alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 234 (Tuesday, December 5, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 75942]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-30874]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. 00N-1060]


Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of OMB 
Approval; Adoption of FDA Food Code by Local, State, and Tribal 
Jurisdictions

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a 
collection of information entitled ``Adoption of FDA Food Code by 
Local, State, and Tribal Jurisdictions'' has been approved by the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: JonnaLynn P. Capezzuto, Office of 
Information Resources Management (HFA-250), Food and Drug 
Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301-827-4659.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of August 3, 2000 
(65 FR 47736), the agency announced that the proposed information 
collection had been submitted to OMB for review and clearance under 44 
U.S.C. 3507. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays 
a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has now approved the 
information collection and has assigned OMB control number 0910-448. 
The approval expires on November 30, 2003. A copy of the supporting 
statement for this information collection is available on the Internet 
at http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets.

    Dated: November 28, 2000.
Margaret M. Dotzel,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 00-30874 Filed 12-4-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed October 19, 2022

. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D21

- 2234 Lower Tribunal No. 19

- 0803

________________ 

### Melissa Tripodi , Appellant,

vs. 

### Adam Mac Nacer, et al. , Appellee s

.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami

- Dade County, Christina Marie Di R aimondo , Judge.
Melis s a Tripodi, in proper person. Dr. Malissa Tigges , Guardian ad Litem, in proper person

. Before LOGUE, LINDSEY, and BOKOR , JJ. PER CURIAM.2 Appellant Melissa Tripodi appeals an order of the circuit court granting Dr. Malissa Tigges ’s Motion for Guardian ad Litem Attorney’s Fees and Costs. Tripodi has failed to provide a transcript of the circuit court’s hearing on this Motion but contends that the circuit court’s order was erroneous on its face and can be reversed even in the absence of a transcript. We
agree. This Court has held that “[a]n award of attorney ’ s fees without making adequate findings justifying the amount of the award is reversible error

. . . . T his is true even in the instance where a party does not provide an appellate court with an adequate reco rd or a transcript of proceedings.” Babun v. Stok
Kon + Braverman , 335 So. 3d 1236, 1240 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021) (citations omitted). Accordingly, “ [w]e remand with directions that the trial court consider the evidence supporting the GAL ’ s request for fees an d include in any order those findings necessary to justify the grant of reasonable fees for specific and documented services rendered, and from whom those fees are due.” Adkins v. Sotolongo , 197 So. 3d 1233, 1235 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016).
Reversed and remanded.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1644 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1644

  To clarify the status of the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National 
         Historic Trail as a unit of the National Park System.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 27, 2017

 Mr. Cardin (for himself and Mr. Van Hollen) introduced the following 
bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To clarify the status of the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National 
         Historic Trail as a unit of the National Park System.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Captain John Smith Chesapeake 
National Historic Trail Parity Act''.

SEC. 2. CAPTAIN JOHN SMITH CHESAPEAKE NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL.

    Section 5(a)(25)(C) of the National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 
1244(a)(25)(C)) is amended, in the matter preceding clause (i), by 
inserting ``as a unit of the National Park System'' after ``the 
Secretary of the Interior''.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 232 (Friday, December 1, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75307-75308]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-30603]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Environment and Natural Resources Division; Notice of Lodging 
Proposed Consent Decree

    In accordance with Department Policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is hereby 
given that a proposed consent decree in United States v. Portrait Homes 
Construction Co., Civil Action No. 4:00-3581-12, (D.S.C.), was lodged 
with the United States District Court for the District of South 
Carolina on November 15, 2000. This proposed Consent Decree concerns a 
complaint filed by the United States against Portrait Homes 
Construction Co., pursuant to sections 301(a) and 404 of the Clean 
Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1311(a) and 1344 and imposes civil penalties 
against the Defendant for the unauthorized discharge of dredged or fill 
material into waters of the United States in connection with the 
construction of a subdivision development on a portion of Kaminski 
Tract, located off Highway 707, approximately 1.5 miles from the 
intersection of Highway 17 and 707, near Murrells Inlet, in Horry 
County, South Carolina.
    The proposed Consent Decree requires the payment of civil penalties 
in the amount of $10,000 and prohibits the discharge of pollutants into 
the waters of the United States.
    The Department of Justice will accept written comments relating to 
this proposed Consent Decree for thirty (30) days from the date of 
publication of this notice. Please address comments to Joseph P. 
Griffith, Jr., United States Attorney's Office, 170 Meeting Street, 
Suite 300, P.O. Box 978, Charleston, South Carolina 29402 and refer to 
United States v. Portrait Homes Construction Co.
    The proposed Consent Decree may be examined at the Clerk's Office, 
United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, 
Hollings Judicial

[[Page 75308]]

Center, Meeting Street at Broad, Charleston, S.C. 29401.

