alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### O’Connell, Respondent, vs. Old Line Life Insurance Company of America, Appellant.

*February 16*—

May *17, 1938.*

*673For the appellant there were briefs by *Olwell & Brady*and *George A.*Gessner, all of Milwaukee, attorneys, and *W. G. Haddow*of Ellsworth of counsel, and oral argument by *Mr. Gessner.*

*Irwin E. Magee*of Ellsworth, for the respondent.

The following opinion was filed March 15, 1938:

Fairchild, J.

Assuming that there was originally on defendant’s part a want of the care and attention required by the circumstance of leaving smoldering material in the old cellar where the burning of the waste had been done, subsequent events had ended the relation of time, place, and persons which might have existed earlier when the fire was capable of damaging plaintiff’s property. There had been a fire on defendant’s premises. The fire had not burned out, but before leaving, and about 6 o’clock, the defendant’s employees threw water on the smoldering embers. About 9 o’clock that evening, plaintiff and a neighbor living near with whom he was visiting noticed some flames flaring up from the pile of ashes. The wind had changed so as to move the smoke and sparks in the direction of plaintiff’s property. He was prompted to take precautions against the possible spreading of fire, and carried out his protective measures by pouring water on the grass, some lumber piled near the fence, and wetting the roof of his house. There was no fire on plaintiff’s land, nor was he hurt during any period of excitement when circumstances flowing from defendant’s act might have constituted an emergency. In *674fact, there does not appear to- have existed any emergency, and certainly a considerable period of time must have intervened between the presence of anything that might have approached an emergency and the time of the plaintiff’s fall as described in the statement of facts. After any danger of fire that might have existed had passed, and about 2 or 3 a. m., the plaintiff, while walking on defendant’s premises, tripped and fell. The plaintiff’s own conduct, free in the legal sense from any relationship arising from the tort of defendant, intervening, the injurious consequences of the fall must be deemed too remote to constitute the basis of a cause of action against defendant.

The trial court reduced the damages which the jury allowed on the theory that the hernia was not shown to be the result of any act which could be charged to the defendant, and that the liability of the defendant arose from creating circumstances which resulted in aggravating an already existing condition. We are of the opinion that the defendant’s leaving the fire unattended, while causing the plaintiff some anxiety, was not a proximate cause of the injury he sustained.

*By the Court.*— -Order reversed, and cause remanded with directions to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint.

A motion for a rehearing was denied, with $25 costs, on May 17, 1938.
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

# TIME AND DATE:

10:00 a.m., Thursday, February 5, 2015.

# PLACE:

The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511N, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004 (enter from F Street entrance).

# STATUS:

Open.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

                         The Commission will consider and act upon the following in open session:                         *Secretary of Labor*                         v.                         *Jim Walter Resources, Inc.,*                         Docket No. SE 2011-407-R; and                         *Secretary of Labor*                         v.                         *Jim Walter Resources, Inc.,*                         Docket No. SE 2012-681-R (Issues include whether the Administrative Law Judges erred in upholding certain imminent danger orders.)                    

Any person attending this meeting who requires special accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. Subject to 29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) and 2706.160(d).

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFO:

 Emogene Johnson (202) 434-9935/(202) 708-9300 for TDD Relay/1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

Sarah L. Stewart,

Deputy General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 2015-01805 Filed 1-27-15; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6735-01-P
Order entered October 17, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-00378-CV

TODD PRUETT, Appellant

V.

MARK STOLZ, ET AL., Appellees

On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-12-07463

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s October 15, 2013 motion to file an amended brief. 

Appellant’s amended brief was due on October 14, 2013. Appellant’s amended brief was filed 

on October 11, 2013. Because appellant timely filed his amended brief, we DENY his motion as 

moot.

/s/ DAVID LEWIS 

JUSTICE
#### Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company, Appellant, vs. Railroad Commission of Wisconsin, Respondent.

*November 16, 1915.*

*Railroad commission: Regulation of passenger service: Stopping-trains at small stations: Interstate commerce.*

*Chicago, B. é Q. R. Go. v. Railroad Comm.*152 Wis. 654, reversed.

Appeal from a judgment of tbe circuit court for Dane county: E. Ray SteveNS, Circuit Judge.

*Reversed.*

By the Court.

