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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2079 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2079

  To amend the Controlled Substances Act to provide penalties for the 
distribution or manufacture of a controlled substance within 1000 feet 
                       of a Head Start facility.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                  May 5 (legislative day, May 2), 1994

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Controlled Substances Act to provide penalties for the 
distribution or manufacture of a controlled substance within 1000 feet 
                       of a Head Start facility.

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

SECTION 1. DISTRIBUTION OR MANUFACTURING IN OR NEAR HEAD START 
              PROGRAMS.

    (a) Penalty.--The first sentence of section 419(a) of the 
Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 860(a)) is amended by striking 
``or a playground'' and inserting ``or a playground or Head Start 
facility''.
    (b) Second Offenders.--The first sentence of section 419(b) of the 
Controlled Substances Act is amended by striking ``or a playground'' 
and inserting ``or a playground or Head Start facility''.
    (c) Definition.--Section 419(d) of the Controlled Substances Act is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(5) The term `Head Start facility'--
                    ``(A) means a facility that is used to carry out a 
                Head Start program under the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 
                9831 et seq.); and
                    ``(B) includes--
                            ``(i) a private residence;
                            ``(ii) a church or synagogue;
                            ``(iii) a facility owned by a fraternal 
                        organization;
                            ``(iv) a government facility;
                            ``(v) a facility owned by an Indian tribe, 
                        within the meaning of section 4(e) of the 
                        Indian Self-Determination and Education 
                        Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b(e)); and
                            ``(vi) a facility owned by a recipient of 
                        assistance under the Head Start Act,
                that is used to carry out such a program.''.

                                 <all>
```
II

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2048

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide that the reduction by

waiver of retired pay due to receipt of compensation or pension not

apply to retired pay attributable to pay for extraordinary heroism.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

APRIL 26 (legislative day, APRIL 11), 1994

Mr. CHAFEE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

A BILL

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide that

the reduction by waiver of retired pay due to receipt

of compensation or pension not apply to retired pay

attributable to pay for extraordinary heroism.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. EXCLUSION OF PAY FOR EXTRAORDINARY HER4 OISM FROM REQUIRED REDUCTION IN RE5 TIRED PAY AS PART OF RECEIPT OF COM6 PENSATION OR PENSION.

7 (a) EXCLUSION.—The first sentence of section 5305

8 of title 38, United States Code, is amended by inserting
2

•S 2048 IS

1 ‘‘(other than pay for extraordinary heroism payable to the

2 person under section 1402(a) or 1402a(f) of title 10)’’

3 after ‘‘such person’s retired or retirement pay’’.

4 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

5 subsection (a) shall take effect on the date of the enact6 ment of this Act. No person shall be entitled to receive

7 by reason of the amendment made by subsection (a) any

8 benefits for any period before such date.

Æ
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2



                        Independent Accountants' Report
                        -------------------------------


The Board of Directors:
Bay View Acceptance Corporation

We have examined management's assertion about Bay View Acceptance Corporation's
(BVAC) compliance with the minimum servicing standards set forth in the Mortgage
Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage
Bankers, except for minimum servicing standards I.1 through I.4, III.3, III.4,
and V.2 through V.4, which BVAC has interpreted as being inapplicable to the
servicing obligations set forth in the Bay View 1997 RA-1 Auto Trust Pooling and
Servicing Agreement dated January 29, 1997 and the Bay View LG-1 Auto Trust
Pooling and Servicing agreement dated December 14, 1999, as of and for the year
ended December 31, 1999, included in the accompanying Management Assertion
Report.  Management is responsible for BVAC's compliance with those minimum
servicing standards.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
management's assertion about the Company's compliance based on our examination.

Our examination was made in accordance with standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included
examining, on a test basis, evidence about BVAC's compliance with the minimum
servicing standards and performing such other procedures as we considered
necessary in the circumstances.  We believe that our examination provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide a legal
determination on BVAC's compliance with the minimum servicing standards.

In our opinion, management's assertion that BVAC has complied in all material
respects with the aforementioned minimum servicing standards as of and for the
year ended December 31, 1999 is fairly stated, in all material respects.

