alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States

Office of

Personnel Management Washington, D.C. 20415

In Reply Refer To: Your Reference:

May 15, 2000

TO ALL FEDERAL ENROLLEES OF

AMERICAN HMO HEALTH PLAN- ILLINOIS

American HMO – Illinois (American Health Care Providers, Inc.) is sending you this important

notice at the request of the United States Office of Personnel Management (OPM).

American HMO, enrollment code AC, will not be offered through the Federal Employees Health Benefits

(FEHB) Program after July 1, 2000 in the states of Illinois and Indiana. You must change to another

participating health plan during the special Open Season, May 15, 2000 through June 30, 2000 to continue

receiving coverage under the FEHB Program.

Please contact your personnel office to obtain a 2000 Guide to Federal Employees Health Benefits Plans.

You may request brochures directly from the health plans at the phone numbers appearing in the Guide. You

may also visit the FEHB web site (www.opm.gov/insure) to see plan brochures, the FEHB Guide and obtain

valuable information to help you choose a health plan.

TRANSITIONAL CARE UNDER THE PATIENTS’ BILL OF RIGHTS

If you (or a family member) have a chronic or disabling condition, or are in the second or third trimester of

pregnancy, you have a right to continue seeing your specialist for up to 90 days from this notice or through

the end of your post-partum care. Contact your new plan so it can help coordinate your transitional care.

IF YOU ARE AN EMPLOYEE

You should contact your personnel office and enroll in a new plan before the last day of the pay period that

ends on or before July 1, 2000. Coverage under your new plan may be effective retroactive to May 7, 2000

but no later than July 2, 2000. If you do not enroll by that date, you will not have any health benefits

coverage after July 1, 2000.

IF YOU ARE AN ANNUITANT

Annuitants under the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) or Federal Employees Retirement System

(FERS), should call the toll-free number at 1-888-767-6738 to make your enrollment change, as soon as

possible. Please have your CSRS or FERS annuity claim number and your Social Security Number available

when calling the toll-free number. If you do not elect a new plan, OPM will deem that you have elected to

enroll in the standard option of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Service Benefit Plan. This will ensure your

continued coverage and eligibility to participate in the FEHB Program. If Blue Cross and Blue Shield is the

plan you want, don’t wait for OPM to enroll you. Coverage under your new plan may be effective retroactive

to May 1, 2000 but no later than July 1, 2000. You should make your selection now to avoid a delay in

receiving your plan identification card. If you are an annuitant of another Federal retirement system, you

must contact that system for assistance.

Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.

U.S. Office of Personnel Management

Office of Insurance Programs
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

EASTERN DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

LAMAR GURDINE, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 190 EAL 2016 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 27th day of September, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of 

Appeal is DENIED.
#### RIVERS v. STATE.

No. 18008.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 4, 1936.

Rehearing Denied April 22, 1936.

John S. Simmang, of Giddings, for appellant.

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

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

The offense is burglary; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

Herman Kipp testified that on the first of March, 1935, some one broke into his barn and took therefrom 715 bushels of cotton seed and 100 pounds of “shorts.” Romeo Montez, a witness for the state, testified that he participated with appellant In committing the burglary. The state introduced in evidence appellant’s written confession in which he fully admitted his guilt.

While the sheriff was testifying, he was asked by appellant’s counsel to state why appellant made the confession. He replied, in effect, that he made it because he was guilty. Appellant’s objection to the answer was sustained, and the court promptly instructed the jury to disregard it. In the light of the record, the opinion is expressed that reversible error is not presented.

Appellant testified in his own behalf. On cross-examination he was required to testify, over his objection, that he had been convicted in 1933 for theft of turkeys. This testimony was admissible for the purpose of impeachment.

Our examination of the record leads us to the conclusion that reversible error is not presented.

The judgment, is affirmed.

*417PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court.

On Motion for Rehearing.

MORROW, Presiding Judge.

Our re-examination of the record in the light of the motion for rehearing discloses that no matters are presented that were not passed upon in the original hearing. Deeming the conclusion reached in the original opinion sound, a further discussion of the matter is pretermitted.

