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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-27-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUN-29-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                                   0
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        7,679
<ALLOWANCES>                                           288
<INVENTORY>                                         10,282
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    19,895
<PP&E>                                              50,891
<DEPRECIATION>                                      17,131
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      74,854
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               15,558
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                50
<OTHER-SE>                                          29,181
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        74,854
<SALES>                                             56,901
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    56,901
<CGS>                                               47,966
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       47,966
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     9,731
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   2,246
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (3,042)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        (1,042)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 (2,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                        (2,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (0.40)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (0.40)
        

</TABLE>
#### Oscar William SMITH *v.*STATE of Arkansas

CR 73-172

507 S.W. 2d 110

Opinion delivered April 1, 1974

*Buford Gardner, Jr.,*for appellant.

*Jim Guy Tucker,*Atty. Gen., by: *Richard Mattison,*Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

*322George Rose Smith, Justice.

The appellant Smith, charged with first-degree murder in the shooting of Robert Ray, testified that he acted in self-defense. The jury rejected that theory and found Smith guilty of second-degree murder, imposing a 21-year sentence.

The evidence is amply sufficient to support the verdict. In fact, the proof would have supported a first-degree conviction. The decedent, 80, was 24 years older than Smith and some 20 pounds lighter. On the afternoon of the homicide a heated argument developed between the two men, about who was to have a quantity of grass clippings that Ray was raking together. There were several eye-witnesses to the quarrel. One of them testified that during the altercation Smith said that he was going to go and get a gun and shoot the old man.

According to the State’s proof. Smith did go and get a .22-caliber pistol, return to the scene, and renew the argument. In the course of the dispute Ray started toward Smith, w'ho then shot Ray with the pistol, one of four wounds being fatal. The jury evidently found from the conflicting evidence that Ray was not threatening Smith with a rake, as Smith claimed, and that Smith could easily have left the scene in safety if he had chosen to do so. We need not narrate the testimony in further detail to show that the jury could find all the elements of murder to be present.

Complaint is made of the prosecution’s failure to include the name of Mrs. Zeb Horton upon the original list of witnesses furnished to defense counsel. No bad faith is attributed to the prosecuting attorney, who did not learn of this witness until the night before the trial began. He immediately informed the defense of the identity of the new witness, who did not testify until the second day of the trial. There was no plea of surprise, and Mrs. Horton’s testimony was merely cumulative. No prejudicial error is shown. *King v. Cardin,*229 Ark. 929, 319 S.W. 2d 214 (1959).

Similarly, we find no reversible error in a remark made by Murl Lewis, a member of the jury panel, on voir dire. Lewis had stated that he had formed an opinion, on hearsay, that might influence his verdict. Upon further questioning he said: “I feel I couldn’t be fair to the defendant.” Defense *323counsel asked for a mistrial, which was refused. Even if the other members of the panel understood the remark, which appears to be doubtful, no prejudice appears. In fact, similar statements are so frequently made spontaneously by prospective jurors that in many cases it would be impossible to empanel a jury if such remarks mandatorily required the granting of a mistrial. Needless to say, Lewis did not serve on the jury that was ultimately selected.

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT L 

Case: 1:18-cv-00357-TSB-KNM-MHW Doc #: 237-14 Filed: 03/02/19 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #:

19806
Election Results Voting Age Populations 

10 Governor I 10 Att. General I 08 President I 06 Att. General I 06 Auditor I 04 President 

D White I Hispanic I Black .I Asian JAmlndian istrict Kasich I Strickland I DeWine I Cord ray I McCain I Obama I Mont. I Dann I Taylor I Sykes I Bush I Kerry PVI 

1 · Chabot 56.09% 1 40.58% 1 53.98% 1 39.76% 1 52.10% 1 46.89% 1 56.16% 1 43.84% 1 60.35% 1 39.65% 1 57.16% 1 42.45% R+6 74.83% 1 2.17% 1 20.32% 1 2.51% 1 o.2o% 

County Population % of District I Hamilton 508,338 70.50% I Warren 212,693 29.50% 1 

Total 721,031 

REV _00000023 

Plaintiffs' Trial

Exhibit

P609

Case No. 1:18-cv-00357

Case: 1:18-cv-00357-TSB-KNM-MHW Doc #: 237-14 Filed: 03/02/19 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #:

19807
#### Wilkin *v.*Special School District of Hazen.

