alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                                         
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                         
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                           
|View History: Annual                                                                     
|View History: Annual                                                                     
|View History:                                                                            
|                                                                                         
|Oklahoma Natural Gas % of Total Commercial Delivered for the Account of Others  (Percent)
|                                                                                         
|                                                                                         
|Oklahoma Natural Gas % of Total Commercial Delivered for the Account of Others  (Percent)
|                                                                                         

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 10.4  
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 7.9    | 8.7    | 11.5   | 10.0   | 11.5   | 14.9   | 15.5   | 18.2   | 26.8   | 28.4  
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 27.6   | 26.0   | 29.0   | 28.7   | 38.4   | 46.9   | 50.1   | 51.9   | 48.7   | 53.6  
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 52.5   | 53.7   | 58.9   | 55.4   | 54.6   | 56.2   | 58.0   | 57.8   | 54.5   | 55.1  
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 56.2   | 53.7   | 54.6   |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains second quarter summary financial information extracted
from Mississippi Chemical Corporation fiscal 1997 second quarter Form 10-Q and
is qualified in its entirety by reference to such Form 10-Q filing.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000066895
<NAME> MISSISSIPPI CHEMICAL CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           3,803
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   64,388
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,488
<INVENTORY>                                     75,233
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               152,333
<PP&E>                                         670,991
<DEPRECIATION>                                 336,271
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 809,040
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           87,833
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           280
<OTHER-SE>                                     422,660
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   809,040
<SALES>                                        113,196
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               114,735
<CGS>                                           80,488
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   94,596
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   195
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 280
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 19,859
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,766
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             12,093
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    12,093
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.56
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
2006 Compensation Schedule for Certain Named Executive Officers


 Exhibit 10.1 
 2006 Compensation Schedule for Certain Named Executive Officers 
 2006 Base
Salary 
  

				
	 Cristóbal Conde, Chief Executive Officer
	  	$	874,000
	 Michael K. Muratore, Executive Vice President
	  	$	557,000
	 Richard C. Tarbox, Senior Vice President
	  	$	424,000

 2006 Cash Bonus 
 SunGard Data Systems Inc. has an annual executive incentive compensation (“EIC”) program for its executive officers and other key management employees. The
principal purpose of this program is to link a significant portion of annual cash compensation to financial results and other goals, so as to reward successful performance. 
 The performance goals for certain executive officers’ 2006 annual cash incentive payments take into account the Company’s overall financial and business goals for 2006. In addition, the performance goals
applicable to incentive payments to be earned in 2006 for executive officers are based upon EBITA, which represents actual earnings before interest, taxes and amortization, as further adjusted for certain unusual items. For certain executive
officers, there are additional performance goals specific to either their function or the business they oversee. Depending upon the extent of the achievement of the 2006 targeted performance goal, the actual amount of the 2006 incentive payment will
be higher or lower than the following targeted incentive payment amounts for the following named executive officers: 
  

				
	 Cristóbal Conde, Chief Executive Officer
	  	$	1,790,000
	 Michael K. Muratore, Executive Vice President
	  	$	826,000
	 Richard C. Tarbox, Senior Vice President-Corporate Development
	  	$	662,000
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

661 

CA 12-02396 

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., FAHEY, PERADOTTO, SCONIERS, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ. 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF JAMES ADAMS, 

PETITIONER-APPELLANT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

SUPERINTENDENT BOLLINIER, FIVE POINTS 

CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT. 

JAMES ADAMS, PETITIONER-APPELLANT PRO SE.

ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (MARCUS J. MASTRACCO OF

COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Seneca County

(Dennis F. Bender, A.J.), dated July 5, 2012 in a proceeding pursuant

to CPLR article 78. The judgment denied and dismissed the petition. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding

seeking to annul the determination that he violated a prison

disciplinary rule. Supreme Court properly denied the petition.

Inasmuch as petitioner has served the entirety of the imposed 30-day

penalty, his contention that the penalty was unlawful is moot (see

Matter of Ellison v Coughlin, 191 AD2d 778, 778-779), and we conclude

that the exception to the mootness doctrine does not apply (cf. id. at

779; see generally Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714-

715). Petitioner’s contention that the absence of the hearing

transcript precluded the court’s meaningful review is not preserved

for our review and, in any event, is without merit (see Matter of

Sessoms v Commissioner of Correctional Servs., 63 AD3d 1400, 1400). 

