alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
*OPINION ISSUED OCTOBER 6, 2008*

#### MARY L. WHEELER VS. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS

(CC-08-0004)

Claimant appeared *pro se.*

Jason C. Workman, Attorney at Law, for respondent.

PER CURIAM:

Claimant brought this action for vehicle damage which occurred when her 2002 Ford Focus struck a hole while she was traveling on Six Mile Road near Madison, Boone County. The Court is of the opinion to deny the claim for the reasons more fully stated below.

*146The incident giving rise to this claim occurred at approximately 3:00 p.m. on December 16, 2007. Six Mile Road is a narrow, two-lane, paved road with a posted speed limit of forty-five miles per hour. At the time of the incident, claimant was traveling west on Six Mile Road from Route 17 to Corridor G. Claimant testified that she was driving at approximately forty miles per hour when her vehicle struck a hole that was approximately one foot and a half wide, one foot long, and three inches deep. There were no other vehicles traveling in the same direction or coming from the opposite direction. She stated that she had not traveled on this road for about six months to a year before this incident occurred. As a result, claimant’s vehicle sustained damage to its tire and rim in the amount of $315.09.

The position of the respondent is that it did not have actual or constructive notice of the condition on Six Mile Road at the site of claimant’s accident for the date in question. Mr. Stefen White, Equipment Operator II for respondent in Boone County, testified that Six Mile Road is a second priority road in terms of its maintenance. Prior to the incident, respondent did not have any complaints regarding the hole on Six Mile Road.

The well-established principle of law in West Virginia is that the State is neither an insurer nor a guarantor of the safety of travelers upon its roads. *Adkins v. Sims,*130 W.Va. 645; 46 S.E.2d 81 (1947). In order to hold respondent liable for road defects of this type, a claimant must prove that respondent had actual or constructive notice of the defect and a reasonable time to take corrective action. *Chapman v. Dep’t. of Highways,*16 Ct. Cl. 103 (1986).

In the instant case, the Court is of the opinion that respondent did not have actual or constructive notice of the hole on Six Mile Road. While the Court finds that claimant’s vehicle struck a hole on Six Mile Road on the day in question, that fact alone is insufficient to establish negligence on the part of respondent. Respondent did not receive any complaints about the condition on Six Mile Road before this incident occurred. Although the Court is sympathetic to the claimant’s plight, the Court does not find any negligence on the part of respondent upon which to justify an award.

In view of the foregoing, the Court is of the opinion to and does deny this claim.

Claim disallowed.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1934 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1934

  To prevent catastrophic failure or shutdown of remote diesel power 
    engines due to emission control devices, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 5, 2017

 Mr. Sullivan (for himself and Ms. Murkowski) introduced the following 
bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment 
                            and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To prevent catastrophic failure or shutdown of remote diesel power 
    engines due to emission control devices, 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 ``Alaska Remote Generator Reliability 
and Protection Act''.

SEC. 2. REVISION OF REGULATIONS REQUIRED.