Opinion delivered June 16, 1930.

*Samuel S. Jefferies,*for appellant.

*Chas. B. Thweatt,*for appellee.

Humphrevs, J.

This is an appeal from a decree sustaining a demurrer to and dismissing- the complaint of appellant filed in the chancery court of Prairie County, Southern District, praying that appellee be enjoined from issuing- $30,000 of bonds and executing a mortgage on the school property to secure same for the purpose of making repairs upon the school building, and to pay the outstanding indebtedness against said school district. It was alleged in the complaint that appellees had advertised, received bids for and entered into a contract for the sale of $30,000 negotiable bonds in accordance with the procedure required by 8984 and 8986 of Crawford & Moses’ Digest, as amended -by later acts, for purpose provided in ads 62 of 1927 and 164 of 1929. The injunction ivas sought upon the alleged invalidity of said acts 62 and 164 because neither act contained any procedure to be followed in issuing bonds, nor any authority to secure same by a mortgage upon the school property; and because appellees were proposing to cover two purposes in one issue of bonds.

*1030Said acts 62 and 164 were passed by the Legislature to enlarge the purposes for which, bonds might be issued by a special school district so as to embrace debts which had been incurred for general operating expenses. This court ruled in the case of *Phillips*v. Baker, 172 Ark. 726, that § 8984 of Crawford & Moses’ Digest was not broad enough to authorize the issuance of bonds by a special school district to make ordinary repairs or for the operation of schools. ’Subsequent to this decision said acts 62 and 164 were passed to authorize the issuance of 'bonds by special school districts to pay their debts, whether incurred for the construction of buildings or the operation of the schools or other legal purposes, in addition to the authority already conferred on said district to issue bonds under and in accordance with act 180 of the Acts of 1917 of which §§ 8984 and 8986 of Crawford & Moses’ Digest are parts. *Phillips*v. *Baker,*174 Ark. 403. All three acts related to the same subject, and the rule is that analogous acts or acts *in pari materia*should be read together in order to ascertain and carry out the intention of the Legislature. Said acts 62 and 164 were passed to supplement said act 180 as subsequently amended. When these acts are read together, the procedure to be followed in issuing bonds is set out and authority is conferred to execute mortgages to secure same. This construction of the three analogous statutes disposes of two objections to the validity of act 62 of 1927 and 164 of 1929. The other objection to the validity of the acts has been disposed of by this court in the case of *Indian Bayou Drainage District*v. *Dickie,*177 Ark. 728. It was said in that case that “If separate bond issues may be authorized for each purpose, a single issue would suffice for both purposes.” The instant case in this particular is ruled by the principle therein announced and quoted above.

No error appearing, the decree is affirmed.
Todd S. WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-2963

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed March 13, 2018

Todd S. Williams, Lawtey, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ORFINGER, TORPY and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                       1,111,536
<SECURITIES>                                28,950,674
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,366,156
<ALLOWANCES>                                   170,733
<INVENTORY>                                  2,973,967
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            34,926,118
<PP&E>                                       4,436,619
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,252,529
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              41,636,748
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,594,141
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       114,236
<OTHER-SE>                                  91,200,806
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                41,636,748
<SALES>                                      1,341,892
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,341,892
<CGS>                                          956,368
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  956,368
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,164,431
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 707
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,360,598)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,360,598)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,360,598)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.21)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.21)
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

**Certificationof**

**Treasurer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)**

**of TGCIndustries, Inc. Pursuant to**

**Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

This certificationis furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002(18 U.S.C. 1350) and accompanies the annual report on Form 10-KSB (the “Form10-KSB”) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006, of TGC Industries, Inc.(the “Company”).  I, Kenneth W. Uselton,Secretary/Treasurer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) of theCompany, certify that, to the best of my knowledge:

(1)                            The Form 10-KSB fully complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

(2)                            The information contained inthe Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

The foregoingcertification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-KSB pursuant toItem 601(6)(32) of Regulation S-B and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, UnitedStates Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part of the Form 10-KSBfor purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,and is not incorporated by reference into any filing of the registrant, whethermade before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporationlanguage in such filing.
| Date: March 28, 2007 |   | By:    | /s/ Kenneth Uselton |
|----------------------|--------|--------|---------------------|
|                 |   |   |                | Kenneth Uselton, Secretary and |
|                 |   |   |                | Treasurer (Principal Financial and |
|                 |   |   |                | Accounting Officer) |