Joseph P. Griffith, Jr.,
Assistant United States Attorney, United States Attorneys Office, 
Charleston, South Carolina.
[FR Doc. 00-30603 Filed 11-30-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-M
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Terrence Mason, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Appelman, J.), rendered July 6, 1987, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

On the instant appeal, the defendant argues that his constitutional right to confront his accusers was infringed when the trial court permitted the investigating detective to testify that the defendant had been arrested after being implicated by a codefendant who did not testify at trial. However, this argument was not preserved for appellate review *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Caldwell,*147 AD2d 581; *People v Cummings,*109 AD2d 748) and, in any event, any error in this regard was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt *(see, People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230, 237) in view of the overwhelming evidence of guilt *(see, People v Grant,*133 AD2d 466; *People v Dubois,*137 AD2d 706).

The defendant also argues that he was deprived of a fair trial by the statements of the prosecutor during summation. We disagree. The defendant has not preserved this issue for appellate review *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Coker,*135 AD2d 723). In any event, the prosecutor’s statements constituted a fair response to the defense summation which impugned the credibility of the prosecution’s witnesses *(see, People v Rawlings,*144 AD2d 500; *People v Crawford,*130 AD2d 678).

The defendant’s remaining arguments are either unpreserved for appellate review *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]) or without merit *(see, People v Graziano,*151 AD2d 775; *People v Patterson,*106 AD2d 520, 521). Mangano, P. J., Eiber, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 6, 2018

No. 04

- 17

- 00846

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF M.L.Y., ET AL CHILDREN,

From the 438th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Tr ial Court No. 2016PA02449

Honorable Richard Garcia, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellant ’ s second motion for extension of time to file brief is GRANTED. The

appellant ’ s brief is due March 20, 2018.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN W ITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 6th day of March, 2018

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Cour t
Exhibit 23

               Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Auditors

We consent to the  incorporation  by reference in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)
of  Burlington  Industries,  Inc. and  Subsidiary  Companies of our report dated
November  1,  1996,  included  in the 1996  Annual  Report  to  Shareholders  of
Burlington Industries, Inc.

Our  audits  also  included  the  financial  statement  schedule  of  Burlington
Industries,  Inc. and Subsidiary  Companies listed in the accompanying  index to
financial  statements.  This  schedule is the  responsibility  of the  Company's
management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits. In
our opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to above, when considered
in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole,  presents fairly
in all material respects the information set forth therein.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration  Statement
(Form S-3 No.  33-95350)  of  Burlington  Industries,  Inc.  and in the  related
Prospectus  of  our  report  dated  November  1,  1996,   with  respect  to  the
consolidated  financial  statements  incorporated  herein by  reference  and our
report included in the above  paragraph with respect to the financial  statement
schedule  included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) of  Burlington  Industries,
Inc.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No.  33-49894)  pertaining  to the  Burlington  Industries,  Inc. 1992
Equity Incentive Plan and the Burlington Industries,  Inc. Equity Incentive Plan
and (Form S-8 No. 333-9501) pertaining to the Burlington  Industries,  Inc. 1995
Equity  Incentive  Plan of  Burlington  Industries,  Inc.  of our  report  dated
November  1,  1996,  with  respect  to  the  consolidated  financial  statements
incorporated  herein by reference and our report included in the above paragraph
with respect to the financial  statement schedule included in this Annual Report
(Form 10-K) of Burlington Industries, Inc.

/s/Ernst & Young LLP


Greensboro, North Carolina
December 16, 1996
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Environmental Protection Agency

          - 40 CFR Part 52 
          - [IL203-2; FRL-6910-8] 

# AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

# ACTION:

Proposed rule; reopening of the public comment period. 

# SUMMARY:

                        EPA is reopening and extending the public comment period for a proposed rule published on August 31, 2000 (65 FR 52967). In the August 31, 2000 proposed rule, EPA proposed to approve Illinois' regulations for control of Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) emissions from Electric Generating Units (EGUs) provided Illinois corrects identified deficiencies in the regulations. This proposed approval was done in parallel to the adoption of the regulations by the State. EPA solicited public comment on Illinois' proposed  NOX                         regulations and on EPA's proposed action. At the request of the State of Missouri, EPA is reopening the comment period through December 11, 2000. All comments received before December 11, 2000, including those received between the close of the comment period on September 30, 2000 and the publication of this proposed rule reopening the comment period, will be entered into the public record and considered by EPA before taking final action on the proposed rule.                     

# DATES:

Comments must be received on or before December 11, 2000. 

# ADDRESSES:

Written comments should be addressed to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), United States Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Edward Doty, Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), United States Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6057,                         *(doty.edward@epa.gov)*.                     

Dated: November 21, 2000. 