/s/ KPMG LLP

San Francisco, California
February 9, 2000
National Domestic Violence Awareness month focuses on technology-facilitated abuse
 
  By Ann Walker, Family Advocacy Program Manager, DLA Installation Management Susquehanna
  October is National Domestic Violence Awareness month. The focus of the 2019 DVAM awareness campaign, provided by Military One Source, is “Raising Awareness about Technology-facilitated Abuse.” The role of technology and its misuse in domestic violence incidents is skyrocketing. Digital abuse is occurring among all populations, but young people are the most vulnerable, as they are using technology in almost all aspects of their lives. Technology-facilitated abuse can take many forms. Smartphones are the most common modality. The most frequently misused technologies include texting and posting on social pages with the intent to bully, stalk, harass or intimidate a partner. There is an increase in monitoring whereabouts or “keeping tabs” via global positioning systems and through use of malware and other applications. Improper use of photographs such as sending explicit pictures and demanding some in return, stealing or insisting on being given passwords, looking through a partner’s phone for texts and emails without consent are also forms of abusive digital communication. Every individual has a right to live a life free of technology-facilitated abuse. If you notice any of these behaviors from your partner, ask yourself if the behavior is crossing the line. You should always trust your “gut feeling.” You have options to protect yourself and create healthy boundaries. It is important to get help and mobilize toward a safer relationship. Please consider tapping into the resources listed below. Resources for addressing technology-facilitated abuse include:www.militaryonesource.milwww.loveisrespect.orgwww.joyfulheartfoundation.org For anonymous, confidential help, please call the National Domestic Violence Hotline at 
1-800-799-7233 (SAFE) or 1-800-787-3224 (TTY). The National Domestic Violence Hotline is a 24-hour confidential service that can be reached through calling and/or online chatting by visiting their website at www.thehotline.org/. To remember and honor the victims and survivors of domestic violence, Defense Logistics Agency’s Installation Management’s Family Advocacy Program and Family and Morale, Welfare and Recreation Susquehanna will host their annual Domestic Violence Awareness 5K Fun Run/1 Mile Walk Oct. 24 at 11:30 a.m. at the Fitness Center, Building 320, F Avenue. Resources and educational materials will be available.
#### Com. v. Crooks

08/24/2016

186 WAL (2016)

Denied

Pa.Super,, 145 A.3d 777
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7393

KAY F. PASCHAL, 

Plaintiff - Appellant, 

v. 

LEON LOTT, in his individual and official capacity; STAN SMITH, in his 

individual and official capacity; HOWARD HUGHES, in his individual and 

official capacity; HEIDI SCOTT, a/k/a Heidi Jackson, in her individual and official 

capacity; RICHLAND COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA, 

Defendants - Appellees. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at 

Columbia. Terry L. Wooten, Chief District Judge. (3:14-cv-04737-TLW) 

Submitted: April 27, 2017 Decided: May 5, 2017

Before MOTZ, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

S. Jahue Moore, MOORE TAYLOR LAW FIRM, P.A., West Columbia, South Carolina, 

for Appellant. Andrew F. Lindemann, Robert D. Garfield, DAVIDSON & 

LINDEMANN, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2

PER CURIAM: 

Kay F. Paschal appeals from the district court’s order adopting the 

recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting summary judgment to Defendants 

in her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) civil rights action. On appeal, Paschal questions whether 

the district court erred in granting summary judgment to Defendants. However, because 

Paschal has not presented this claim in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8)(A) 

(“[T]he [appellant’s] argument . . . must contain . . . appellant’s contentions and the 

reasons for them, with citations to the authorities and parts of the record on which the 

appellant relies.”), we deem it abandoned. Jacobs v. N.C. Admin. Office of the Courts, 

780 F.3d 562, 568 n.7 (4th Cir. 2015); Wahi v. Charleston Area Med. Ctr., Inc., 562 F.3d 

599, 607 (4th Cir. 2009); Williams v. Giant Food Inc., 370 F.3d 423, 430 n.4 (4th Cir. 

2004). 

