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

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1617 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 1617

               For the relief of Jesus M. Collado-Munoz.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 9, 1998

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
               For the relief of Jesus M. Collado-Munoz.

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

SECTION 1. WAIVER OF CONSIDERATION OF CRIMINAL OFFENSE FOR IMMIGRATION 
              PURPOSES FOR JESUS M. COLLADO-MUNOZ.

    Notwithstanding sections 212(a) and 237(a) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act, Jesus M. Collado-Munoz shall not be considered, by 
reason of the criminal offense to which he pleaded guilty on October 
24, 1974, to be inadmissible to, or deportable from, the United States. 
The offense shall not be used to find that Jesus M. Collado-Munoz lacks 
good moral character for any purpose under that Act, including 
eligibility for naturalization.
                                 <all>
```
[No. 10420.

Department Two.

January 7, 1913.]

#### T. J. Reiley, *Respondent,*v. Spokane Sanitary Laundry Company *et al., Appellants.**1*

Contracts — Consideration—Promise to Pay Debt op Another. One purchasing property of a receiver under an agreement to pay all costs of the receivership, is liable for a feed bill incurred by the receiver, on the theory that, on a promise to pay to another the latter’s debt to a third person, the third person may maintain an action thereon.

Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Spokane county, Kennan, J., entered December 11,1911, upon findings in favor of the plaintiff, in an action on contract, after a trial to the court.

Affirmed.

*BerTcey & Cowan*and *W. W. Zent,*for appellants.

/-

*Danson, Williams*& *Damson (George D. Lantz,*of counsel), for respondent.

1

Reported in 128 Pac. 1075.

Morris, J

This action was brought to recover for the hire and feed of certain horses, contracted for partly by the appellant company and partly by its receiver. The liability of appellant Hose is based upon his written agreement with the receiver, in putting in a bid under which he purchased the property from the receiver, to pay all costs of the receivership *517proceedings. The court below held that, under this agreement, Hose was liable for the respondent’s bill, and we think it was right in so holding. The liability of Hose is one of fact, and is to be determined from all the evidence in the case. We have no doubt that, in making his agreement to purchase from the receiver, he fully intended, and the receiver understood he was, to pay such a sum as would relieve the receiver from all costs and expense he had become obligated for in carrying on the laundry business.

Appellants’ contention is that this case falls within that rule of law refusing to recognize a right of action in one who is a stranger to a contract, because of some indirect or incidental benefit which might accrue because of the performance of the contract. This rule may be conceded, but in our opinion it has no application here. It is clear to us from all the facts that Mr. Hose considered he was bound to pay the respondent’s bill, that he had this in mind in using the language he did, and that he brings himself within another well-recognized rule of law, that where one person makes a promise to another to pay the latter’s debt to a third, the third person may maintain an action on the promise in his own name. The whole matter is so largely one of evidence that we will not discuss the matter farther, believing, as we do, that the liability enforced should be sustained.

The judgment is affirmed.

Mount, C. J., Fullerton, Ellis, and Main, JJ., concur.
#### Onkar Singh, Respondent, v Empire International, Ltd., et al., Appellants.

[947 NYS2d 1]—

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Mark Friedlander, J.), entered May 23, 2011, which, in an action for personal injuries arising out of a motor vehicle accident, denied defendants’ motion to change the venue of the action from Bronx County to Queens County, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant Serour’s conclusory affidavit attesting to a Queens County residency, unsupported by documentation of such residency, was insufficient to satisfy defendants’ initial burden of showing that the venue chosen by plaintiff was improper *(Furth v ELRAC, Inc.,*11 AD3d 509, 510 [2004]; *McKenzie v MAJ Tr.,*204 AD2d 154 [1994]). In any event, plaintiff sufficiently rebutted defendants’ proof by submitting the police accident report, which shows that all parties, including Ser our, had addresses outside of New York State at the time of the accident, thereby permitting plaintiff to designate any county as the venue for trial *(see*CPLR 503 [a]; *Furth,*11 AD3d at 510). The utility bills defendants submitted for the first time in reply were properly rejected, as the reply was late and defendants failed to explain why they did not submit the bills with the original moving papers *(Furth,*11 AD3d at 510). In any event, the bills were issued around the time of the accident, not the commencement of the action, and thus were insufficient to raise an issue of fact, especially since defendants offered no explanation for the different addresses on the bills and Serour’s driver’s license *(see Hernandez v Seminatore,*48 AD3d 260 [2008]; *compare Herrera v A. Pegasus Limousine Corp.,*34 AD3d 267 [2006]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Moskowitz and Acosta, JJ.