The motion is overruled.
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of THE POTOMAC EDISON COMPANY (the Company), hereby certifies, to such
officers knowledge, that the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                                               |  |                         
|-------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | --------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------
|                     |  |  |  | 
|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                                               |  | /s/    JEFFREY D. SERKES
|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                                               |  |                         
|Date: March 11, 2004 |  |  |  |  |  | Jeffrey D. Serkes Principal Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 23.1

﻿

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

﻿

National Presto Industries, Inc.

Eau Claire, Wisconsin

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333‐220280) of National Presto Industries, Inc. of our reports dated March 10, 2020, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting which appear in the Annual Report on Form 10-K. Our report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting expresses an adverse opinion on the effectiveness of National Presto Industries, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019.

﻿

/s/ BDO USA, LLP

Milwaukee, Wisconsin

﻿

March 31, 2020 

﻿

﻿

﻿

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF INCOME, CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF
CASH FLOWS, CONSOLIDATED CAPITALIZATION STATEMENT AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    1,402,230
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                     16,305
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         328,707
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                        19,427
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                  54,136
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,820,805
<COMMON>                                       281,847
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                            0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            434,652
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 716,499
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           527,004
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                 700
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                   2,110
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                        0
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 574,492
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                1,820,805
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                    1,274,370
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            54,595
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                   1,086,232
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                   1,140,827
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                        133,543
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                               3,336
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                 136,879
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        38,475
<NET-INCOME>                                    98,404
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   98,404
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        65,063
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                       35,722
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                         166,664
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.81
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.81
        


</TABLE>
#### NATIONAL LIFE & ACCIDENT INS. CO., Appellant, v. Lem HARRIS, Appellee^

No. 3568.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Beaumont.

Jan. 24, 1940.

Rehearing Denied Eeb. 28, 1940.

George M. Sonfield, of Beaumont, and Robert L. Sonfield, of Houston, fdr appellant. .

Howell & Howell, of Beaumont, for ap- . pellee.

COMBS, Justice.

This suit originated in the County Court of Jefferson County and involves collection of twenty-seven weekly installments of disability insurance of $8 each aggregating $216. The trial court awarded judgment as prayed for. We find no reversible error and affirm the judgment without written opinion. See Texas & New Orleans Railroad Company v. Futch, Tex.Civ.App., 127 S.W.2d 1040.
#### TIMMONS v. STATE.

No. 15354.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 11, 1932.

Geo. W. Neill, of Brownfield, for appellant.

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

MORROW, P. J.

Gaming, as defined in article 618, P. 0. 1925, is the offense; penalty assessed at a fine of $5.

The complaint charges the offense as follows: “ * * * Did then and there unlaw-

fully gamble for money, at a game played with dice.”

The information contains the same description of the offense as that contained in the complaint. In the charge of the court the offense is described as follows: “That whoever shall bet or wager any money or other thing of value at any game played with dice, whether the same be known as craps, high or low dice, or die, piker dice or by any other name, shall be fined not exceeding fifty dollars.” The charge follows the language of the statute.

 It is thought that the complaint and information are not so drawn as to charge the offense denounced by statute. The statute does not apply to all forms of gambling. See Arredondo v. State, 58 Tex. Cr. R. 145, 124 S. W. 930; also Nelson v. State, 37 Okl. Cr. 90, 256 P. 939, and cases collated. Gambling is a broader term than those used in the statute, and includes many other games of chance and devices by which money may be won or lost. See Allen v. Commonwealth, 178 Ky. 250, 198 S. W. 896; 3 Words and Phrases, Third Series, 850. In charging the offense in question, the language'should be restricted to that in substance which is used in defining the offense.

Por the reasons stated, the judgment is reversed, and the prosecution ordered dismissed.
# Official Journal C 62/2008

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 62 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 517 March 2008 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 62

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 517 March 2008

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES |
| | Commission |
| 2008/C 062/01 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |
| | NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES |
| 2008/C 062/02 | Notification by the Republic of Bulgaria concerning visa reciprocity | 2 |
| 2008/C 062/03 | Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1628/2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to national regional investment aid (1) | 3 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Commission

2008/C 062/01

Euro exchange rates

1

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

2008/C 062/02

Notification by the Republic of Bulgaria concerning visa reciprocity

2

2008/C 062/03

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1628/2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to national regional investment aid (1)

