alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In re Estate of George Hekel.

*522March 6, 1928.

*Boy A. Cook,*for appellants.

*Fred A. Harrison*and *W. A. Cook,*for administrator of estate of Mary Timson, appellee..

*B. J. O’Brien*and *M. A. Smith,*for R. B. Raines, executor estate of George Hekel, appellee.

EvaNS, J.

George Hekel died testate, on December 18, 1924, leaving no surviving spouse or children. By the second and third paragraphs of his will he bequeathed $3,500 of his estate. 'The fourth paragraph was as follows:

“Fourth. I give, devise and bequeath all the rest, residue and remainder of my estate both real and personal unto R. B. Raines in trust however for the following purposes: The said Raines is to keep the same invested, five hundred dollars of the principal as an annuity to my sister, Mary Timson, during her lifetime payable as follows: Five hundred dollars on the first day of January following my decease and said sum of five hundred dollars of principal and the interest on the principal sum on the first day of January of each year thereafter until her death or until the fund is exhausted. Should any of said property not be distributed as herein set forth during the lifetime of my said sister, the same shall be distributed at her death to my nephews, Fred Klotz, Louis F. Klotz, George Klotz, Joe Hekel, John Hekel, Julius Hekel, Edward Neindorf and George Neindorf. ’ ’

It will be noted from the foregoing that the corpus of the net estate of the testator over and above $3,500 was bequeathed in trust to Raines, to the use of Mary Timson, sister of the testator, and to be paid to her in the form of annuities on each first day of January succeeding the death of the testator. The annuity on each such date was to be the accrued interest on the principal sum, and $500 of the principal. The first annuity *523became due on January 1, 1925, and tbe second on January 1, 1926. Mary Timson died in March, 1926, without having received from the trustee any portion of the annuities due her. Her administrator now claims from this executor and trustee the respective amounts which should have been paid as annuities on the dates named. The district court sustained his claim, and held, in effect, that the right of Mary Timson to each, annuity vested on the date that the annuity became due.

The appellee has filed no argument. The appellants are the certain nephews named as residuary legatees. They predicate argument upon a single authority, being the case of *In re Denton,*decided by the New York Court of Appeals, 137 N. Y. 428 (33 N. E. 482). Without reviewing the cited authority, it is sufficient to say that we have held to the contrary in *Johnson v. Coler,*187 Iowa 734. We think the district court properly construed the will.

Its order is, *accordingly,*— Affirmed.

Stevens, C. J.^and Faville, KiNdig, and WagNER, JJ., concur.
# L_2012052EN.01000101.xml

| 24.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 52/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 52/1

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 14 February 2012

on the conclusion of an Agreement between the European Union and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia on certain aspects of air services

(2012/113/EU)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 100(2), in conjunction with Article 218(6)(a) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

Having regard to the consent of the European Parliament,

Whereas:

| (1) | By its Decision of 5 June 2003, the Council authorised the Commission to open negotiations with third countries on the replacement of certain provisions in existing bilateral agreements with an agreement at Union level. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

By its Decision of 5 June 2003, the Council authorised the Commission to open negotiations with third countries on the replacement of certain provisions in existing bilateral agreements with an agreement at Union level.

| (2) | In accordance with Council Decision 2011/663/EU (1), the Agreement between the European Union and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia on certain aspects of air services (2) (the ‘Agreement’) has been signed and provisionally applied, subject to its conclusion. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

In accordance with Council Decision 2011/663/EU (1), the Agreement between the European Union and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia on certain aspects of air services (2) (the ‘Agreement’) has been signed and provisionally applied, subject to its conclusion.

| (3) | The Agreement should be approved, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The Agreement should be approved,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The Agreement between the European Union and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia on certain aspects of air services (3) (the ‘Agreement’) is hereby approved on behalf of the Union.

Article 2

The President of the Council shall, on behalf of the Union, give the notification provided in Article 8(1) of the Agreement.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 14 February 2012.

For the Council

The President

M. LIDEGAARD

---

(1)  
  OJ L 264, 8.10.2011, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 264, 8.10.2011, p. 2.

2

(3)  The Agreement has been published in OJ L 264, 8.10.2011, p. 2, together with the decision on signing.

3

---
Exhibit 99.14

CONSENT OF GEOLOGIST

Ladies and
Gentlemen:

The undersigned hereby consents to (1) the references to the undersigneds name included or incorporated by reference in the Annual
Report on Form 40-F of Denison Mines Corp. in connection with the report entitled Mineral Resource Estimate On The J Zone Uranium Deposit, Waterbury Lake Property dated September 6, 2013 and (2) all other references to the
undersigned included or incorporated by reference in the registration statement in the Annual Report on Form 40-F of Denison Mines Corp.

