alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Gladys Olivari et al., Respondents, v John C. Beck, Appellant, et al., Defendants. (Action No. 1.) Gladys Olivari, Respondent, v John C. Beck, Appellant, et al., Defendants. (Action No.2.)

Supreme Court, Bronx County (Barry Salman, J.), entered on or about February 26, 1990, which denied the motion of defendant Beck to change venue from Bronx County to Rockland County, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff's were injured in Rockland County when their automobile was struck in the rear by an automobile operated by the defendant John C. Beck. Venue was properly placed in Bronx County, the residence of plaintiff Gladys Olivari when the action was commenced (CPLR 503 [a]). Defendant Beck moved to change venue to Rockland County primarily on the basis of the convenience of material witnesses pursuant to CPLR 510 (3). However, Beck’s motion papers did not sufficiently set forth the names and addresses of all nonparty material witnesses expected to be called, and the essence of their expected testimony. *(Weiss v Saks Fifth Ave.,*157 AD2d 475.)

To the extent that such information was set forth, it did not demonstrate that the IAS court abused its discretion in denying the motion *(Paddock Constr. v Thomason Indus. Corp.,*133 AD2d 20, 22). The State Trooper who investigated the scene of the accident reported that defendant’s vehicle struck plaintiffs’ vehicle in the rear, and he issued three summonses to Beck, including one for violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1129 (a) (i.e., following too closely). It thus appears unlikely that the State Trooper’s testimony would be material to the defense of the plaintiffs’ action. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Carro, Milonas and Rubin, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 39 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 39

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 11, 2009

   Received and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the District of Columbia 
              Special Olympics Law Enforcement Torch Run.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF USE OF CAPITOL GROUNDS FOR DC SPECIAL 
              OLYMPICS LAW ENFORCEMENT TORCH RUN.

    On June 5, 2009, or on such other date as the Speaker of the House 
of Representatives and the Committee on Rules and Administration of the 
Senate may jointly des-

              

ignate, the 2009 District of Columbia Special Olympics Law Enforcement 
Torch Run (in this resolution referred to as the ``event'') may be run 
through the Capitol Grounds as part of the journey of the Special 
Olympics torch to the District of Columbia Special Olympics summer 
games.

SEC. 2. RESPONSIBILITY OF CAPITOL POLICE BOARD.

    The Capitol Police Board shall take such actions as may be 
necessary to carry out the event.

SEC. 3. CONDITIONS RELATING TO PHYSICAL PREPARATIONS.

    The Architect of the Capitol may prescribe conditions for physical 
preparations for the event.

SEC. 4. ENFORCEMENT OF RESTRICTIONS.

    The Capitol Police Board shall provide for enforcement of the 
restrictions contained in section 5104(c) of title 40, United States 
Code, concerning sales, advertisements, displays, and solicitations on 
the Capitol Grounds, as well as other restrictions applicable to the 
Capitol Grounds, in connection with the event.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 10, 2009.

            Attest:

                                            LORRAINE C. MILLER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Description of Executive Officer Cash Compensation



 Exhibit 10.1 
  
 ACE LIMITED 
  
 DESCRIPTION OF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CASH COMPENSATION 
  
 FOR 2004 AND 2005 
  
 Set forth below are the base salaries of the Chief Executive Officer and each of the four most highly compensated executive officers in 2004 and their increased annual base salary effective January 1, 2005, together with bonus amounts with
respect to 2004 compensation. 
  
 Evan Greenberg, President and Chief Executive
Officer 
  

							
	 	  	Base

	  	Bonus


	 2004
	  	$	1,000,000	  	$	2,700,000
	 2005
	  	$	1,000,000	  	 	 

  
 Brian Duperreault, Chairman

  

							
	 	  	Base

	  	Bonus


	 2004
	  	$	1,030,000	  	$	1,800,000
	 2005
	  	$	600,000	  	 	 

  
 Philip Bancroft, Chief Financial
Officer 
  

							
	 	  	Base

	  	Bonus


	 2004
	  	$	650,000	  	$	650,000
	 2005
	  	$	650,000	  	 	 

  
 Gary Schmazlriedt, Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer, ACE Overseas General 
  

							
	 	  	Base

	  	Bonus


	 2004
	  	$	625,000	  	$	675,000
	 2005
	  	$	650,000	  	 	 

  
 Brian Dowd, Chairman and Chief
Executive Officer, ACE USA 
  

							
	 	  	Base

	  	Bonus


	 2004
	  	$	525,000	  	$	575,000
	 2005
	  	$	575,000	  	 	 

  
 In addition to the above, these
officers receive perquisites that may include commuting and living expenses, personal travel on the corporate aircraft, use of the corporate apartment, club memberships, financial planning and tax preparation services, home security systems and
reimbursement of certain medical expenses not covered by primary insurance.
BILL OF COSTS

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, SIXTH DISTRICT, AT TEXARKANA

No. 06-14-00095-CV

Kevin Cooper Ross

v.