Tbe judgment of tbe court in tbis action, rendered March 11, 1913 [152 Wis. 654], affirming tbe judgment of tbe circuit court for Dane county, having been reversed by tbe supreme court of tbe United States upon writ of error [see 231 U. S. 220], and tbe mandate of said last named court having been received and filed:

Now, therefore, it is ordered and adjudged, pursuant to tbe command of said mandate, that tbe judgment of affirmance aforesaid rendered by tbis court be and tbe same is in all things vacated and set aside and that tbe judgment of the said circuit court for Dane county be and tbe same is hereby in all things reversed without' costs, and that tbis cause be and tbe same is hereby remanded to the said circuit court with directions to enter judgment therein adjudging that tbe order of tbe said *Railroad Commission*involved in tbis action was and is void, and setting aside and vacating tbe same.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Staff

# Regulatory Effectiveness of the Station Blackout Rule (NUREG-1776)

On this page:
        - Publication Information 
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG-1776 (PDF - 4.77 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**August 2000**Date Published:**August 2003

Prepared by W.S. Raughley

 Division of Systems Analysis and Regulatory Effectiveness Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research is reviewing selected regulations, starting with the station blackout (SBO) rule, to determine if the requirements are achieving the desired outcomes. This initiative is part of an evolving program to make NRC activities and decisions more effective, efficient, and realistic. This report evaluates the effectiveness of the SBO rule by comparing regulatory expectations to outcomes. A set of baseline expectations was established from the SBO rule and related regulatory documents in the areas of coping capability, risk reduction, emergency diesel generator reliability, and value-impact. The report concludes that although there are opportunities to improve the clarity of SBO related regulatory documents, the SBO rule is effective and the industry and the NRC costs to implement the SBO rule were reasonable considering the outcome.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-7432
JAMES EDMOND WATTS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JOHN B. METZGER, III; VIRGINIA PAROLE BOARD; OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondents - Appellees.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-96-946-R) Submitted: January 13, 1998 Decided: January 26, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Edmond Watts, Appellant Pro Se. John H. McLees, Jr., OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court'sopinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Watts v. Metzger , No. CA-96-946-R (W.D. Va. Sept. 23, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Order entered July 17, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 11
- 01423
- CV CITIBANK(SOUTH DAKOT A), N.A., Appellant

V. MICHAEL AND THANH TR AN, Appellee s On Appeal from the 95th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Te xas Trial Court Cause No. 05
- 14313
- D



### O RDER Before the Court is Appellees’ July 3, 2013 motion for extension of time in which to file a motion for rehearing in this case. The motion is GRANTED . Appellees’ motion is due on or before July 22, 2013.

/ ELIZABE TH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
# L_2015244EN.01006002.xml

| 19.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 244/60 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 244/60

---

Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/880 of 4 June 2015 on the extension of the transitional periods related to own funds requirements for exposures to central counterparties set out in Regulations (EU) No 575/2013 and (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 143 of 9 June 2015
  )

On page 7, in Recital 5:

for:

‘With regard to existing CCPs established in third countries that have already applied for recognition, no recognition has been granted yet to such CCPs.’,

read:

‘With regard to existing CCPs established in third countries that have already applied for recognition, the recognition process is ongoing but will not be completed by 15 June 2015.’.

---
# C_2015161EN.01000701.xml

| 14.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 161/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.5.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161/7

---

COMMISSION DECISION

of 13 May 2015

on appointing members of the Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products to represent patients’ organisations

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 161/05)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1999 on orphan medicinal products (1), and in particular Article 4(3) thereof,

1

Whereas:

| (1) | Article 4(3) of the Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 requires that the Commission appoints representatives of patients' organisations for a mandate of three years. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Article 4(3) of the Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 requires that the Commission appoints representatives of patients' organisations for a mandate of three years.

| (2) | The term of office of the three members representing patients' organisations expires on 30 June 2015. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The term of office of the three members representing patients' organisations expires on 30 June 2015.

| (3) | The members of the Committee should be appointed for a period of three years starting 1 July 2015. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The members of the Committee should be appointed for a period of three years starting 1 July 2015.

| (4) | Where a member appointed by this decision is no longer capable of contributing efficiently to the work of the Committee, or resigns, the Commission may replace this member from the reserve list, for the duration of the member's mandate, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Where a member appointed by this decision is no longer capable of contributing efficiently to the work of the Committee, or resigns, the Commission may replace this member from the reserve list, for the duration of the member's mandate,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following are hereby appointed members of the Committee for a term of three years, from 1 July 2015:

| — | Lesley GREENE, |
| --- | --- |

—

Lesley GREENE,

| — | Pauline EVERS, |
| --- | --- |

—

Pauline EVERS,

| — | Mario RICCIARDI. |
| --- | --- |

—

Mario RICCIARDI.