Dated:
March 30, 2017



|                              |  |                   
|----------------------------- |  | ------------------
|By:                           |  | /s/ Allan Armitage
|Allan Armitage, Ph.D., P.Geo.
EXHIBIT 32.1
 
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2011 of Vitacost.com, Inc. (the “Company”) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jeffrey J. Horowitz, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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/ Jeffrey J. HorowitzJeffrey J. HorowitzChief Executive OfficerDate: August 9, 2011
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 15

- 00288

- CR

THE STATE OF TEXAS

v. REINALDO SANCHEZ
On Appeal from the 206th District Court of Hidalgo County , Texas Trial Cause No. CR

- 3054

- 14

- D

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this ca use on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be reversed and the cause
remanded to the trial court. The Court orders the judgment of the trial court REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings in accordance with its opinion

. We f urther order this decision certified below for observance. April 5, 2018
`[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 302 Reported in Senate (RS)]






                                                       Calendar No. 384
106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 302

              For the relief of Kerantha Poole-Christian.


_______________________________________________________________________


                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 25, 1999

Mr. Torricelli introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
  referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

                             April 15, 1999

    Committee discharged; referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

                            November 4, 1999

                Reported by Mr. Hatch, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL


 
              For the relief of Kerantha Poole-Christian.

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

SECTION 1. CLASSIFICATION AS A CHILD UNDER THE IMMIGRATION AND 
              NATIONALITY ACT.

    (a) In General.--In the administration of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act, Kerantha Poole-Christian shall be classified as a 
child within the meaning of section 101(b)(1)(E) of such Act, upon 
approval of a petition filed on her behalf by Clifton or Linette 
Christian, citizens of the United States, pursuant to section 204 of 
such Act.
    (b) Limitation.--No natural parent, brother, or sister, if any, of 
Kerantha Poole-Christian shall, by virtue of such relationship, be 
accorded any right, privilege, or status under the Immigration and 
Nationality Act.
                                     





                                                       Calendar No. 384

106th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 302

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

              For the relief of Kerantha Poole-Christian.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            November 4, 1999

                       Reported without amendment`
# News

                                Sholl selected as UT-ORII executive director                            

                                Dealing with stress in large-scale additive manufacturing                            

                                Dilling named associate laboratory director for neutron sciences                             

## Filter News

### News Type

            - News Releases(24)
            - Story Tips(13)

### Date

            - (-)2002
            - 2024
            - 2023
            - 2022
            - 2021
            - 2020
            - 2019
            - 2018
            - 2017
            - 2016
            - 2015
            - 2014
            - 2013
            - 2012
            - 2011
            - 2010
            - 2009
            - 2008
            - 2007
            - 2006
            - 2005
            - 2004
            - 2003
            - 2001
            - 2000
            - 1999
            - 1998
            - 1997
            - 1996
            - 1995
            - 1994

## Media Contacts

David  Keim

keimdm@ornl.gov

865.576.9122

Morgan  McCorkle

mccorkleml@ornl.gov

865.574.7308

Sara  Shoemaker

shoemakerms@ornl.gov

865.576.9219

## Connect with ORNL

**

**

**

**

**

**

## Get ORNL News

Subscribe

## Cost of lavish Christmas lights display offset by simple measures

December 20, 2002

If you're wondering just how much your neighborhood Clark Griswold is paying to brighten the town with Christmas lights visible from outer space, the answer varies significantly from one part of the country to another.

## Stretch of I-40 part of ORNL, UT environmental lab initiative

December 19, 2002

## Contract Awarded for SNS Land Improvements

December 18, 2002

## David earns international research award

December 12, 2002

## Satkowiak named nonproliferation deputy director

December 12, 2002

## Wilbanks named to national council

December 12, 2002

## Materials - Woodman, spare that tree

December 1, 2002

## Robotics - Easing the warrior's load

December 1, 2002

## Chemical Monitoring - Keeping labs safer

December 1, 2002

## ORNL corporate fellow earns award

November 26, 2002

### Pagination

-                Current page            1 
-                Page            2 
-                Page            3 
- …
-  Next page» 
-  Last pageLast » 

All ORNL News >
United States 

Office of 

Personnel Management

The Federal Government’s Human Resources Agency 

Benefits Administration Letter 

Number: 03-308 Date: June 17, 2003 

Subject: Imputed Cost Factor Related to the FEHB for the Third Quarter of FY 2003 

In previous Benefits Administration Letters, we provided the imputed cost factor related to the 

Federal Employee Health Benefit Program (FEHB)and guidelines for calculating your imputed 

costs for the first two quarters of FY 2003. This letter provides the imputed cost factor related to 

the FEHB for the third quarter of FY 2003. Once again, since they will rarely change during the 

fiscal year, the imputed cost factors related to “Pensions” and Life Insurance are not provided in 

this letter. 

The imputed cost factor for the third quarter of FY 2003 related to the FEHB is $950, resulting in 

an FY 2003 year-to-date imputed cost factor related to the FEHB of $2,802: 

1st Quarter $918 

2nd Quarter 934 

3rd Quarter 950 

FY 2003-to-date $2,802 

Please note that we will not provide an imputed cost factor related to the FEHB for the fourth 

quarter of FY 2003. Rather, as is our standard practice, we will provide imputed cost factors for 

the entire FY 2003 for the FEHB, FEGLI and for “pensions” by September 15, 2003. 

