alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Northeast Area
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        
                Northeast Area Cities

                    Washington, D.C.
                            Newark, Delaware
                            Boston, Massachusetts
                            Beltsville, Maryland (BHNRC)
                            Beltsville, Maryland (BARC)
                            Frederick, Maryland
                            Orono, Maine
                            Geneva, New York
                            Ithaca, New York
                            University Park, Pennsylvania
                            Wyndmoor, Pennsylvania
                            Kearneysville, West Virginia
                            Leetown, West Virginia
                            Burlington, Vermont


                    Civil Rights & EEO Policy StatementsSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Northeast Area Docs BARC Public Field Day





- ARS News & Events
- AgResearch Magazine
- Image Gallery
- News

Field Day 2010headline bar Beltsville Agricultural Research Center Public Field Day Photo GalleryPhoto Galleries From Other Years**2010** | 2007 | 20052004 | 2003 | 20021999-01Gallery HomeField Day Information


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

FLORIDA WATER & MOLD RESTORATION, LLC a/a/o LINDA MOSES
, Appellant,

v.

AMERICAN INTEGRITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF FLORIDA
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 21

- 1802

[ March 23, 2022 ]

Appeal from the County Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Edward A. Garrison , Judge; L.T. Case No.

502021CC002289

.

Christian C. Walters of Barry L. Miller, P.A., Orlando, for appellant.

Thomas L. Hunker and Virginia A. Paxton of Hunker Appeals, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

ON CONFESSION OF ERROR

P ER C URIAM

.

Appellant challenges a final order dismissing its original complaint with prejudice . Appellant argues that the trial court should have given it an opportunity to amend its complaint once as a matter of course before a responsive pleading was served

. Appellant raised this argument below in its motion for rehearing, which the trial court denied. A ppellee confesses error on this point.

We accept appellee’s confession of error and reverse . The trial court

erred in refusing to permit appellant to amend its complaint where no responsive pleading had been served and no prior amendment had been

filed. See Fla . R. Civ . P. 1.190(a) (stating that “[a] party may amend a pleading once as a matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is served”); Boca Burger, Inc. v. Forum , 912 So. 2d 561, 567 (Fla. 2005) (“ Under the plain language of the first sentenc e of rule 1.190(a), a plaintiff has an absolute right to amend the complaint before a responsive pleading is served.

. . . A judge ’ s discretion to deny amendment of a2 complaint arises only after the defendant files an answer or if the plaintiff already has exercised the right to amend once.” ); Solonenko v. Vogue Prop s. , LLC , 192 So. 3d 87 , 87 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (“Appellant moved for rehearing, arguing she had the right to amend her complaint once as a matter of right. The trial court denied her motion without allowing her to amend the complaint. This was error.”); D ’ Alessandro v. Fid. Fed. Bank &

Tr. , 15 4 So. 3d 498, 498 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) ( holding that the trial court erred in dismissing the original complaint “ with prejudice

, without an opportunity to amend ” ) ; Unrue v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. , 161 So. 3d 536, 538 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) (explaining that a p laintiff has “an automatic right to amend the complaint once” before a responsive pleading is served).

We remand with instructions for the trial court to allow appellant to amend its complaint. We express no opinion as to the legal viability of appellant ’s proposed amended complaint. See Boca Burger , 912 So. 2d at 568 (“ A defendant may contest the legal viability of a first amended complaint by moving to dismiss the amended complaint, not by contesting the plaintiff ’ s right to amend .”).

Reversed and rem anded

.