 

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

<ARTICLE>               5

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                           JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                       1,100
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                            1,472,325
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         1,778,499
<PP&E>                                  49,236,336
<DEPRECIATION>                          25,946,566
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          25,311,045
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                    3,241,720
<BONDS>                                  3,410,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                    45,174
<OTHER-SE>                              15,460,621
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            25,311,045
<SALES>                                  4,526,110
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         4,697,880
<CGS>                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            1,521,966
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            53,755
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         218,711
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            509,137
<INCOME-TAX>                               130,584
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        378,553
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                               378,553
<EPS-BASIC>                                  .09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .09



</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1066 Received in Senate (RDS)]

<DOC>
117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 1066

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 14, 2022

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
     To amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
  Assistance Act to provide flexibility with the cost share for fire 
             management assistance, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Wildfire Recovery Act''.

SEC. 2. FIRE MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE COST SHARE.

    (a) In General.--Section 420 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster 
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act is amended--
            (1) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (f); and
            (2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following:
    ``(e) Federal Share.--The Federal share of assistance under this 
section shall be not less than 75 percent of the eligible cost of such 
assistance.''.
    (b) Applicability.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall only 
apply to amounts appropriated on or after the date of enactment of this 
Act.

SEC. 3. RULEMAKING.

    Not later than 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
President, acting through the Administrator of the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency, shall conduct and complete a rulemaking to provide 
criteria for the circumstances under which the Administrator may 
recommend the President increase the Federal cost share for section 420 
of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act 
(42 U.S.C. 5187). Such criteria shall include a threshold metric that 
assesses the financial impact to a State or local government from 
responding to a fire for which fire management assistance is being 
provided.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 13, 2022.

            Attest:

                                             CHERYL L. JOHNSON,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
## TO: FROM: RE: TODAY' S DATE: Chris, . ··,: '-::' ' ;

**.·:·~ ~-~~:·.**  

# ME . MO

,·. 

### .

**-~·** 

# Chris Donovan . 'I . ' .

. ,··- ' .. . , .. 

### · ....

**~ -~.-**  

### > ... ' ''



# · Russ Maguire · .: ·.\ · , "'·t<.X..'> , . ,



# On-Airport Construction Filings . ·· January 

## 28, 2013 ···.·. ;:. · ·

·. ' ' • • • ·' .... 1 ." 

## Please see attached a reference sheet that shovld help to simplity . the .process of filing your on-airport. co ' nstruction project. 

# · As you . can see, separate filings are required for 

# both FAA (FAA forrn .7460}'and MasspOT.



# . . . .. ..· . . <·· . :

# :·x·· ..

**~** 

## ;,::r

**~.''\·** 

## . . :. 

# ·.··:D> . .. . For the 7460 filing, I've also attached a separate :: gui<ielines ·· sheet . This . . ' 

### . ' . . ... . . . . .. ' . . ; . . .. ,. 

### . . . ·, -··· \·· ' .. · 

## references data **requireme~ts** 

## that should be **s}1are~ty,ritl,f**

**'· M.**  **a.~**

**·** 

# Part of its evaluatl .on process. · ... · ' · · · '< · •:

**·· :~··.** 

**·** .. , · .;.:' . ........ , · ...

**~·** · ·· ,.. 

### . ' . . ' . . ' -_;

**~-** '

**~** .: · ... ·-; . 

## If you have 

# any questions about the 

# FAA filing, . 

# ple~se ·ccmtac· t 

# FAA' s Tracey Mcinnis, at 781-238-7621. . For the Ma,ssDOT filing, Kathleen Mahoney would be a great resource, at **617.;412~3.689.** 

## · ' ' ' ' 

### ..

' '•

' \ ' ..::,,.··. , .·1·•·· ,•.. '. .