We reject petitioner’s further contention that the absence of the

hearing transcript from the record on appeal prevents this Court from

conducting a meaningful appellate review, inasmuch as the missing

transcript “is not relevant to the issues before us” (Matter of Gold v

Masse, 256 AD2d 981, 981-982, lv denied 93 NY2d 803; see Matter of

Borrero v Goord, 268 AD2d 853, 854). 

Entered: June 13, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
No. 12-6306.

#### Chavarria *v.*Hamlet, Warden.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
* 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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-10019 Summary Calendar

JOHN JOSEPH ARCHULETA, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus WAYNE SCOTT, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, ET AL., Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 5:96-CV-12-C

- - - - - - - - - - February 19, 1998 Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Texas prisoner John Joseph Archuleta, No. 689511, appeals the dismissal of his claims against defendant “Dr. Adam” pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997e and the entry of summary judgment in favor of the other defendants to the suit. Having reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties, we AFFIRM. Archuleta’s motion for injunctive relief is DENIED.
AFFIRMED; MOTION DENIED.
2017-0989.

#### State v. Goodwin.

Butler App. No. CA2016-05-099, 2017-Ohio-2712. On review of an order certifying a conflict. It is determined that no conflict exists. Cause dismissed.

O’Connor, C.J., and O’Neill and Fischer, JJ., dissent.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 98 (Thursday, May 21, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 27991]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-13541]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Closed 
Meetings

    Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
National Heart, Lund, and Blood Institute meetings:

    Name of Committee: Heart, Lung, and Blood Program Project Review 
Committee.
    Date: June 25, 1998.
    Time: 8:00 a.m.
    Place: Holiday Inn Silver Spring, 8777 Georgia Avenue, Silver 
Spring, Maryland 20910.
    Contact Person: Jeffrey H. Hurst, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Administrator, NHLBI/Review Branch, Two Rockledge Center, Room 7208, 
6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892-7924, (301) 435-0303.
    Purpose/Agenda: To review and evaluate program project grant 
applications.
    Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Special 
Emphasis Panel (Thrombocytopenia: Pathogenesis and Treatment).
    Date: June 10, 1998.
    Time: 8:00 a.m.
    Place: Gaithersburg Marriott Washingtonian Center, 9751 
Washingtonian Boulevard, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20878.
    Contact Person: Eric H. Brown, Ph.D., Two Rockledge Center, Room 
7204, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, Maryland 20892-7924, (301) 
435-0299.
    Purpose/Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    These meetings will be closed in accordance with the provisions 
set forth in secs. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5, U.S.C. 
Applications and/or proposals and the discussions could reveal 
confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable 
material and personal information concerning individuals associated 
with the applications and/or proposals, the disclosure of which 
would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Programs Nos. 93.837, Heart 
and Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; and 
93.839, Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes 
of Health)

    Dated: May 14, 1998.
Anna Snouffer,
Acting Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 98-13541 Filed 5-20-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
2017-1501.

#### State v. Holton.

Logan App. No. 8-17-02, 2017-Ohio-6934. On motion for leave to file delayed appeal. Motion granted. Appellant shall file a memorandum in support of jurisdiction within 30 days.

O’Donnell and Kennedy, JJ., dissent.

O’Neill, J., not participating.
|                                                                               
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                               
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                       
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                 
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                 
|View History:                                                                  
|                                                                               
|Kenai, AK Liquefied Natural Gas Exports Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                               
|                                                                               
|Kenai, AK Liquefied Natural Gas Exports Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                               

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        | 12.88  | 15.71  | --     | 15.74  | 7.49   | --     | --     | --     | --    
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
414 P.2d 435

#### In the Matter of ANONYMOUS, a neglected dependent minor child. PARENTS, Appellants, v. The Honorable John F. MOLLOY, Judge of the Superior Court, Pima County, Appellee.*

No. 2 CA-CIV 266.

Court of Appeals of Arizona.

May 20, 1966.

See also Ariz.App., 414 P.2d 176.

Scruggs & Rucker, by D. Thompson Slutes, Tucson, for appellants.

-Darrell F. Smith, Atty. Gen., Philip M. Haggerty, Asst. Atty. Gen., Phoenix, for ap-pellee.

*

 This appeal was filed with the Arizona Supreme Court and assigned that court’s No. 8315. The matter was referred to this court pursuant to A.R.S. Section 12-120.23.

HATHAWAY, Judge.