Tiffany McCrary

(No. 1969 IN COUNTY COURT OF FRANKLIN COUNTY)

TYPE OF FEE CHARGES PAID BY

CLERK'S RECORD

SUPREME COURT CHAPTER 51 FEE

FILING

STATEWIDE EFILING FEE

INDIGENT

$21.00

$50.00

$100.00

$20.00

$25.00

UNKNOWN

PAID

PAID

PAID

PAID

KEVIN C. ROSS

KEVIN C. ROSS

KEVIN C. ROSS

KEVIN C. ROSS

KEVIN C. ROSS

Balance of costs owing to the Sixth Court of Appeals, Texarkana, Texas: 0.00

Court costs in this cause shall be paid as per the Judgment issued by this Court.

I, DEBRA AUTREY, CLERK OF THE SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS OF THE 

STATE OF TEXAS, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct 

copy of the cost bill of THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH DISTRICT OF 

TEXAS, showing the charges and payments, in the above numbered and styled cause, 

as the same appears of record in this office.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, 

witness my hand and the Seal of 

the COURT OF APPEALS for 

the Sixth District of Texas, this 

June 26, 2015.

DEBRA AUTREY, CLERK

By ___________________________

Deputy
U.S. flag
      An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.
        Here's how you know
      Here's how you know**Official websites use .gov**
            
            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
      **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
            
            A **lock** (
            A locked padlock
            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. Menu

      
        close

            
            
                                              About
          Charter
          Legislation
          Members
          Meetings
          Reports & Resources

                            
                                About
          Contact Us
                  Share
FacebookXLinkedInRedditPinterestEmail Home
 Luke Tate
Luke Tate is Senior Advisor for Urban Policy at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), working in the Office of Policy Development and Research where he is a lead on the White House Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative. He works primarily on neighborhood revitalization in distressed communities, Choice Neighborhoods, and the connections between housing, community development, and other areas of urban policy including education, economic welfare and upward economic mobility, energy and sustainability, and long-term disaster recovery. Mr. Tate previously served on the Presidential Transition team focused on urban policy and HUD, and as Special Assistant to the Secretary at HUD. Prior to joining the Obama Administration, he did community development and educational work in Nicaragua, worked on community policy in the Office of the Governor of Arizona, and worked on President Obama's presidential campaign. He is a graduate of Harvard University.
  
Date Created: July 10, 2020
 Top

      Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

        
        
                        Facebook
          
                      X
          
                      YouTube
  

      Secondary Footer link menu
            Accessibility
              Plain Language
              Privacy Policy
              Legal Policies and Disclaimer
              No FEAR Act
              Freedom of Information Act
              USA.gov
              Justice.gov
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

KEVIN JEROME JONES, TDCJ No.

1169005,

Plaintiff,

VS.

MR. BOWERS, ET AL.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

)

) 3:22-CV-2286-G-BN

)

)

)

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. Objections were filed. The District Court reviewed de

novo those portions of the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation to

which objection was made, and reviewed the remaining proposed findings,

conclusions, and recommendation for plain error. Finding no error, the court

ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States

Magistrate Judge.

SO ORDERED.

November 4, 2022.

___________________________________

A. JOE FISH

Senior United States District Judge

Case 3:22-cv-02286-G-BN Document 7 Filed 11/04/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 28
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Titanium
Metals Corporation's financial statements for the nine months ended September 30,
1998 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such consolidated 
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001011657
<NAME> TITANIUM METALS CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. 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>                                         142,591
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  151,679
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,039
<INVENTORY>                                    212,059
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               528,195
<PP&E>                                         397,190
<DEPRECIATION>                                  67,986
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 986,827
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          157,569
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          201,250
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           315
<OTHER-SE>                                     458,117
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   986,827
<SALES>                                        551,390
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               557,186
<CGS>                                          418,437
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  469,269
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,211
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,325
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 85,592
<INCOME-TAX>                                    29,134
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             48,247
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    48,247
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.53
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.49
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from SEC
Form 10-QSB and is qualified in its entirety by reference to the unaudited
financial statements contained therein.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                      1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           5,047
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           2,864
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      2,972
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           3,277
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             3,163
<LOANS>                                        131,839
<ALLOWANCE>                                        823
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 155,254
<DEPOSITS>                                     122,785
<SHORT-TERM>                                     5,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,725
<LONG-TERM>                                      5,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            21
<OTHER-SE>                                      20,723
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 155,254
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  5,216
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  233
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   139
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 5,588
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               2,449
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,666
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            2,922
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      150
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  2,782
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    817
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         817
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       495
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.44
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.17
<LOANS-NON>                                        358
<LOANS-PAST>                                       359
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    20

<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   703
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       35
<RECOVERIES>                                         5
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  823
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               823
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1478 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1478

 For the relief of Chi Hsii Tsui, Jin Mie Tsui, Yin Whee Tsui, Yin Tao 
                        Tsui, and Yin Chao Tsui.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 24, 1993