**-~ ~..**  .

'o' •
**'i-~·.** '.' ' ' ' ,1 • ' I '

**~** ,:i_ :,, .. ' .· ,;,._ .. i ' ·-:·: !'I . \-: '\

**/~,-;~ -_;.·**  **~: ~**  ·_ . . 1. '

. ··.. · ' . ·:·

.. ' 'i ' : •• •

**.-:~~ ~**  ' . ..

**~** . 

### · ..

**-~** : .
**~·.:**.. ·: ·.. .

' .. ,.
Case: 1:18-cr-00043-TSB Doc #: 209-1 Filed: 11/08/22 Page: 1 of 6 PAGEID #: 5268
Case: 1:18-cr-00043-TSB Doc #: 209-1 Filed: 11/08/22 Page: 2 of 6 PAGEID #: 5269
Case: 1:18-cr-00043-TSB Doc #: 209-1 Filed: 11/08/22 Page: 3 of 6 PAGEID #: 5270
Case: 1:18-cr-00043-TSB Doc #: 209-1 Filed: 11/08/22 Page: 4 of 6 PAGEID #: 5271
Case: 1:18-cr-00043-TSB Doc #: 209-1 Filed: 11/08/22 Page: 5 of 6 PAGEID #: 5272
Case: 1:18-cr-00043-TSB Doc #: 209-1 Filed: 11/08/22 Page: 6 of 6 PAGEID #: 5273
Destry Cord MCKINNEY v. STATE

CR-15-1396

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 3, 2017 Reh. denied February 24, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
# Secretary of the Navy Carlos Del Toro Issues Statement on Navy Special Warfare Operator 1st Class Christopher J. Chambers and Navy Special Warfare Operator 2nd Class Nathan Gage Ingram

#### 23 Jan 2024

On behalf of every Sailor, Marine, and Department of Navy civilian around the world, I offer my deepest condolences to the family, friends, and teammates of our fallen Navy SEALs, Navy Special Warfare Operator 1st Class Christopher J. Chambers and Navy Special Warfare Operator 2nd Class Nathan Gage Ingram, who were reported missing during the boarding of an illicit dhow carrying Iranian-made weapons bound for Houthis in Yemen, Jan. 11. Their service was part of our collective commitment to maritime security in the Middle East and economic prosperity in the United States and around the world. These men embodied the SEAL ethos, serving their country, the American people, and protecting our way of life. Our Navy, Department, and our Nation are safer because of the service of these two warriors. Our prayers are with their families and the entire Naval Special Warfare community during this difficult period.
Exhibit
10.16

    


    SCHEDULE
A

    TO

    EXHIBIT
10.15

    


    Rurban
Financial Corp. (the “Registrant”) has entered into Amended and Restated
Supplemental Executive Retirement Agreements effective as of December 31, 2008
(“Amended SERP Agreements”), with the executive officers of the Registrant
identified below, which Amended SERP Agreements are substantially identical to
the Amended and Restated Supplemental Executive Retirement Agreement, effective
as of December 31, 2008, by and between the Registrant and Kenneth A. Joyce,
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, a copy of which was
filed as Exhibit 10.15 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 (the “2008 Form 10-K”).

    


    In
accordance with Rule 12b-31 promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and Item 601(b)(10)(iii) of Regulation S-K, the following table identifies
(a) the name and title of each executive officer of the Registrant with whom the
Registrant has entered into an Amended SERP Agreement similar to that included
as Exhibit 10.15 to the 2008 Form 10-K; (b) the Retirement Benefit (as a
percentage of the executive officer’s Annual Direct Salary) payable under
Section 3.1 of the executive officer’s Amended SERP Agreement if the executive
officer terminates employment on or after age 65; and (c) the Early Retirement
Benefit (as a percentage of the executive officer’s Annual Direct Salary) if the
executive officer terminates employment prior to age 65 (provided the executive
officer has at least 5 years of service):

     

    
      
        	 
      	 	 	 	 	
                (c)

              	 
	 
      	 	 	 	 	
                Early Retirement Benefit

              	 
	 
      	 	 	 	 	
                At least 55

              	 	 	 	 
	
                (a) 

              	 	
                (b)

              	 	 	
                but less than

              	 	 	
                At least 60 but

              	 
	
                Name and Title

              	 	
                Retirement Benefit

              	 	 	 	
                60

              	 	 	
                less than 65

              	 
	
                Duane
      L. Sinn

              	 	 	20	%	 	 	10	%	 	 	15	%
	
                Executive
      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Registrant

              	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	
                Henry
      R. Thiemann

              	 	 	20	%	 	 	10	%	 	 	15	%
	
                President
      of RDSI

              	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	
                Mark
      A. Klein

              	 	 	15	%	 	 	5	%	 	 	10	%
	
                President
      and Chief Executive Officer of State Bank