED FROM JANUARY 1, 2005 TO JANUARY 1, 2006. FOR A PREMIUM OF $2,220.
		
	 	  	THE POLICY TERMINATES EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2006.
		
	 	  	All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.
			
	 	  	Authorized Representative	  	 /s/ Robert Hamburger


	 	  	 	  	Robert Hamburger

  


					
	 	  	last page    
	Form 44-02-0926 (Ed. 1-95)             Endorsement	  	Page 1    










					
	

	  	 Blanket Accident Insurance
  

		
	 	  	Schedule of Forms
			
	 	  	Policy Period	  	JANUARY 1, 2005 TO JANUARY 1, 2006
			
	 	  	Effective Date	  	JANUARY 01, 2005
			
	 	  	Policy Number	  	6404-48-82
			
	 	  	Policyholder	  	RYERSON TULL, INC.
			
	 	  	Name of Company	  	FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
			
	 	  	Date Issued	  	FEBRUARY 8, 2005

  
 The following is a schedule of forms
issued with the policy at inception. 
  

					
	 Form Name

	  	 Form Number


	ENDORSEMENT - JANUARY 1, 2005 RENEWAL	  	        44-02-0926             (01/95)

  


					
	 	  	last page    
	Form 44-02-0992 (Ed. 1-95)             Schedule of Forms	  	Page 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

JENNIFER VANDERSTOK, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

MERRICK GARLAND, in his official

capacity as Attorney General of the United

States; et al.,

 Defendants.

Civil Action No. 4:22-cv-00691-O

SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF MICHAEL G. ANDREN

I, Michael G. Andren, declare under penalty of perjury, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, that

the following statements are true and correct to the best of my knowledge:

1. I am over 18 years of age and am competent to testify to the matters contained

herein.

2. I would directly purchase items including one marketed as an “80% Lower” from

Tactical Machining, LLC, or another direct sales manufacturer, within the next three to four

months if such a purchase would not subject me to any civil or criminal fines or penalties.

3. While I could request that Tactical Machining or another manufacturer ship an

“80% Lower” to a local Federal Firearms Licensee (“FFL”) who would then transfer it to me,

based upon my inquiry directed to a local FFL, if I did so I would be subjected to additional costs,

including a transfer fee. The FFL I would likely use for such transfer charges $30.00.

4. Additionally, FFL transfers must be done in person, resulting in additional time

commitments and expenses I would not have to incur if I did not have to go through an FFL and

could have the item shipped directly to me.

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 62-2 Filed 09/08/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 872
2

5. Due to the vague nature of the Final Rule, I am uncertain what tools or equipment,

in conjunction with such an “80% Lower” may be considered a firearm under the Final Rule. I fear

prosecution for directly buying an “80% Lower” while in possession of other tools and equipment.

6. Finally, my understanding is that the ATF Final Rule restricts my ability to 

purchase and a manufacturer’s ability to provide a jig, guide, instructions, or potentially other 

items that would facilitate my use of an “80% Lower” or similar item. But for the Final Rule’s 

restrictions, I would buy a jig, guide, or instructions that would help me learn to manufacture a 

“80% Lower” into an actual frame or receiver.

DATED this ___th day of September, 2022.

Michael G. Andren

7

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 62-2 Filed 09/08/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 873
[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: 00-30753]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Boundary Establishment for McKenzie National Wild and Scenic 
River, Willamette National Forest, Lane and Linn Counties, OR

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service, Washington Office, is transmitting 
the final boundary of the McKenzie 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 McKenzie 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 Scenic River Act (Public Act 100-557) 
of October 28, 1988, designated the McKenzie 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 McKenzie 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. 00-30753 Filed 12-1-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Roderick L. La Gasse, Jr., Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Counsel’s application to withdraw granted *(see, People v Crawford,*71 AD2d 38). (Appeal from judgment of Seneca County Court, DePasquale, J. — criminal possession of stolen property, fourth degree.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Boomer, Pine, Balio and Lowery, JJ.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1598

To reclassify the cost of international peacekeeping activities from the international affairs budget function to the national defense budget function

and to express the sense of Congress that there should be included

in the Department of Defense budget for each fiscal year a minimum

level of funding for international humanitarian assistance and peacekeeping activities.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 1, 1993

Mr. PENNY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Government Operations

A BILL

To reclassify the cost of international peacekeeping activities

from the international affairs budget function to the

national defense budget function and to express the sense

of Congress that there should be included in the Department of Defense budget for each fiscal year a minimum

level of funding for international humanitarian assistance

and peacekeeping activities.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 1598 IH

1 SECTION 1. TRANSFER TO PAYMENT RESPONSIBILITY FOR

2 CONTRIBUTIONS FOR INTERNATIONAL

3 PEACEKEEPING ACTIVITIES.

4 Effective with fiscal year 1994, the budget account

5 ‘‘Contributions to International Peacekeeping Activities’’

6 shall be transferred from budget function 150 (inter7 national affairs) to budget function 050 (national defense)

8 and appropriations for such account shall be made to, and

9 shall be administered by, the Department of Defense.

10 SEC. 2. MINIMUM AMOUNT TO BE REQUESTED IN ANNUAL

11 DEFENSE BUDGET.

12 It is the sense of Congress that, of the total amount

13 requested in the President’s budget for any fiscal year for

14 military functions of the Department of Defense, a total

15 of 1 percent should be for international humanitarian as16 sistance activities of the Department of Defense and for

17 appropriations to the ‘‘Contributions to International

18 Peacekeeping Activities’’ account.

Æ
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jose Gonzales, Appellant.

Harvey, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Washington County (Leary, J.), rendered January 18, 1989, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crime of promoting prison contraband in the first degree.

On December 24, 1987 defendant, an inmate at Great Meadow Correctional Facility in Washington County, was discovered during a routine search to be in possession of a toothbrush which had one end sharpened to a point. Following an investigation, defendant was indicted for the crime of *744promoting prison contraband in the first degree. Defendant was found guilty of this crime after a jury trial and was sentenced to a term of *SV2*to 7 years’ imprisonment, which was to run consecutively to any term of imprisonment he was currently serving. This appeal followed.

We affirm. Although defendant advances several arguments in support of his request for reversal, none of them require extended discussion. Defendant’s claim that he was wrongfully deprived of his right to testify before the Grand Jury that indicted him must fail because he waived that right by not making a motion to dismiss the indictment within five days after his arraignment *(see, People v Hamilton,*165 AD2d 908; *People v Sylvester,*165 AD2d 920). Defense counsel’s alleged failure to secure an opportunity for defendant to testify before the Grand Jury did not amount to ineffective assistance of counsel since no prejudice appeared to accrue to defendant *(see, People v Planthaber,*131 AD2d 927, *lv denied*70 NY2d 803). The remaining error assigned to defense counsel by defendant did not amount to a lack of "meaningful representation” under all of the circumstances *(see, People v Baldi,*54 NY2d 137, 147). The right to meaningful representation does not include the right to flawless performance by counsel *(see, People v Alexander,*161 AD2d 1035).

Defendant’s remaining arguments have been examined and have been found to be devoid of merit.

Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Yesawich, Jr., Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM GROEN
BROTHERS AVIATION, INC. JUNE 30, 1996 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATMENTS
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                         125,624
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,875
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               128,409
<PP&E>                                         335,560
<DEPRECIATION>                                 101,230
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 362,829
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,520,652
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       183,650
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,502,023)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   362,829
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 7,761
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  974,952
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              78,571
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,045,762)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,045,762)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,045,762)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.03)
        

</TABLE>