If you have any questions about this letter, we would prefer that you email us at 

finance@opm.gov, so we have a record of them. You may of course call us on 202-606-0606. 

Robert A. Yuran, Manager 

Financial Policy Group 

Center for Financial Services
#### BARFIELD v. STATE.

No. 15203.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 11, 1932.

Rehearing Denied June 15, 1932.

Pat L. Pittman, of Fort Worth, for appellant.

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

HAWKINS, J.

Conviction is for passing a forged instrument ; punishment being two years in the penitentiary. .

The motion for new trial was overruled, and notice of appeal given ,on' October 31, 1931. Sixty days were granted in which to file statement of facts and bills of exception. No further extension order appears in the record. If any had been made, the time could not have been carried beyond 90 days from the date notice of appeal was given. Article 760, subd. 5, C. C. P. The statement of facts and bills of exception were filed in the trial court on January 30,1932, which was 91 "days after notice of appeal. Under the statute, neither the statement of facts nor bills of exception may be considered. Many cases will be found collated in note 36, under article 760, Vernon’s Ann. Tex. C. C. P. Some of the later cases are McKneely v. State, 110 Tex. Cr. R. 634, 10 S.W.(2d) 544; Owens v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 35 S.W.(2d) 726; Moore v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 37 S.W.(2d) 746; Loyd v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 38 S.W.(2d) 1102.

The judgment is affirmed. •
# L_2012004EN.01001001.xml

| 7.1.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 4/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.1.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 4/10

---

DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

of 13 December 2011

on the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument

(2012/3/EU)

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (1), and in particular the fifth paragraph of point 27 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

Whereas:

After having examined all possibilities for reallocating appropriations under subheading 1a and heading 4, the two arms of the budgetary authority agreed to mobilise the Flexibility Instrument to complement the financing in the 2012 budget, beyond the ceiling of subheading 1a, of EUR 50 million towards the financing of the Europe 2020 Strategy, and beyond the ceiling of heading 4, of EUR 150 million towards the financing of the European Neighbourhood Policy,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

For the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2012 (hereinafter ‘the 2012 budget’), the Flexibility Instrument shall be used to provide the sum of EUR 50 million in commitment appropriations under subheading 1a and EUR 150 million in commitment appropriations under heading 4.

That amount shall be used to complement the financing of:

| — | EUR 50 million for the Europe 2020 Strategy under subheading 1a, |
| --- | --- |

—

EUR 50 million for the Europe 2020 Strategy under subheading 1a,

| — | EUR 150 million for the European Neighbourhood Policy under heading 4. |
| --- | --- |

—

EUR 150 million for the European Neighbourhood Policy under heading 4.

Article 2

This decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Strasbourg, 13 December 2011.

For the European Parliament

The President

J. BUZEK

For the Council

The President

M. SZPUNAR

---

(1)  
  OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1.

1

---
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED February 10, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-50603 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ALBERTO TOMAS YOUNGBLOOD, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 6:02-CR-86-ALL

-------------------- Before GARWOOD, GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Alberto Youngblood appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion to dismiss the Government’s request for discovery and directing Youngblood to answer the Government’s discovery. This court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction on its own motion if necessary. Mosley v. Cozby , 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1997). Orders directing or denying discovery are not final decisions within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and are notNo. 04-50603 -2- appealable except under limited circumstances not presented in this case. See Branch v. Phillips Petroleum Co. , 638 F.2d 873, 877-78 (5th Cir. 1981).
APPEAL DISMISSED.
Exhibit 99.20

CONSENT OF ENGINEER

Ladies and
Gentlemen:

The undersigned hereby consents to (1) the references to the undersigned companys name included or incorporated by reference in the
Annual Report on Form 40-F of Denison Mines Corp. in connection with the report entitled Mineral Resource Estimate On The J Zone Uranium Deposit, Waterbury Lake Property dated September 6, 2013 and (2) all other references to
the undersigned company included or incorporated by reference in the registration statement in the Annual Report on Form 40-F of Denison Mines Corp.

Dated: March 19, 2014



|                           
|---------------------------
|/s/ Alan Sexton            
|Alan Sexton, M.Sc., P.Geol.
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002

I, Christopher Y. Chai, certify that:

1. I have
reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of MAP Pharmaceuticals, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrants other
certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure
that material information relating to the registrant, including any consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably 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 involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control
over financial reporting.



|                             
|-----------------------------
|Date: August 13, 2008        
|                             
|/s/ Christopher Y. Chai      
|Christopher Y. Chai          
|Chief Financial Officer      
|(Principal Financial Officer)
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2854 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2854

    To suspend temporarily the duty on Fructooligosaccharides (FOS).

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 12, 2000

  Mr. Allard introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To suspend temporarily the duty on Fructooligosaccharides (FOS).

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

SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

      

``    9902.21.01        Fructooligosacch  Free             No change        No change        On or before 12/ ''
                         arides (FOS)                                                         31/2003          .
                         (provided for
                         in subheading
                         2106.90.99)....

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```