    (a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment 
of this Act, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency 
shall revise section 60.4216(c) of title 40, Code of Federal 
Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this Act), by 
striking ``, except that for 2014 model year'' and all that follows 
through ``compared to engine-out emissions''.
    (b) Electricity and Energy Reliability.--A revision of section 
60.4216 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, may require the 
installation of emission control devices only if, after consultation 
with the Secretary of Energy, the Administrator of the Environmental 
Protection Agency determines that such a requirement will not 
negatively affect electricity or energy reliability in any remote area 
of the State of Alaska.
                                 <all>
```
(December 21, 1990)

#### In the Matter of Gerald G. Kramer for Reinstatement as an Attorney, Petitioner.

Application for reinstatement granted and petitioner, Gerald G. Kramer, reinstated as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately. Order entered. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Casey, Yesawich, Jr., and Mercure, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                           UT
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
     FROM STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS, BALANCE SHEETS AND STATEMENTS
     OF CASH FLOWS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
     TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000
<CURRENCY>                                U.S. Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                       66,705
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                      7,996
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                          44,265
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                             0
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                   1,364
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 120,330
<COMMON>                                         1,195
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                       37,153
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                             28,929
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                  67,277
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      1,446
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                            21,582
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                    1,007
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                  29,018
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  120,330
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                       17,012
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                               105
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      15,461
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      15,566
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                          1,551
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                              (2,266)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                    (715)
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          (389)
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,225)
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                         16
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   (1,225)
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                           731
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                            0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                           2,065
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.17)



</TABLE>
Exhibit 3.03


                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                       OF
                       CERTIFICATE OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
                                       OF
                      DEAN WITTER SELECT FUTURES FUND L.P.

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

              Pursuant to Section 17-202 of the Delaware Revised
                         Uniform Limited Partnership Act
              ---------------------------------------------------


            The  undersigned,  for the purpose of amending  the  Certificate  of
Limited  Partnership  of Dean Witter  Select  Futures  Fund L.P.  filed with the
Secretary  of State of  Delaware  on March 21,  1991,  does  hereby  certify  as
follows:

                  First.  Name of Limited  Partnership.  The name of the limited
             partnership is Dean Witter Select Futures Fund L.P.

                  Second. Amendment. Article First of the Certificate of Limited
             Partnership is amended to read in full as follows:


                          "First. Name of Limited  Partnership.  The name of the
                     limited partnership is Dean Witter Spectrum Select L.P."


            IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate of
Amendment of  Certificate  of Limited  Partnership  as of the 28th day of April,
1998.



                             By: Demeter Management Corporation
                                 General Partner


                             By: /s/ Mark J. Hawley
                                 ----------------------------
                                 Mark J. Hawley
                                 President
#### MANLY v. STATE.

No. 14629.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 6, 1932.

J. T. Ranspot, of Mineral Wells, -for appellant.

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

MORROW, P. J.

The original opinion is withdrawn, and in lieu thereof the following remarks are made: Appellant was convicted of the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale, and a penalty assessed against him of confinement in the penitentiary for one year.

The affidavit for the search warrant, as set out in bill of exception No. 3, after describing the private residence, contains the following: “Said described private residence is occupied by negro, name unknown.’’

In the affidavit there is no further description of the person. The requisites of an affidavit for a search warrant are set out in article 310, C. C. P., as follows: “The name of the person accused of having stolen or concealed the property; or, if his name be unknown, giving a description of the accused, or stating that the person who stole or concealed the property is unknown.”

The insufficiency of the affidavit has been declared in Denzlinger v. State, 116 Tex. Cr. R. 158, 28 S.W.(2d) 160; Naulls v. State, 115 Tex. Cr. R. 44, 27 S.W.(2d) 180; Tillery v. State, 114 Tex. Cr. R. 106, 24 S.W.(2d) 844; Anderson v. State, 114 Tex. Cr. R. 448, 25 S.W.(2d) 839; De Aguirre v. State, 109 Tex. Cr. R. 584, 7 S.W.(2d) 76; Alford v. State, 8 Tex.App. 561.

The search warrant based upon the imperfect affidavit mentioned was illegal, and the evidence obtained through the search of the appellant’s residence upon the authority of the search warrant mentioned was inadmissible in evidence.

It appears from the record that the evidence against the appellant was obtained under a search warrant which was invalid for the reason that the affidavit failed to comply *257with the demand of the statute with reference to the name and description of the possessor of the place to he searched. The insufficiency of the affidavit rendered the search unauthorized under article 727a, O. O. P. 1925. The evidence having been obtained under an illegal search warrant, the court was in error in receiving it in evidence and permitting the judgment against the accused to be based thereon.

For the reasons stated, the motion for rehearing is granted, the order of affirmance is set aside, the judgment of the trial court is reversed, and the cause remanded.
I N I TIAL REVI E W ENG I N EER I NG REPORT PMN : 15 - 0098 Standard Rev i ew D ra f t 2/5/2015 ENG I NEER : H