C ONNER

, C.J., W ARNER and G ROSS

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
EXHIBIT 31.1



Certification of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



I, Michael T. Kennedy, certify that:



1. I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Radnor Holdings Corporation;



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



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



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



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



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



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



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



(a) All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and



(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that
involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



|                     |  |                                      
|-------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: August 6, 2004 |  | /s/ Michael T. Kennedy               
|                     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                     |  | (Principal Executive Officer)
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Food Surveys Research Group: Beltsville, MD
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Northeast Area Beltsville, Maryland (BHNRC) Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center Food Surveys Research Group Docs







CSFII 1994-1998 Citationsheadline bar U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center, Food Surveys Research Group (Beltsville, MD). Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals 1994-96, 1998 and Diet and Health Knowledge Survey 1994-96: Documentation (csfii9498_documentationupdated.pdf) or Data Files (csfii9498_data.exe).  Retrieved MM/DD/YY from USDA Agricultural Research Service, Food Surveys Research Group website: *remainder of url*.


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. James Edward WILSON, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 08-7621.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Nov. 25, 2008.

Decided: Jan. 13, 2009.

James Edward Wilson, Appellant Pro Se.

Rose Mary Sheppard Parham, Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

*815PER CURIAM:

James Edward Wilson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. *Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Wilson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.*
#### In re LANSING’S WILL. In the matter of the probate of the will of Jane E. Lansing.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

March 2, 1898.)

No opinion. Decree affirmed, with costs. All concur, except LANDON, J., not voting.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1999
<CASH>                                           3,709
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   40,083
<ALLOWANCES>                                       745
<INVENTORY>                                     39,060
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                90,507
<PP&E>                                          39,625
<DEPRECIATION>                                  24,032
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 126,314
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           22,251
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           146
<OTHER-SE>                                      63,123
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   126,314
<SALES>                                        108,359
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               108,359
<CGS>                                           60,011
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   98,048
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   351
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,343
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,617
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,189
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,428
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,428
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.37
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.36
        

</TABLE>
# L_2009003EN.01000601.xml

| 7.1.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 3/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.1.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 3/6

---

Corrigendum to Commission Regulation (EC) No 983/2008 of 3 October 2008 adopting the plan allocating to the Member States resources to be charged to the 2009 budget year for the supply of food from intervention stocks for the benefit of the most deprived persons in the Community

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 268 of 9 October 2008
  )

On page 5, Annex I, table (b), second column, ‘Sugar’, tenth line, ‘Polska’:

for:

‘
  49 554
  ’,

read:

‘
  49 544
  ’.

---
#### NORWEGIAN LUTHERAN TRINITY CHURCH OF BROOKLYN & VICINITY, Appellant, v. KRELSOVITCH, Respondent, et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

March 29, 1912.)

Action by the Norwegian Lutheran Trinity Church of Brooklyn and Vicinity against Meyer Krelsovitch and another. No opinion. Judgment re: versed, and new trial granted, costs to abide the event, on the ground that the evidence presented by the plaintiff was sufficient to make out a prima facie case. See, also, 147 App. Div. 108, 131 N. Y. Supp. 845.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Sherman Symes, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Harrington, J.), rendered January 20, 1982, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

The court properly admitted defendant’s statements into evidence. The evidence at the pretrial hearing established that defendant was fully advised of his rights, and voluntarily accompanied the police to headquarters. The record supports the finding that defendant was not placed in custody until after his *418polygraph test was over and he had made his inculpatory statements. Accordingly, suppression was not warranted *(see, People v Yukl,*25 NY2d 585).

Defendant’s other contentions have been considered and found to be without merit. Lazer, J. P., Thompson, O’Connor and Niehoff, JJ., concur.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 461 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend financing of the 

Superfund. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 2, 2011 

Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mrs. MURRAY, 

Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mr. WHITEHOUSE, Mr. CARDIN, and Mr. MERKLEY) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend 

financing of the Superfund. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Polluter Pays Restora5 tion Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF SUPERFUND TAXES. 