Article 2

The following are hereby placed on a reserve list by order of merit:

| — | Julián Isla GÓMEZ, |
| --- | --- |

—

Julián Isla GÓMEZ,

| — | Loris Angelo BRUNETTA, |
| --- | --- |

—

Loris Angelo BRUNETTA,

| — | Baiba ZIEMELE. |
| --- | --- |

—

Baiba ZIEMELE.

Done at Brussels, 13 May 2015.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Vytenis ANDRIUKAITIS

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  OJ L 18, 22.1.2000, p. 1.

1

---
# L_2015203EN.01000301.xml

| 31.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 203/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 203/3

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/1312

of 24 July 2015

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Fesols de Santa Pau (PDO))

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

1

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Spain's application to register the name ‘Fesols de Santa Pau’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union
   (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Spain's application to register the name ‘Fesols de Santa Pau’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union
   (2).

Official Journal of the European Union

2

| (2) | As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Fesols de Santa Pau’ should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Fesols de Santa Pau’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘Fesols de Santa Pau’ (PDO) is hereby entered in the register.

The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.6. Fruits, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed, as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).

3

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Official Journal of the European Union

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 24 July 2015.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Phil HOGAN

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ C 82, 10.3.2015, p. 17.

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).

3

---
#### A. S., PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. B. S., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division

Argued May 16, 1977

Decided May 31, 1977.

Before Judges Fritz, Ard and Pressler.

*Mr. Ira F. Back*argued the cause for the appellant.

*Mr. George Warren, Guardian ad Litem,*argued the cause *pro se.*

Per Curiam.

The judgment of the Superior Court, Chancery Division, is affirmed substantially for the reasons set forth in the opinion of Judge Lowengrub.
No. 90-750.

#### Zinker, Executor of the Estate of Zinker, Deceased *v.*Doty et al.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice White would grant certiorari.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       1,530,659
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  457,222
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (41,481)
<INVENTORY>                                  2,020,699
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,262,092
<PP&E>                                       2,503,954
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,694,193)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,766,046
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,025,876
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    16,785,548
<OTHER-SE>                                (12,644,719)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,766,046
<SALES>                                        789,618
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,874,354
<CGS>                                          549,431
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,323,996
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,201,366
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                47,413
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             136,897
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,808,238)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,808,238)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,808,238)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.49)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
# L_2015068EN.01004701.xml

| 13.3.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 68/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 68/47

---

DECISION (EU) 2015/422 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

of 17 December 2014

on the mobilisation of the European Union Solidarity Fund

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 of 11 November 2002 establishing the European Union Solidarity Fund (1), and in particular Article 4a(4) thereof,

Having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management (2), and in particular point 11 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

Whereas:

| (1) | The European Union has created a European Union Solidarity Fund (the ‘Fund’) to show solidarity with the population of regions struck by disasters. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The European Union has created a European Union Solidarity Fund (the ‘Fund’) to show solidarity with the population of regions struck by disasters.

| (2) | Article 10 of Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 (3) allows the mobilisation of the Fund within the annual ceiling of EUR 500 million (2011 prices). |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Article 10 of Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 (3) allows the mobilisation of the Fund within the annual ceiling of EUR 500 million (2011 prices).

| (3) | Article 4a(4) of Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 foresees that the Fund may be mobilised in an amount up to a maximum of EUR 50 000 000 for the payment of advances and the corresponding appropriations entered into the general budget of the Union, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Article 4a(4) of Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 foresees that the Fund may be mobilised in an amount up to a maximum of EUR 50 000 000 for the payment of advances and the corresponding appropriations entered into the general budget of the Union,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

For the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2015, the European Union Solidarity Fund shall be mobilised to provide the sum of EUR 50 000 000 in commitment and payment appropriations for the payment of advances.

Article 2

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

Done at Strasbourg, 17 December 2014.

For the European Parliament

The President

M. SCHULZ

For the Council

The President

B. DELLA VEDOVA

---

(1)  
  OJ L 311, 14.11.2002, p. 3.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 373, 20.12.2013, p. 1.

2

(3)  Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884).

3

---
Exhibit 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION 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 GLOBAL  NATIONAL  COMMUNICATIONS  CORP.
(the  "Company")  on Form 10-KSB for the year ended  September 30, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date here of (the "report"),
I, Wu Wenbin,  Chief Financial 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 this  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
     Company.

Dated this 13th day of January, 2005.
                                                          /s/ Wu Wenbin
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         Wu Wenbin
                                                         Chief Financial Officer