alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

I]-S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD

Address o f Admin istratrve Law Judge Docketing

ALJ Docketing Center

U.S. Custom House

40 South Gay Street. Room 414

Baltimore, MD 21 2024022

Phone: (410) 962-5100

Toll Free: (866) 612-7574 [6IA-SKCG]

Fax: (410) 962-1746

Email: al docketcenter mil

Ccnter:

Toll Free Fax: 8 243-3453 CGE-FILE

COMPLAINANT:

UNITED STATES COAST GUARI)

DOCKET NUMBER ](J]] () RESPONDENT: Lance Christian Willumsen ] II3

WITHDRA}IAL FROM DOCKET CG ENFORCEMENT ACTIVIry NUMBER

76s-1119

The Coast Guard initiated an administrative proceeding by filing a Complaint on May2 3,2023,

seeking revocation of Respondent's Merchant Mariner Credential.

On June 8, 2023, the Coast Guard filed a Notice of Withdrawal from docket as

The Respondent signed a Voluntary Surrender Agreement under 46 CFR$ 5.203.

The Coast Guard reserves the right to file a new Complaint in this matter. This matter is removed

from the docket and closed without prejudice effective this date.

Done and Dated Jlune 14,2023, at

Baltimore. MD

/-zr-/r,'V/L ?,Z4rrz.

Lauren M. Meus

Hearing Docket Clerk

U.S. Coast Guard

By Direction of the Chief Administrative Law

Judge
The State of TexasAppellee

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 21, 2013

No. 04-12-00749-CR, 04-12-00750-CR, 04-12-00751-CR

Kwaku AGYIN,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 437th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2011CR10947, 2012CR0469, 2011CR10948

Honorable Lori I. Valenzuela, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

The panel has considered the Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing, and the motion is 

DENIED.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 21st day of November, 2013.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
# C_2021251EN.01001601.xml

| 28.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 251/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 251/16

---

Winding-up proceedings

Decision to start winding-up proceedings in respect of Gefion Finans A/S, CVR-nr- 36 01 64 93

(Publication made in accordance with Article 280 of Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency Il))

(2021/C 251/08)

| Insurance undertaking | Gefion Finans A/S |
| --- | --- |
| Østergade 10 |
| 2200 København N |
| DENMARK |

Insurance undertaking

Gefion Finans A/S

Østergade 10

2200 København N

DENMARK

Date, entry into force and nature of decision

7 June 2021, Bankruptcy

Competent authorities

| The Maritime and Commercial Court |
| --- |
| Amaliegade 35, 2. |
| 1256 Copenhagen K |
| DENMARK |

The Maritime and Commercial Court

Amaliegade 35, 2.

1256 Copenhagen K

DENMARK

Supervisory authority

None

Administrator appointed

| Søren Aamann Jensen |
| --- |
| Tuborg Boulevard I |
| 2900 Hellerup |
| DENMARK |

Søren Aamann Jensen

Tuborg Boulevard I

2900 Hellerup

DENMARK

| Boris K. Frederiksen, |
| --- |
| Kalvebod Brygge 32 |
| 1560 Copenhagen V |
| DENMARK |

Boris K. Frederiksen,

Kalvebod Brygge 32

1560 Copenhagen V

DENMARK

Applicable law

Denmark

Danish Bankruptcy Code 17

---
(8 Misc. Rep. 502.)

#### SCHULBERG et al. v. GUTTERMAN et al.

(City Court of New York, General Term.

May 18, 1894.)

Partnership—Evidence—Declarations and Admissions.

Declarations and admissions of alleged partners are admissible to prove the partnership.

*764Appeal from trial term.

Action by Frank Schulberg and Philip Robinsky against JacobGutterman and Joseph Youngerman. There was a judgment in, favor of defendants, and plaintiffs appeal. Reversed.

Argued before EHRLICH, C. J., and VAN WYCK and McCARTHY, JJ.

Abraham Levy, for appellants.

Jacob Barnett, for respondents.

McCARTHY, J.

This was an action brought against the defendants for goods sold and delivered. The defendant Youngerman, did not defend, but made default, and the defendant Gutterman appeared, and answered, in effect, a general denial. The defendant Youngerman was the son-in-law of Gutterman, and the question principally contested was that of the alleged partnership. One of the plaintiffs and another witness testified to statements made by Gutterman admitting the partnership, and his liability for ihe goods in question. This Gutterman denied, and said: “I have never at any time been in the collecting business with any one in my life. Mr. Youngerman was at no time a partner of mine in business;” and absolutely denied the statements testified to by plaintiff and his witness. On rebuttal, one Friedlander was called oh behalf' of plaintiffs, and among other questions asked was the following:

“Q. Did you have any dealings with Jacob Gutterman and Joseph Younger-man,—the firm of Gutterman & Younger? (Defendants’counsel objects. Objection sustained. Plaintiffs except.) Q. Did' Mr. Jacob Gutterman at any time buy, or tell you that it was all right for you to ship goods to the firm of' Gutterman & Youngerman at Goldsboro, North Carolina, because he was a partner? (Defendants’ counsel objects. Objection sustained. Plaintiffs except.)”