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
 Sustainable Water Management Research: Stoneville, MS
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Southeast Area Stoneville, Mississippi Sustainable Water Management Research People & Locations







Mahesh Lal Maskey
                        Sustainable Water Management Research

                        




                        
                        Post Doc (Research Associate)
                        Phone: (662) 686-5347
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


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
II

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1670

To amend the Alaskan Native Claims Settlement Act to provide for selection

of lands by certain veterans of the Vietnam era.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 24, 1998

Mr. MURKOWSKI (for himself and Mr. STEVENS) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

A BILL

To amend the Alaskan Native Claims Settlement Act to

provide for selection of lands by certain veterans of the

Vietnam era.

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

3 SECTION 1. VIETNAM VETERANS ALLOTMENT.

4 The Alaskan Native Claims Settlement Act (43

5 U.S.C. 1600, et seq.) is amended by adding at the end

6 the following:
2

S 1670 IS

1 OPEN SEASON FOR CERTAIN NATIVE ALASKAN

2 VETERANS FOR ALLOTMENTS

3 ‘‘SEC. 41. (a) IN GENERAL.—(1) During the one4 year period beginning on the date of enactment of this

5 section, an individual described in subsection (b) is eligible

6 for an allotment of not more than 160 acres of land under

7 the Act of May 17, 1906 (chapter 2469; 34 Stat. 197),

8 as such Act was in effect before December 18, 1971.

9 ‘‘(2) Allotments selected under this section shall not

10 be from existing native or non-native campsites.

11 ‘‘(3) Only Federal lands are eligible for selection and

12 conveyance under this Act.

13 ‘‘(4) All conveyances are subject to valid rights.

14 ‘‘(5) All state selected lands that have not yet been

15 conveyed are ineligible for selection under this Act.

16 ‘‘(6) The Secretary shall prescribe, after consultation

17 with Alaska Natives groups, such rules as may be nec18 essary to carry out this section.

19 ‘‘(b) ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS.—(1) An individual is

20 eligible under subsection (a) if the individual would have

21 been eligible under the Act of May 17, 1906 (chapter

22 2469; 34 Stat. 197), as such Act was in effect before De23 cember 18, 1971, and the individual is a veteran of the

24 Vietnam era.
3

S 1670 IS

1 ‘‘(2) For purposes of this section, in the case of an

2 individual described in paragraph (1) who is deceased, the

3 heirs of the individual shall be treated as the individual

4 described in paragraph (1).

5 ‘‘(c) CONVEYANCE DEADLINE.—The Secretary of the

6 Interior shall complete land conveyances pursuant to this

7 section not later than one year after the end of the period

8 referred to in subsection (a).

9 ‘‘(d) DEFINITIONS.—For the purposes of this section,

10 the terms ‘veteran’ and ‘Vietnam era’ have the meaning

11 given such terms by paragraphs (2) and (29), respectively,

12 of section 101 of title 38, United States Code.’’.

Æ
Exhibit 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of Oak Hill Financial, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, R.E.
Coffman, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

      (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.


R. E. Coffman, Jr.
President & Chief Executive Officer
July 29, 2004


                                      -24-
# EUR-Lex - 52006AP0514 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52006AP0514

**European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the rules for the participation of undertakings, research centres and universities in actions under the Seventh Framework Programme and for the dissemination of research results (2007-2013) (COM(2005)0705 - C6-0005/2006 - 2005/0277(COD)) **

*
Official Journal 316 E , 22/12/2006 P. 0173 - 0173 *

P6_TA(2006)0514

Rules for participation — FP7 — EC ***I

European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the rules for the participation of undertakings, research centres and universities in actions under the Seventh Framework Programme and for the dissemination of research results (2007-2013) (COM(2005)0705 — C6-0005/2006 — 2005/0277(COD))

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2005) 0705) [1],

