alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          31,650
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  825,147
<ALLOWANCES>                                    17,064
<INVENTORY>                                    938,203
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,799,009
<PP&E>                                       3,845,454
<DEPRECIATION>                                 972,609
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,635,596
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,415,142
<BONDS>                                      1,190,713
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,942,551
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,635,596
<SALES>                                      5,409,704
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,402,571
<CGS>                                        5,086,195
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,189,143
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   394
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 7,556
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              47,103
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                158,375
<INCOME-TAX>                                    47,263
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            111,112
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   111,112
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 209 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 209

   To authorize an additional district judgeship for the district of 
                                 Idaho.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 24, 2017

 Mr. Crapo (for himself and Mr. Risch) introduced the following bill; 
  which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To authorize an additional district judgeship for the district of 
                                 Idaho.

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

SECTION 1. DISTRICT JUDGESHIP FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO.

    (a) In General.--The President shall appoint, by and with the 
advice and consent of the Senate, 1 additional district judge for the 
district of Idaho.
    (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table in section 
133(a) of title 28, United States Code, is amended by striking the item 
relating to Idaho 

              

and inserting the following:

``Idaho....................................................         3''.
 

                                 <all>
```
#### Harvey THOMPSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 21244.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 28, 1940.

John D. Coffman, of Houston, for appellant.

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

KRUEGER, Judge.

The conviction is for unlawfully operating a motor vehicle upon the public highway while under the influence of intoxicating liquor; penalty assessed at confinement in the state penitentiary for a period of two years.

Upon the written motion of the appellant, duly verified by his affidavit, the appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion by the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
Exhibit
      10.37b

    


    AMENDMENT
      TO 

    6%
      PROMISSORY NOTE

    


    AMENDMENT
      TO 6% PROMISSORY NOTE, is dated as of September
      18, 2008;
      made by
      and between Delta Mutual, Inc., a Delaware corporation, with its principal
      offices located at 111 North Branch Street, Sellersville, PA 18960 (the
“Company”) and Security Systems International, Inc., a Delaware corporation,
      (the “Lender”) with a mailing address of 9034 East Caribbean Lane, Scottsdale,
      AZ 85260. Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined herein shall
      have the meaning assigned to such term in the Original Note.

    


    WHEREAS,
      the Company and the Lender are parties to that certain 6% Promissory Note,
      dated
      March 6, 2008 (the “Original Note”), pursuant to which the Company has borrowed
      the amount of $100,000
      from the
      Lender; 

    


    WHEREAS,
      the Original Note provides that the Maturity Date shall be September 6, 2008;
      and

    


    WHEREAS,
      the Company and the Lender have agreed to extend the Maturity Date and to amend
      Section 1.4 of the Original Note; and

    


    WHEREAS,
      in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Original Note, the Company
      and the Lender hereby approve the amendment of the Original Note as set forth
      herein.

    


    NOW,
      THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual covenants contained
      herein, the parties agree as follows:

    


    1. By
      their
      respective execution of this AMENDMENT, the Company and the Lender
      agree that Section 1.4 of the Original Note is hereby amended to read in its
      entirety as follows: “Maturity
      Date”
      shall
      mean December
      15, 2008; and

    


    2. Except
      as
      expressly provided herein, the Original Note shall continue in full force and
      effect.

    


    3. This
      AMENDMENT may be executed by facsimile and in counterparts, which, taken
      together, shall be deemed an original and shall constitute a single
      AMENDMENT.

    


    IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company and the Lender have caused this AMENDMENT to be
      executed as of the date first written above.

     

    
      	
              DELTA
                MUTUAL, INC.

            	 	
              SECURITY
                SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC.

            
	
              (COMPANY)

            	 	
              (LENDER)

            
	 	 	 	 	 
	
              By:

            	
              /s/
                Martin G. Chilek

            	 	
              By:

            	
              /s/
                Malcolm W. Sherman

            
	 	
              Martin
                G. Chilek

            	 	 	
              Malcolm
                W. Sherman

            
	 	
              Sr.
                Vice President

            	 	 	
              President
EXHIBIT 3.2

To:      The Secretary of State
         State of New Jersey

         Pursuant to the provisions of Section 14A:9-2(4) and Section
14A:9-4(3), Corporations, General, of the New Jersey Statutes, the undersigned
corporation executes the following Certificate of Amendment to its Certificate
of Incorporation:

1.       The name of the corporation is EP MedSystems, Inc.

2.       The following amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation was
         approved by the directors and thereafter duly adopted by the
         shareholders of the corporation on the 28th day of September, 1998:

         Resolved, that a new Article Tenth of the Certificate of Incorporation
 be added to read as follows:

     TENTH:  Effective  with the election of directors at the annual  meeting of
shareholders to be held in 1998, the directors shall be classified, with respect
to the time for which they severally hold office,  into three classes, as nearly