Francis X. Lyons, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 00-30633 Filed 11-30-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560-50-U
### Siloxanes ECA Extension Marcus Aguilar to: pdeleo, j ames.blum, Betsy.Carlton, emihaich, kathy.plotzke, russell.mait, wendykoch, lisa.dumars, Raymond.Hiley, Kevin.West, 12/20/2012 02:20 PM

Cc: Ward Penberthy, Mike Mattheisen, Paul Lewis

From: Marcus Aguilar/DC/USEPA/US To: pdeleo@cleaninginstitute.org, j ames.blum@bluestarsilicones.com, Betsy.Carlton@bluestarsilicones.com, emihaich@nc.rr.com, kathy.plotzke@dowcorning.com, russell.mait@evonik.com, wendykoch@eponallc.com, lisa.dumars@momentive.com, Cc: Ward Penberthy/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Mike Mattheisen/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Paul Lewis/DC/USEPA/US@EPA 

### Dear Siloxanes ECA Participants, This email is intended to notify interested parties that EPA has extended the ECA negotiation period by 60 days until February 27, 2013 at the request of the Silicones Environmental Health and Safety Council (SEHSC). In its request to EPA, SEHSC stated that the extension would allow them to add additional POTWs to their current siloxane monitoring proposal. The precise timing of future negotiation sessions will be determined in early January. EPA remains hopeful that an ECA agreeable to all interested parties can be concluded in the near term. Please see the attached letter from SEHSC requesting an extension of this ECA. This letter will be placed in the public docket for this ECA. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me via email or telephone. I will be out of the office beginning Dec. 21 and returning Jan. 2.

06 Dec 12 Response Letter Final.pd f Response Final.pd 

### Sincerely, Marcus Aguilar Telephone: (202) 564-3194 Facsimile: (202) 564-4765 Program Analyst Chemical Information and Testing Branch Chemical Control Division Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics US Environmental Protection Agency
#### HUDSON v. BLACKWELL.

No. 14235.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Fort Worth.

May 2, 1941.

Rehearing Denied June 6, 1941.

T. Wesley Hook, of Alvarado, for appellant.

George P. Gleeson and Obel L. McAl-ister, both of Fort Worth, for appellee.

BROWN, Justice.

The record in this cause was filed in this Court on November 26th, 1940, and the records of the Clerk of this Court disclose that appellant’s counsel withdrew the record so soon as the customary 30 day period had expired, but no effort was made to file briefs under the Statute, Article 1848, Vernons’ Tex. Civ. Statute.

This cause was set for submission for April 4th, 1941, and appellant tendered his briefs on March 28th, 1941. The Clerk of this Court declined to file the briefs, and appellant filed a motion for leave to file his briefs on March 28th, 1941.

This motion is resisted by appellee.

In short, appellant tendered his briefs at about the time when, under the said statute, appellee was required to file briefs.

After an appellant has had eight weeks’ notice of the day of submission of his cause, there must be some good cause for his failure to file briefs in accordance with the statute. We do not consider appellant’s reasons such as measure up to the requirements.

The motion to be permitted to file briefs is overruled.

The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1665 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1665

    To authorize the State of Utah to select certain lands that are 
available for disposal under the Pony Express Resource Management Plan 
 to be used for the support and benefit of State institutions, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 27, 2017

   Mr. Hatch introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To authorize the State of Utah to select certain lands that are 
available for disposal under the Pony Express Resource Management Plan 
 to be used for the support and benefit of State institutions, and for 
                            other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Confirming State Land Grants for 
Education Act''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION.

    (a) In General.--Subject to valid existing rights, the State of 
Utah may select any lands in T6S and T7S, R1W, Salt Lake Base and 
Meridian, that are owned by the United States, under the administrative 
jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management, and identified as 
available for disposal by land exchange in the Record of Decision for 
the Pony Express Resource Management Plan and Rangeland Program Summary 
for Utah County (January 1990), as amended by the Pony Express Plan 
Amendment (November 1997), in fulfillment of the land grants made in 
sections 6, 8, and 12 of the Act of July 16, 1894 (28 Stat. 107), as 
generally depicted on the map entitled ``Proposed Utah County Quantity 
Grants'' and dated June 27, 2017, to further the purposes of the State 
of Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration, without 
further land use planning action by the Bureau of Land Management.
    (b) Application.--The criteria listed in Decision 3 of the Lands 
Program of the resource management plan described in subsection (a) 
shall not apply to any land selected under subsection (a).
    (c) Effect on Limitation.--Nothing in this Act affects the 
limitation established under section 2815(d) of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65).
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 21


                 TANDY BRANDS ACCESSORIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

EXHIBIT (21):  SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT


21.1  List of subsidiaries

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Subsidiaries of                     State or Other Jurisdiction of         Names Under Which Such
the Registrant                      Incorporation or Organization          Subsidiaries Do Business
--------------                      -----------------------------          ------------------------
<S>                                 <C>                                    <C>
Accessory Design Group, Inc.        A Delaware Corporation                 Accessory Design Group, Inc.
                                                                           Accessory Design Group

TBAC-Prince Gardner, Inc.           A Delaware Corporation                 TBAC-Prince Gardner, Inc.
                                                                           Prince Gardner

TBAC-AIS, Inc.                      A Delaware Corporation                 TBAC-AIS, Inc.

H.A. Sheldon Canada Ltd.            A Canadian Corporation                 1088258 Ontario, Inc.
                                                                           H.A. Sheldon Canada Ltd.

TBAC-Canterbury, Inc.               A Delaware Corporation                 TBAC-Canterbury, Inc.

Amity/Rolfs, Inc.                   A Delaware Corporation                 Amity/Rolfs, Inc.

Tiger Accessories, Inc.             A New York Corporation                 Tiger Accessories, Inc.
</TABLE>