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. We dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

AFFIRMED
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

September 27, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice

130615 Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. JACKSON COUNTY DRAIN COMMISSIONER, Stephen J. Markman, HENRIETTA TOWNSHIP, TOMPKINS Justices TOWNSHIP, LEONI TOWNSHIP, RIVES TOWNSHIP, WATERLOO TOWNSHIP, JERRY RUNCIMAN, GLENNA RUNCIMAN, GARY BALDWIN, LINDA BA LDWIN, JUDY FAYE, THOMAS BACK, ELMA BACK, SHAWN FITZPATRICK, TERRY FITZPATRICK, ROBERT HANNEWALD, LEWIS WILD, MARGARET WILD, MARVIN EVERLY, NORMA EVERLY, RICHARDS EADEN, LEEAN BURMINGHAM, DEAN KATZ, MARILYN KATZ, JAMIE BATDORFF, CHERYL BATDORFF, and GERALD KOT, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v SC: 130615 COA: 258008 Jackson CC: 03-006165-AS VILLAGE OF STOC KBRIDGE, GRAND RIVER INTER-COUNTY DRAINAGE BOARD, INGHAM COUNTY DR AIN COMMISSION, and JACOBS LAKE DRAIN DISTRICT, Defendants-Appellees.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 19, 2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

K ELLY , J., would grant leave to appeal.

t0920 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 27, 2006

Clerk
Exhibit
32.1








SECTION
906 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350




I, A.
Bruce O’Connor, hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the periodic
report being filed herewith containing financial statements fully complies with
the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and that information contained in said
periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Middlesex Water Company for the period
covered by said periodic report.













/s/ A. Bruce
      O’ConnorA.
      Bruce O’ConnorChief
      Financial Officer











Date:   November
6, 2008














A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Middlesex Water Company and will be retained by Middlesex Water Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
#### Com. v. Richardson 30

12/29/2015

489 EAL (2015)

30

. Justice EAKIN did not participate in the decision of this matter.

Denied

Pa.Super., 131 A.3d 80
EXHIBIT 12

                         MICHIGAN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY
                COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                                   (Unaudited)
                                        
                              (Dollars in Millions)
                                        
                                                  Three Months Ended
                                                        March 31
                                                   ---------------
                                                  1998         1997
                                                  ----         ----
1.  EARNINGS

     a) Income before interest expense,
         income taxes and undistributed
         equity earnings ....................  $  260.8      $  290.0

     b) Single Business Tax (2)..............       7.1           6.4

     c) Portion of rental expense
         representative of the
         interest factor (1)(2)..............       2.8           2.9
                                               --------      --------
     Total 1(a) through 1(c).................  $  270.7      $  299.3
                                               --------      --------
2.  FIXED CHARGES

     a) Total interest expense including
         capital lease obligations..........   $   20.8      $   21.1

     b) Capitalized interest................        0.4           0.4

     c) Portion of rental expense
         representative of the
         interest factor (1)................        2.8           2.9
                                               --------      --------
     Total 2(a) through 2(c)................   $   24.0      $   24.4
                                               --------      --------
3.  RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES......      11.28         12.27
                                                  =====         =====


(1)  We consider one third of total rental expense to represent return on
     capital.
     
(2)  Earnings represent income before income taxes and fixed charges.
     Since we have already deducted the Single Business Tax (the Tax)
     and rental expense in our calculation of income before tax (item
     1a), the Tax and the one-third portion of rental expense
     considered to be fixed charges are added back to arrive at total
     earnings.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Roy Usher, Appellant.

[767 NYS2d 877]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Demarest, J.), rendered December 20, 2001, convicting him of course of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

A claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel requires proof *546of less than meaningful representation, rather than simple disagreement with strategies and tactics *(see People v Benevento,*91 NY2d 708, 713 [1998]; *People v Flores,*84 NY2d 184, 187 [1994]; *People v Baldi,*54 NY2d 137, 146 [1981]). A review of the totality of the circumstances of this case shows that the defendant was provided with meaningful representation. Accordingly, he was not deprived of his constitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel. Florio, J.P., Friedmann, Townes and Cozier, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 10.16


 


Transfer Agreement for Greenhouse


 


Party A:
Harbin Hainan Kangda Cactus Hygienical Food Co., Ltd.