- having regard to Article 251(2) and Articles 167 and 172 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6-0005/2006),

- having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the opinions of the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Culture and Education (A6-0304/2006),

1. Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

[1] Not yet published in OJ.

--------------------------------------------------
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
 Renewable Product Technology Research: Peoria, IL
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    NCAUR homepageSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Midwest Area Peoria, Illinois National Center for Agricultural Utilization Research Renewable Product Technology Research People & Locations







Hemanthi Devika Manamperi
                        Renewable Product Technology Research

                        




                        
                        RESEARCH CHEMIST
                        Phone: (309) 681-6263
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


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
Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S. C. SECTION 1350


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO





SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of American Commerce Solutions, Inc., (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended November 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Daniel L. Hefner, Chief Executive Officer, President and Director of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S. C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:





(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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





Date: January 18, 2011

/s/ Daniel L. HefnerDaniel L. HefnerChief Executive Officer, President and Director
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-7480

TERRENCE LEROY WRIGHT, a/k/a Terrence Wright El,

 Petitioner – Appellant,

v.

BUTCH JACKSON,

 Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Bryson City. Robert J. Conrad, 

Jr., Chief District Judge. (2:12-cv-00006-RJC)

Submitted: December 12, 2012 Decided: January 3, 2013

Before AGEE, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Terrence Leroy Wright, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Terrence Leroy Wright seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006)

petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice 

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). 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) (2006). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Wright has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny Wright’s motion for a certificate of appealability, deny 

leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Christopher McGhee, Appellant.

[945 NYS2d 566]

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Efman, J), rendered April 5, 2011, convicting him of attempted burglary in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by vacating the sentence imposed; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Suffolk County, for resentencing in accordance herewith.

The County Court failed to pronounce sentence, in violation of its obligation under CPL 380.20. Accordingly, the sentence must be vacated and the matter remitted to the County Court, Suffolk County, for resentencing on the conviction of attempted burglary in the second degree *(see*Penal Law §§ 110.00, 140.25) in accordance with CPL 380.20 *(see People v Henry,*80 AD3d 625, 626 [2011]; *People v White,*72 AD3d 993, 994 [2010]; *People v Robinson,*69 AD3d 885, 885 [2010]).

In light of our determination, we need not reach the defendant’s remaining contention. Rivera, J.P., Dickerson, Hall and Miller, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Anthony Pauley, Also Known as Anthony Paulley, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Agresta, J.), rendered September 8, 1982, convicting him of murder in the second degree (two counts), and attempted robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Chetta, J.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

*342The defendant’s argument that the pretrial lineup identification of him by the eyewitness to the crime was tainted because his photograph appeared in an article on the incident published in the *New York Post*prior to the lineup is without merit. The eyewitness did not see the newspaper article and photograph, and there is nothing in the present record to indicate that the photograph published in the newspaper was supplied by law enforcement officials *(see, People v Marshall, 91*AD2d 643). The defendant’s contention that remarks made by the prosecutor during his summation denied him a fair trial is also without merit (see, *People v Mayrant,*109 AD2d 850). We have considered the defendant’s other contention and find it to be without merit. Thompson, J. P., Niehoff, Rubin and Eiber, JJ., concur.