On November 9, 1963, a minor child of appellants was found in appellants’ home by a deputy sheriff under circumstances which led him to believe that she had been physically abused. A petition was immediately filed in juvenile court by the chief probation officer of Pima county asking that the child-be declared a neglected child. On November 12, 1963, a similar petition was filed as to the four other children of appellants under the age of 18 years.

On January 16, 1964, the juvenile court entered an order declaring a twenty-month old child, whom the appellants were attempting to adopt, to be a neglected child. The order severed all parental rights of appellants and awarded permanent custody of the child to the Arizona Children’s Home Association for the purpose of placing her in an adoptive home.1 Appellants have appealed this juvenile court order on the ground that there was no evidence to support the adjudication of neglect.

There is no right of appeal from a jiivenile court order nor is the general appeal statute applicable in this case. Application of Gault, 99 Ariz. 181, 186, 407 P.2d 760 (1965). The State has filed neither a responsive brief nor a motion to dismiss this appeal. It is the duty of this court, however, to inquire, sua sponte, into its jurisdiction. Searles v. Haldiman, 3 Ariz.App. 294, 413 P.2d 860 (filed May 9, 1966); Christian v. Cotten, 1 Ariz.App. 421, 403 P.2d 825 (1965); Bloch v. Bentfield, 1 Ariz.App. 412, 403 P.2d 559 (1965); Ginn v. Superior Court, 1 Ariz.App. 455, 404 P.2d 721 (1965). Since an appeal does not *352lie from the subject order this court is without jurisdiction to consider this appeal and it is hereby dismissed.

KRUCKER, C. J., and JACK G. MARKS, Superior Court Judge, concurring.

NOTE: Judge JOHN F. MOLLOY having requested that he be relieved from consideration of this matter, Judge JACK G. MARKS was called to sit in his stead and participate in the determination of this decision.

1

. On April 8, 1964, the juvenile court dismissed the petition regarding the other three children for “lack of evidence.”
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1754 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1754

            Regarding the suspension of duty on diflunisal.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

            November 20 (legislative day, November 2), 1993

 Mr. Bradley (for himself and Mr. Lautenberg) introduced the following 
  bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
            Regarding the suspension of duty on diflunisal.

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

SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON DIFLUNISAL.

    Heading 9902.30.23 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 
States is amended by striking out ``12/31/92'' and inserting ``12/31/
95''.

SEC. 2. APPLICABILITY.

    (a) In General.--The amendment made by section 1 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.
    (b) Retroactive Provision.--Notwithstanding section 514 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930 or any other provision of law, upon proper request 
filed with the appropriate customs officer within 180 days after the 
15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act, any entry or 
withdrawal from warehouse--
            (1) that was made after December 31, 1992, and before such 
        15th day; and
            (2) with respect to which there would have been no duty if 
        the amendment made by section 1 applied to such entry or 
        withdrawal;
shall be liquidated or reliquidated as though such amendment applied to 
such entry or withdrawal.

                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 90 (Monday, May 11, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25847-25848]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-12366]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-200-000]


KO Transmission Company; Notice of Petition for Waiver

May 5, 1998.
    Take notice that on April 30, 1998, KO Transmission Company (KO 
Transmission) tendered for filing a petition for waiver of the 
electronic communications and Internet transaction requirements of the 
Commission's Order Nos. 587-B, 587-C and 587-G.
    KO Transmission states that copies of this petition has been served 
on each of KO Transmission's customers.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed on or 
before May 12, 1998. Protests will be considered by the Commission in 
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to 
make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to 
become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing 
are on file with the Commission and are available for public

[[Page 25848]]

inspection in the Public Reference Room.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-12366 Filed 5-8-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER>        1,000

<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                  JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                             61,475
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                     214,412
<ALLOWANCES>                            0
<INVENTORY>                       131,659
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  425,441
<PP&E>                            432,789
<DEPRECIATION>                    218,103
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    848,296
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>             261,348
<BONDS>                                 0
<COMMON>                           56,988
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                             0
<OTHER-SE>                        185,199
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      848,296
<SALES>                           463,771
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  463,771
<CGS>                             208,916
<TOTAL-COSTS>                     208,916
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                  170,912
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                 14,293
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    75,344
<INCOME-TAX>                       17,241
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                58,103
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                       58,103
<EPS-BASIC>                        1.28
<EPS-DILUTED>                        1.24


</TABLE>
No. 12-657.

#### Cash Advance Network, Inc. *v.*Felts.

Sup. Ct. N. M. Certiorari denied.