3

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY |
| | Commission |
| 2008/C 062/04 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5071 — AAC/Polaris/BabySam) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1) | 4 |
| 2008/C 062/05 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4884 — FCC/PORR/Autoput) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1) | 5 |
| | OTHER ACTS |
| | Commission |
| 2008/C 062/06 | Publication of an application pursuant to Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs | 6 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY

Commission

2008/C 062/04

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5071 — AAC/Polaris/BabySam) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1)

4

2008/C 062/05

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4884 — FCC/PORR/Autoput) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1)

5

OTHER ACTS

Commission

2008/C 062/06

Publication of an application pursuant to Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs

6

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
**Exhibit 32.2**

​

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

​

**Pursuant to**

**Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)**

​

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of WhiteHorse Finance, Inc. and Subsidiaries (the “Company”) for the annual period ended December 31, 2021 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Joyson C. Thomas, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge 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/ Joyson C. Thomas           | ​ |
| Name: Joyson C. Thomas         | ​ |
| Title: Chief Financial Officer | ​ |
| ​                        | ​ |
| Date: March 31, 2022           | ​ |

​

----
#### MILLS et al. v. DISNEY et ux.

No. 1112.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Eastland.

Oct. 21, 1932.

Conner & McRae, of Eastland, for appellants.

L. R. Pearson, of Ranger, for appellees.'

LESLIE, J.

This appeal is from the order of the district judge of'Eastland county granting a temporary injunction in behalf of R..A. Disney and wife to restrain y. W. Mills and the sheriff of Eastland county from selling property described in the petition under and by virtue of an order of sale issued out of the district court of Eastland county in cause No. 15192, in which Y. W. Mills was plaintiff and the Disneys were defendants. The right to in-junctive relief is based upon the alleged ground that the judgment in said cause is void, in that it was obtained by default, foreclosing a paving or assessment lien against property belonging to the Disneys and which constituted their homestead at the time of the fixing .of the lien, as well as the obtaining of the judgment.

No copy of the alleged void judgment is attached. Its invalidity is not otherwise made to appear, but the pleadings disclose that the judgment was taken March 24, 1932. The petition for injunction in the instant case was presented to the district judge on the 7th day of June, 1932, and granted the same day. Hence the petition shows on its face that the plaintiff had at that time an adequate remedy at law, to wit, writ of error (article 2255, R. S. 1925), by which he could have had reviewed the order and judgment below. For that reason the plaintiffs are not entitled to the equitable relief sought; San Antonio & A. P. Ry. Co. v. Glass (Tex. Civ. App.) 40 S. W. 339; Galveston, H. & S. A. Ry. Co. v. Ware, 74 Tex. 47, 11 S. W. 918; Jeffers v. Rondeau (Tex. Civ. App.) 1 S.W.(2d) 380; Dodge v. Youngblood (Tex. Civ. App.) 202 S. W. 116; Id. (Tex. Com. App.) 245 S. W. 225; Malone v. U. S. F. & G. Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 9 S.W.(2d) 461; Svoboda v. Alexander (Tex. Com. App.) 3 S.W.(2d) 423; Givens v. Delprat, 28 Tex. Civ. App. 363, 67 S. W. 424; Woodley v. G. C. & S. F. Ry. Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 20 S.W.(2d) 842, 843, and authorities therein; Ayres v. Parrish, 15 Tex. Civ. App. 541, 40 S. W. 435; Hill v. Brown (Tex. Com. App.) 237 S. W. 252; Thacher Medicine Co. v. Trammell (Tex. Civ. App.) 279 S. W. 307; Hetkes v. Gehret (Tex. Civ. App.) 16 S.W.(2d) 395; Texas-Mexican Ry. Co. v. Wright, 88 Tex. 346, 31 S. W. 613, 31 L. R. A. 200.

An injunction will not be granted to take the place of an appeal or writ of error. Hetkes v. Gehret, supra; D. F. Connolly Agency v. Popejoy (Tex. Civ. App.) 290 S. W. 831; Kyle v. Richardson, 31 Tex. Civ. App. 101, 71 S. W. 399; Turner v. Patterson, 54 Tex. Civ. App. 581, 118 S. W. 565; Race v. Decker (Tex. Civ. App.) 214 S. W. 709.

The mere averment that a judgment is void is but a legal conclusion, and not such allegation of fact as to warrant the granting of an injunction. Pye v. Wyatt (Tex. Civ. App.) 151 S. W. 1086; Lester v. Gatewood (Tex. Civ. App.) 166 S. W. 389; 49 C. J., p. 68, § 48.