7 (a) EXCISE TAXES.—Section 4611(e) of the Internal 

8 Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 461 IS

1 ‘‘(e) APPLICATION OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE

2 SUPERFUND FINANCING RATE.—The Hazardous Sub3 stance Superfund financing rate under this section shall 

4 apply after December 31, 1986, and before January 1, 

5 1996, and after the date of the enactment of the Polluter 

6 Pays Restoration Act and before January 1, 2021.’’. 

7 (b) CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTAL INCOME TAX.— 

8 Section 59A(e) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 

9 amended to read as follows: 

10 ‘‘(e) APPLICATION OF TAX.—The tax imposed by this 

11 section shall apply to taxable years beginning after De12 cember 31, 1986, and before January 1, 1996, and to tax13 able years beginning after the date of the enactment of 

14 the Polluter Pays Restoration Act and before January 1, 

15 2021.’’. 

16 (c) EFFECTIVE DATES.— 

17 (1) EXCISE TAXES.—The amendments made by 

18 subsection (a) shall take effect on the date of the en19 actment of this Act. 

20 (2) INCOME TAX.—The amendment made by 

21 subsection (b) shall apply to taxable years beginning 

22 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.2





Certification of Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code,

as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code, the undersigned, Michael V. Valenza, the Senior Vice President-Finance and Chief Financial Officer of Radnor Holdings Corporation (the
Company), hereby certifies that:



The
Companys Form 10-Q Quarterly Report for the period ended June 27, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                      |  | 
|--------------------- |  | 
|Dated: August 6, 2003 |  | 
|                      |  | 



A signed original of this written
statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
exhibit10-29.htm

 








ICO, INC. CHANGE IN CONTROL SEVERANCE PLAN

 

Participation Agreement

Date: October 7, 2009

 

To:   A. John Knapp, Jr.

 

The purpose of this Participation Agreement is to confirm your participation in the ICO, Inc. Change in Control Severance Plan (the “Plan”), subject to your executing of this Participation Agreement and returning it to the Company within ten business days after the date set forth above.  Any capitalized terms used
herein and not defined herein have the meaning ascribed to such terms in the Plan.

 

The Severance Benefit for which you may be eligible pursuant to Section 4(a) of the Plan shall mean 200% of your annual base salary as of the date when a Change in Control occurs (i.e. your base salary multiplied by two (2)).  In addition, the Company will pay or reimburse 100% of your premiums at the rate applicable to you for
your and your dependents’ continued coverage, pursuant to the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (“COBRA”), under the Company’s medical and dental plans to the extent that you and your dependents are participants in such plans immediately prior to your termination, and provided that you elect COBRA continuation coverage, for up to twelve months following termination.

 

For purposes of the definition of “Good Reason” under the Plan, a material change in the geographic location at which you must perform services includes a change in your primary work location to a location that is more than 50 miles from its prior location.

 

As set forth in Section 5 of the Plan, (i) if the aggregate of payments due under this Plan is greater than amounts owed to you under any other agreement and/or severance or separation plan or policy applicable to you (“Other Plan”), then payments made to you under this Plan shall be in lieu of payments owed under such Other
Plan, and (ii) if the aggregate of payments due under this Plan is less than amounts owed under any Other Plan applicable to you, then payments made under the Other Plan shall be in lieu of payments under this Plan.  In the event that you become entitled to and are paid payments under an Other Plan, and subsequently become entitled to payments under this Plan, then the amounts due to you under this Plan shall be reduced by the amounts previously paid to you under the Other Plan.  For the avoidance
of doubt it is noted that the Company’s incentive compensation plans (pursuant to which employees may be awarded stock options or restricted shares) and 401(k) plan are not within the definition of “Other Plan” for the purpose of this paragraph.

 

Further details and requirements related to your Severance Benefit are set forth in the Plan, which is attached to and incorporated into this Participation Agreement.

 


	
ICO, Inc.
	  
	
By:
	
/s/ Gregory T. Barmore

	  	
Gregory T. Barmore.

	  	
Chairman of the Board of Directors








 


	
Accepted and agreed to by:

	  	  
	
By:
	
/s/ A. John Knapp, Jr.

	  	
A. John Knapp, Jr.

	
Date:
	
October 7, 2009

	
Attachment: Change in Control Severance Plan