# - -SAT (concerns) (12/23/2014) : Re l ated C Analogs : Migratio PBT rat i ng : P2B1Tl Health : 1 - 2 Derma l , I nha l at i on Eco : 2 Water (Al l re l eases to water wi th a CC (Test i ng desired) 99 ppb), XB TestingOCCUPAT I ONAL EXPOSURE RAT I NG : 2 - 3A NOTES & KEY ASSUMPT I ONS : Generated by the 09/30/20 1 3 vers i on o f ChemST EER .I N I TIAL REVI EW ENG I N EER I NG REPORT PMN : 15 - 0 098 

# -

# I I


# -I N I TIAL REVI EW ENG I N EER I NG REPORT PMN : 15 - 0 098 

# -

# I I


# -

# -
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2


CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002


In connection with the Annual Report of Open
Solutions Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for
the fiscal period ending December 31, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Carl D. Blandino, Senior Vice
President, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary of
the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| |                                                                                                                                                                 
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (1) the Report fully complies with the
    requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
    Exchange Act of 1934; and                               
|
| | (2) the information contained in the Report
    fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
    condition and results of operations of the Company.



| |                                           
| | ------------------------------------------
| | /s/ CARL D. BLANDINO                      
| |                                           
| | Carl D. Blandino                          
| | Senior Vice President, Chief
    Financial
| | Officer, Treasurer and Secretary          

March 30, 2004
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 233 (Monday, December 4, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 75725]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-30708]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; 
Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meetings.
    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive 
and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis, Panel, ZDK1 GRB-B(J3)M.
    Date: December 4, 2000.
    Time: 12:30 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: 2 Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Blvd, Rm 645, Bethesda, 
MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Ned Feder, Scientific Review Administrator, 
Review Branch, DEA NIDDK, Room 645, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, 
National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594-8890.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

    Name: of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive 
and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel, ZDK1 GRB-B(J2)S.
    Date: December 15, 2000.
    Time: 3 p.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: 2 Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Blvd, Rm 645, Bethesda, 
MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Ned Feder, Scientific Review Administrator, 
Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, Room 645, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, 
National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594-8890.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, 
Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive 
Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology 
and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: November 27, 2000.
Anna Snouffer,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 00-30708 Filed 12-1-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
April 2 5 , 2013



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NEW DELIVERANCE CHUR CH, INC. , Appellant

NO. 14

- 10

- 01127

- CV V.

ADAM MILLER AND HOUS SIERE, DURANT & HOUS SIERE, LLP, Appellee s

________________________________ This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellee s was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find error in the judgment. We therefore order the judgment of the court below REVERSED and REMAND the cause for proceeding s in accordance with the court's opinion. We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by appellee s.
We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 March 3, 2014

Order 

Clerk

March 3, 2014

146478(109)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

SC: 146478

v COA: 307758

St. Clair CC: 06-001700-FC

RAYMOND CURTIS CARP,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________________________/

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

SC: 146819

v COA: 314080

Wayne CC: 94-002089-01-FC

CORTEZ ROLAND DAVIS,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of the Ad Hoc Committee Comprised of 

Former Officials of the Michigan Department of Corrections, Correctional, Penological, 

Public Safety and Mental Health Organizations Together with Individual Experts for 

leave to file an amicus curiae brief is GRANTED. The amicus brief submitted on 

February 20, 2014, is accepted for filing.
Exhibit 31.1
**Certification of Principal Executive and Financial Officer**
I, Roy T. Rimmer, Jr., certify that:
 1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of TIMCO AviationServices, Inc.;  2.  Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;  3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of,and for, the periods presented in this report;  4.  I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and I have:
 a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision,to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b)  Intentionally omitted.  c)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  d)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and
 5.  I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 a)  all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial information; and  b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.     Date: May 10, 2005      /s/ Roy T. Rimmer, Jr.       Roy T. Rimmer, Jr.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 28 (Thursday, February 10, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 6687]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-3079]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


RTCA; Special Committee 147; Minimum Operational Performance 
Standards for Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance Systems Airborne 
Equipment

    Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
(Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is hereby given for 
Special Committee 147 meeting to be held February 29-March 1, 2000, 
starting at 9 a.m. each day. The meeting will be held at RTCA, 1140 
Connecticut Avenue, NW., Suite 1020, Washington, DC, 20036.
    The agenda will include: February 29: (1) Requirements Working 
Group Meeting. March 1: 9 a.m.-1 p.m. (2) Requirements Working Group 
Meeting continues; 1 p.m.-5 p.m. (3) Plenary Session: (a) Welcome and 
Introductory Remarks: (b) Review and Approve Previous Meeting; (c) 
Report and Discuss Requirements Working Group Activities; (d) Discuss 
Future SC-147 Activities and Plans; (4) Other Business; (5) Date and 
Location of Next Meeting; (6) Closing.
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space 
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public 
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present 
statements or obtain information should contact the RTCA Secretariat, 
1140 Connecticut Avenue, NW., Suite 1020, Washington, DC, 20036; (202) 
833-9339 (phone); (202) 833-9434 (fax); or http://www.rtca.org (web 
site). Members of the public may present a written statement to the 
committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 4, 2000.
Janice L. Peters,
Designated Official.
[FR Doc. 00-3079 Filed 2-9-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
Wyoming Nitrate Contribution to Badlands

Worst

site Year modelrun param N SReg PT AF MV Nat Area Total

BADL1 2002 plan02c36k PN3 23 WY 0.0766 0.0003522 0.0578565 0.0035609 0.0143044 0.1526739

Wyoming's 2002 Contribution (20% Worst) to Nitrate at Badlands = 0.15 divided by 1.3, or 12%

Best

site Year modelrun param N SReg PT AF MV Nat Area Total

BADL1 2002 plan02c36k PN3 23 WY 0.2871696 0.0004304 0.2081957 0.0137522 0.0643087 0.5738566

Wyoming's 2002 Contribution (20% Best) to Nitrate at Badlands = 0.57 divided by 1.7, or 34%