For the reasons assigned, the judgment below is reversed, and the injunction is dissolved. It is so ordered.
|   | (logo)Deutsche Bank

 

1761 East St. Andrew Place

Santa Ana, CA 92705-4934

 

Tel 714 247 6000

Tel 714 247 6009 |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

ANNUAL STATEMENT AS TO COMPLIANCE

COMM 2012-CCRE3

The undersigned, David Co, a Director of Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as the Certificate Administrator (a “Certifying Servicer”) under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, dated as of October 1, 2012 (the “Agreement”), by and among,  Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation, as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer, Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association, as Special Servicer, U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Certificate Administrator, Paying Agent and Custodian, and Situs Holdings, LLC,  as Operating Advisor, here by certifies in accordance with Section 10.11 of the Agreement:

 

A)       A review of such Certifying Servicer’s activities during the preceding calendar year (the “Reporting Period”) and of such Certifying Servicer’s performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer’s supervision and

B)      That, as to the best of such officer’s knowledge, based on such review, such Certifying Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement, in all material respects during the Reporting Period.

 

DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS

as Certificate Administrator     

 

/s/ David Co

BY:  David Co

Title:  Director

Date:  March 1, 2015
Attachment 

Sample Request for Estimated Military Earnings
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Estimated Earnings During Military Service

Instructions: Use a separate RI 20-97 for each branch of service. Attach DD 214 or the equivalent and any available records of pay or 

promotions. The pay center cannot provide estimated earnings without verification of service. The requester must complete blocks 1 through 10 

and block 19. Pay center addresses are on the reverse. 

1. Name (Last, first, middle) 

Joseph, Adam C. 

2. Other names used 

3. Social Security Number 

123-45-6789 

4. Date of Birth 

08/01/1955 

5. All military service numbers 

123456789 

6. Branch of service 

Navy 

The uniformed services must provide Federal employees' estimated basic pay for military service they performed after December 31, 1956. This 

is needed to make a deposit to the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund for retirement credit. Please provide the estimated basic pay 

earned by the person named above. 

7. Signature of requester 8. Relationship to person named 

 Person named is requester 

 Other (specify): 

 Survivor 

9. Date 

12/08/2003 

10. Active military service after 

December 31, 1956 (Dates indicated 

 below must be based on DD 214 or 

equivalent certification) 

11. Authorized Official or Retired Pay Center completes blocks 11 through 18. 

Estimated Earnings (Base Pay) 

 Do not provide estimated earnings for any period of service prior to January 1, 1957. 

From 

(mm/dd/yyyy) 

To 

(mm/dd/yyyy) 

From 

(mm/dd/yyyy) 

To 

(mm/dd/yyyy) 

Rate of Basic Pay Earnings Type of Discharge 

11/01/2001 07/01/2003 

I’m requesting estimated military earnings for only a portion of my active military duty, please see attached note. 

12. If period of service began before and ended after December 31, 1956, 

enter date service actually began. (mm/dd/yyyy) 

13. Lost time 

 None  Number of days _______________________ 

 Inclusive From 

dates (mm/dd/yyyy) 

To 

(mm/dd/yyyy) 

From 

(mm/dd/yyyy) 

To 

(mm/dd/yyyy) 

14. Signature of authorized official furnishing estimate 15. Date 16. Telephone number (including area code) 

17. Typed name of authorized official 18. Title of authorized official 

19. Requester’s name and address (Return this completed form to address below) 

Adam Joseph 

123 Maple Street 

Austin, MD 21234 

BAL 03-105 June 24, 2003 

Attachment 2 
December 8, 2003 

To Whom It May Concern: 

Please provide me with estimated earnings for the period(s) noted below. I received civilian pay subject 

to retirement deductions during my active military duty. I do not have to pay a deposit for the time 

covered by my civilian pay. The period(s) noted below represents the portion of my active military duty 

not covered by civilian pay. 

Thank you. 

Adam Joseph 

123 Maple Street 

Austin, MD 21234 

Active Military Duty Not Covered by Civilian Pay 

From To 

11/01/2001 09/14/2002 

10/15/2002 07/01/2003 

BAL 03-105 June 24, 2003 

Attachment 3