 Mr. Price of North Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 For the relief of Chi Hsii Tsui, Jin Mie Tsui, Yin Whee Tsui, Yin Tao 
                        Tsui, and Yin Chao Tsui.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR CHI HSII TSUI, JIN MIE TSUI, 
              YIN WHEE TSUI, YIN TAO TSUI, AND YIN CHAO TSUI.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding section 201(a) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, Chi Hsii Tsui, Jin Mie Tsui, Yin Whee Tsui, Yin 
Tao Tsui, and Yin Chao Tsui shall be eligible for issuance of an 
immigrant visa or for adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully 
admitted for permanent residence upon filing an application for 
issuance of an immigrant visa under section 204 of such Act or for 
adjustment of status to lawful permanent resident.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Chi Hsii Tsui, Jin Mie Tsui, Yin Whee 
Tsui, Yin Tao Tsui, or Yin Chao Tsui enters the United States before 
the filing deadline specified in subsection (c), he or she shall be 
considered to have entered and remained lawfully and shall, if 
otherwise eligible, be eligible for adjustment of status under section 
245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of status is filed 
with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
    (d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Number.--Upon the granting of an 
immigrant visa or permanent residence to Chi Hsii Tsui, Jin Mie Tsui, 
Yin Whee Tsui, Yin Tao Tsui, and Yin Chao Tsui, the Secretary of State 
shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 5, during the current or 
next following fiscal year, the total number of immigrant visas that 
are made available to natives of the country of the aliens' birth under 
section 203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act or, if 
applicable, the total number of immigrant visas that are made available 
to natives of the country of the aliens' birth under section 202(e) of 
such Act.

                                 <all>
```
Union Calendar No. 136

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1385

[Report No. 103–245]

A BILL

To amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe

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

SEPTEMBER 21, 1993

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the

State of the Union and ordered to be printed
IB

Union Calendar No. 136

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1385

[Report No. 103–245]

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.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 17, 1993

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

on the Judiciary

SEPTEMBER 21, 1993

Additional sponsors: Mr. ZIMMER, Mrs. LLOYD, Mr. RAMSTAD, Mr. SKEEN,

and Mr. FISH

SEPTEMBER 21, 1993

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union

and ordered to be printed

A BILL

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,
2

•HR 1385 RH

1 SECTION 1. GRANT PROGRAM DESCRIPTION.

2 Section 501(b) of title I of the Omnibus Crime Con3 trol and Safe Streets Act of 1968 is amended—

4 (1) by striking the period at the end of para5 graph (21) and adding ‘‘; and’’; and

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

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

8 while intoxicated and the enforcement of other laws

9 relating to alcohol use and the operation of motor

10 vehicles.’’.
#### In the Matter of Albert Griffin, Petitioner, v Marie Santagata et al., Respondents.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, *inter alia,*to prohibit any further proceedings in a criminal action against the petitioner entitled *People*
      *558
      *v Albert Griffin,*under Nassau County indictment No. 73230, and for a change of venue of the criminal action.

Adjudged that the proceeding is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The extraordinary remedy of prohibition is available only where there is a clear legal right, and then, in cases where judicial authority is challenged, only when the court acts or threatens to act either without jurisdiction or in excess of its authorized powers *(see, Matter of Hynes v George,*76 NY2d 500; *Matter of Holtzman v Goldman,*71 NY2d 564, 569). Moreover, prohibition clearly does not lie if there is available an adequate remedy at law, by way of appeal or otherwise *(see, Matter of Molea v Marasco,*64 NY2d 718), and thus, cannot be used as a means of seeking collateral review of an error of law in a pending criminal matter *(see, Matter of State of New York v King,*36 NY2d 59; *Matter of Kramer v Rosenberger,*107 AD2d 748, 749).

In this case, the Nassau County District Attorney clearly has jurisdiction to prosecute the petitioner under the subject indictment, the County Court clearly has jurisdiction to preside over the prosecution, and the denials of the petitioner’s recusal motions are reviewable on direct appeal *(see, Matter of Borrell v Naro,*153 AD2d 557). Likewise, the petitioner’s challenge to the sufficiency of the indictment is not reviewable in a collateral proceeding. Thus, inasmuch as the petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the remedy of prohibition which transcends a question of substantive or procedural law, and which could not otherwise be safeguarded through the alternative remedy of appeal *(see, Matter of Borrell v Naro, supra,*at 558; *Matter of Lipari v Owens,*70 NY2d 731), the proceeding must be dismissed.

To the extent that the petitioner requests a change of venue of the criminal action now pending against him in the County Court, Nassau County, which relief is not available in this CPLR article 78 proceeding, that branch of the application is dismissed *(see,*CPL 230.20 [2], [3]). Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Bracken, Brown and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
Case 4:22-cr-00194-O Document 144 Filed 10/12/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 415
Case 4:22-cr-00194-O Document 144 Filed 10/12/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 416