Party B:
Wanbao Planting Base


 


Under the principle of
mutual support, mutual benefit and common development, Party A and Party B have
entered into the following agreement:


 


1.               Part A transfers its greenhouse and related
appurtenance within Part B to part B in a lump. Total transferring accounts for
250,000 RMB


 


2.               Facilities and equipments have a good
condition, doors and windows also have a good condition, the supply of water
and electricity is normal.


 


3.               After the Party B received greenhouse from
part A and confirm it have a good condition, Party B will take charge of all
the accidents such as damage and being stolen.


 


4.               Payment style: Within three days after the
subscription of this agreement, that is on Jan 17th,2006, party B
will pay 100,000 RMB to Party A, on March 17th2006, party B will pay
150,000 RMB to Party A and on May 10th 
2006, party B will pay 400,000 RMB to Party A.


 


This
Contract is executed in two counterparts, one for each party. The Contract will
enter into effect upon execution and seals of the both parties.


 


Party A: Harbin Hainan Kangda Cactus Hygienical Food Co.,
Ltd.


 


Authorized Representative (Sealed): Chengzhi Wang


 


Party B: Wanbao Planting Base


 


Authorized Representative (Sealed): Fengzhen Wei


 


January 23, 2006
No. 12-8194.

#### Sakyi *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
#### New York Ins. Assn., Inc. v State of New York

3d Dept: 145 AD3d 80

denied
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 15-3


May 14, 2002

Michigan Consolidated Gas Company
Detroit, Michigan

We have made a review, in accordance with standards established by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants, of the unaudited interim financial
information of Michigan Consolidated Gas Company for the periods ended March 31,
2002 and 2001, as indicated in our report dated April 23, 2002; because we did
not perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on that information.

We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2002, is
incorporated by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-63370 on Form S-3.

We are also aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under
the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration
Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Detroit, Michigan
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 53 (Friday, March 18, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 15039]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6525]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

RTCA Government/Industry NextGen Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Charter Renewal.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the 
renewal of the RTCA Charter (FAA Order 1110.77T) for two years, 
effective April 2, 2011. The administrator is the sponsor of the 
committee. The objective of the advisory committee is to seek solutions 
to issues and challenges involving air transportation concepts, 
requirements, operational capabilities, and the associated use of 
technology and related considerations to aeronautical operations that 
impact the future Air Traffic Management System. RTCA provides the 
following two categories of recommendations to the FAA: Broad gauged 
policy and investment priority recommendations used by FAA when 
considering policy and program decisions; and minimum performance 
standards, reports, and guidance documents used by the FAA in 
regulatory decisions and rulemaking. Government regulatory and 
procurement practices reference or use RTCA standards (with or without 
change). The Secretary of Transportation has determined that that 
information and use of committee are necessary in the public interest 
in connection with the performance of duties imposed on the FAA by law.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW., 
Suite 805, Washington, DC, 20036; telephone (202) 833-9339; fax (202) 
833-9434; Web site http://www.rtca.org or the FAA Business Operations 
Group, NextGen and Operations Planning, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC: telephone (202) 493-4409; fax (202) 267-5071.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Steering Committee and Special Committee 
meetings are open to the public and announced in the Federal Register, 
except as authorized by Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 15, 2011.
Kathy Hitt,
RTCA Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 2011-6525 Filed 3-17-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
# Distribution San Diego’s Walker promoted to Lieutenant

/ Published Jan. 28, 2020
SAN DIEGO, 
Navy Lt. j.g. Marc Walker, military liaison officer, Defense Logistics Agency Distribution San Diego, California, was promoted during a ceremony held at DDDC Dec. 30.

DDDC Commander Navy Capt. Jerome R. White, promoted Walker to the rank of lieutenant as a result of his demonstrated performance.

Walker expressed his appreciation in his remarks. "Thanks to everyone who supported me on my journey to this point in my career. It is a pleasure to be here and to learn from the decades of logistics experience that many of you have here at DDDC."
2017-1500.

#### State v. Glover.

Fayette App. No. CA2016-11-016, 2017-0hio-7360. On motion for leave to file delayed appeal. Motion granted. Appellant shall file a memorandum in support of jurisdiction within 30 days.

O’Neill, J., not participating.