equal in number as possible, as shall be provided in the manner specified in the
by-laws;  one calls to hold office  initially  for a term expiring at the annual
meeting  of  shareholders  to be held in  1999,  another  class  to hold  office
initially for a term expiring at the annual meeting of  shareholders  to be held
in 2001,  with the members of each class to hold office  until their  respective
successors  are elected and qualified.  At each annual  meeting of  shareholders
commencing  with the annual  meeting in 1999,  the  successors to the classes of
directors whose terms then expire shall be elected to serve three year terms and
until their respective successors are duly elected and qualified. No decrease in
the number of  directors  shall have the  effect of  shortening  the term of any
incumbent director. Any increase or decrease in the number of directors shall be
apportioned  among the  classes  so as to make all  classes  as nearly  equal in
number as possible.

     Notwithstanding  anything contained herein to the contrary, the affirmative
vote of the  holders of a majority of all issued and  outstanding  shares of the
corporation  entitled to vote thereon,  voting together as a single class, shall
be required to alter, amend or adopt any provisions inconsistent with, or repeal
this Article TENTH or any provision  hereof at any annual or special  meeting of
shareholders.

3.       The number of shares entitled to vote upon the amendment was 9,849,917.

4.       The number of shares voting for and against such amendment is as
         follows:

                     Number of Shares             Number of Shares
                   Voting For Amendment       Voting Against Amendment
                         6,898,493                       0


5.       The effective date of this Amendment to the Certificate of
         Incorporation shall be upon filing.

         Dated this 6th day of November, 1998

                          EP MedSystems, Inc.

                          By: /s/ James J. Caruso
                          James J. Caruso, VP-Finance, CFO & Secretary
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-10-00268-CV

IN RE GERALD HAYES

Original Proceeding

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Gerald Hayes, an inmate, filed a petition for writ of mandamus. There are 

procedural problems with the petition, but we use Rule 2 to look beyond those 

problems and deny the petition. See TEX. R. APP. P. 2.

Further, absent a specific exemption, the Clerk of the Court must collect filing 

fees at the time a document is presented for filing. TEX. R. APP. P. 12.1(b); Appendix to 

TEX. R. APP. P., Order Regarding Fees (Amended Aug. 28, 2007, eff. Sept. 1, 2007). See 

also TEX. R. APP. P. 5; 10TH TEX. APP. (WACO) LOC. R. 5; TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 

51.207(b); § 51.941(a) (Vernon 2005); and § 51.208 (Vernon Supp. 2009). Under these 

circumstances, we suspend the rule and order the Clerk to write off all unpaid filing 
In re Hayes Page 2

fees in this case. TEX. R. APP. P. 2. The write-off of the fees from the accounts receivable 

of the Court in no way eliminates or reduces the fees owed by Hayes.

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Reyna, and

Justice Davis

Petition denied

Opinion delivered and filed July 28, 2010

[OT06]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>      5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THERMO OPTEK
CORPORATION'S REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED OCTOBER 3, 1998 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>   1,000
       
<S>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                JAN-02-1999
<PERIOD-END>                     OCT-03-1998
<CASH>                                60,113
<SECURITIES>                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                         98,269
<ALLOWANCES>                           4,850
<INVENTORY>                           73,242
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                     243,722
<PP&E>                                97,979
<DEPRECIATION>                        37,090
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                       562,601
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                154,432
<BONDS>                               73,964
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      0
<PREFERRED>                                0
<COMMON>                                 518
<OTHER-SE>                           318,519
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>         562,601
<SALES>                              329,135
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                     329,135
<CGS>                                176,829
<TOTAL-COSTS>                        176,829
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                      27,377
<LOSS-PROVISION>                          56
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                     5,787
<INCOME-PRETAX>                       39,807
<INCOME-TAX>                          17,352
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                   22,455
<DISCONTINUED>                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                          213
<CHANGES>                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                          22,668
<EPS-PRIMARY>                           0.44
<EPS-DILUTED>                           0.42
        

</TABLE>
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2429 

To amend chapter 77 of title 18, United States Code, to clarify that using 

drugs or illegal substances to cause a person to engage in a commercial 

sex act constitutes coercion and using drugs or illegal substances to 

provide or obtain the labor or services of a person constitutes forced 

labor. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 14, 2018 

Mr. BROWN (for himself, Mr. CORNYN, Ms. KLOBUCHAR, Mr. NELSON, Mr. 

PORTMAN, Mr. TILLIS, and Mrs. FEINSTEIN) introduced the following 

bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend chapter 77 of title 18, United States Code, to 

clarify that using drugs or illegal substances to cause 

a person to engage in a commercial sex act constitutes 

coercion and using drugs or illegal substances to provide 

or obtain the labor or services of a person constitutes 

forced labor. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Protecting Rights Of 

5 Those Exploited by Coercive Trafficking Act of 2018’’. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2429 IS

1 SEC. 2. USE OF DRUGS OR ILLEGAL SUBSTANCES FOR 

2 TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS. 

3 (a) FORCED LABOR.—Section 1589(a) of title 18, 

4 United States Code, is amended— 

5 (1) in paragraph (3), by striking ‘‘or’’ at the 

6 end; 

7 (2) in paragraph (4), by striking the comma at 

8 the end and inserting ‘‘; or’’; and 

9 (3) by inserting after paragraph (4) the fol10 lowing: 

11 ‘‘(5) by means of supplying, furnishing, or pro12 viding any drug or illegal substance to a person, in13 cluding to exploit the addiction of the person or 

14 cause the person to become addicted to the drug or 

15 illegal substance,’’. 

16 (b) SEX TRAFFICKING.—Section 1591(e)(2) of title 

17 18, United States Code, is amended— 

18 (1) in subparagraph (B), by striking ‘‘or’’ at 

19 the end; 

20 (2) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period 

21 at the end and inserting ‘‘; or’’; and 

22 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

23 ‘‘(D) supplying, furnishing, or providing 

24 any drug or illegal substance to a person, in25 cluding to exploit the addiction of the person or 

26 cause the person to become addicted to the 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 2429 IS

1 drug or illegal substance (unless the defendant 

2 engaged in the conduct as a direct result of 

3 being a victim of an offense under this chap4 ter).’’. 

Æ 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
#### PERKINS v. STATE.

No. 15987.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 10, 1933.

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

HAWKINS,- Judge.

Conviction is for manufacturing intoxicating liquor, punishment being one year in the penitentiary.

The indictment is regular and charges an offense. The record contains neither statement of facts nor bills of exception. In such condition nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.
BIE

https://secure.cds2.com:8080/main.html?download&weblink=ba7fb55f3f312c4157404ab0e2456183&r

ealfilename=BIE-v3.0.pdf
-82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72 -70

 38

 40

 42

 44

▲★

▲

▲

▲

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 1000

18 12 06 00

06/16

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 16 Jun 06

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.77 N 77.11 W Meters AGL
| 1. | Amendment.  The second and third sentences of the first paragraph of clause (ii) of Sections 3(b) of the Amended Employment Agreement are hereby amended to read as follows: |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | No Other Modification or Amendment.  Except as specifically provided herein, the Amended Employment Agreement is not modified or amended in any respect and remains in full force and effect. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 3. | Governing Law.  This Second Amendment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New York (determined without regard to the choice of law provisions thereof), and the parties consent to jurisdiction in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 4. | Counterparts.  This Second Amendment may be executed by the parties hereto in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but both such counterparts shall together constitute one and the same document. |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | LIFETIME BRANDS, INC.                                                                                             |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |  By:  /s/ Ronald Shiftan                                                                                |
|   |            Name: Ronald Shiftan                            |
|   |            Title:   Chief Operating Officer |
|   |   EXECUTIVE                                                                                             |
|   |  __/s/ Jeffrey Siegel                                                                                        |
|   |           Jeffrey Siegel                                        |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          14,366
<SECURITIES>                                    15,781
<RECEIVABLES>                                       21
<ALLOWANCES>                                       (5)
<INVENTORY>                                         33
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                34,542
<PP&E>                                           7,707
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (4,633)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  40,482
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,160
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           327
<OTHER-SE>                                      21,972
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    40,482
<SALES>                                          1,079
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,924
<CGS>                                              709
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   28,674
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 (8)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (17,553)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (522)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (17,031)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (17,031)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.53)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.53)


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2254 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2254

 To prevent unfair double taxation by ensuring that the deduction for 
    State and local taxes is not reduced, suspended, or eliminated.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           December 19, 2017

 Mr. Menendez (for himself, Mr. Booker, Mr. Cardin, Mrs. Murray, Mrs. 
   Gillibrand, Mr. Van Hollen, Ms. Harris, Mr. Blumenthal, and Mrs. 
  Feinstein) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prevent unfair double taxation by ensuring that the deduction for 
    State and local taxes is not reduced, suspended, or eliminated.

    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 ``Tax Cuts and Jobs Act''.

SEC. 2. PREVENTING REDUCTION, SUSPENSION, OR ELIMINATION OF THE 
              DEDUCTION FOR STATE AND LOCAL TAXES.

    Notwithstanding any other law or any subsequent Act, the deduction 
allowed pursuant to section 164 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
shall not be reduced, suspended, or eliminated in any manner.
                                 <all>
```
#### Flexo-Craft Prints, Inc., Respondent, v HBE Leasing Corporation, Appellant.

In an action to recover damages based on fraud, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Held, J.), dated May 12, 1989, which denied its motion to dismiss the amended complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

*666On this appeal, the defendant challenges the Supreme Court’s determination which denied its motion to dismiss the amended complaint. The court concluded that a valid cause of action based on fraud was stated therein.

We agree with the defendant that a fraud cause of action was not alleged by the plaintiff *(see,*CPLR 3016 [b]; *Glassman v Catli,*111 AD2d 744). Nevertheless, we find that the allegations in the amended complaint sufficiently set forth a cause of action to recover an alleged monetary overpayment made by the plaintiff to the defendant. Accordingly, dismissal of the amended complaint was not warranted. Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Eiber, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.