We think this was error, for here was evidence contradicting the-defendant, and to show that he claimed, represented, and held himself out to the world as a partner of Youngerman in this business.. In an action to charge defendants as copartners the copartnershipmay be established as well by circumstances, declarations, admissions, and conduct as by direct proof. Rogers v. Murray, 110 N. Y. 658, 18 N. E. 261; Cassidy v. Hall, 97 N. Y. 169. See De Cordova v. Powter (Sup.) 1 N. Y. Supp. 147. The declarations of a party to the suit as to the existence of a partnership are competent to charge and prove him to have been a member of an alleged firm, and who were admitted by him to have been the persons composing it. See Kipper v. Sizer, 2 N. Y. St. Rep. 386. This testimony was important, as corroborating the contentions of the plaintiffs, and should have been submitted to the jury for their consideration. Judgment is therefore reversed, and a new trial ordered, with, costs to abide the event. All concur.
CWITED STATES OF AMERICA 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD 

UXITED STATES COAST GUARD 

Compla~nant 

vs. 

JOSHUA JAMES SHELDRICK 

Respondent 

Docket Number: CG S&R 04-0572 

CG Case No. 2227646 

Order Granting Motion for Withdrawal 

Issued: December 15,2004 

Issued bv: Jeftie J. Massev. Administrative Law Jud~e 

On October 25, 2004, the United States Coast Guard initiated an administrative 

proceeding against Merchant Mariner's Documents issued to Joshua James Sheldrick by 

the United States Coast Guard ("USCG herein). On November 9,2004, the Respondent 

filed an Answer. denying the allegations of the Complaint. 

On h'ovember 10, 2004, the USCG filed a Motion for Summary Decision. 

Respondent filed his "Motion to Countermove Against Apposing [sic] Affidavit" on 

November 30, 2004. On that same date, the undersigned issued an Order Denying 
Motion for Summary Disposition and Ordering USCG to Show Cause Why Complaint 

Should Not Be Dismissed. A response &om the USCG on the Show Cause Order was 

due on or before December 10, 2004. Nothing has been filed by the Respondent in 

response to the Novemher 30, 2004 Order. 

On December 15,2004. the USCG filed its Motion for Withdrawal with the 

undersigned, noting that it wished to withdraw the Complaint in the instant proceeding 

because "This office has learned that the abstract of court records received were in error. 

The abstract did not reflect the correct conviction dates." The USCG goes on to request 

that any Order issued by the undersigned with respect to the Motion to Withdraw "state 

that the Coast Guard may file a new Complaint in this matter." 

The undersigned notes that in his Novemher 30,2004, filing, the Respondent 

claims that his conviction for DUI pursuant to the October 2001 arrest did not actually 

occur until sometime in 2002. If this is in fact true, then it is not possible to allege an act 

of Misconduct based on an allegation that the Respondent unlawfully failed to disclose 

such a conviction on his December 2001 Application for Raise in Grade. 

The right to withdraw a Complaint and proceed with a separate proceeding is 

within the rights of the USCG. Accordingly, the Motion is GRANTED. This 

proceeding should be removed from the docket and considered closed for all purposes. 

With respect to whether or not another Complaint could or should he filed against the 

Respondent based on the same or similar facts, the undersigned will reserve judgment on 

that issue for the timeif and when it occurs-that another Complaint is presented 
ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that that the administrative action against Respondent Joshua 

James Sheidrick's Coast Guard issued documents shall be dismissed and removed from the 

docket. 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that service of this Decision on the parties andlor parties' 

representative(s) serves as notice of appeal rights set forth in 33 CFR 20. I001 -- 20.1004. 

(Attachment A). 

Done and dated December 15,2004 

New Orleans. Louisiana
# C_2021284EN.01000201.xml

| 16.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 284/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 284/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10316 — Macquarie/Warrington/Bingo)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 284/02)

On 30 June 2021, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10316. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10316. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
Listen

# Civil Rights and Protections During the Federal Response to Hurricanes Harvey and María

September 21, 2022

This report examines the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) disaster response and compliance with federal civil rights laws and policies in Texas and Puerto Rico following Hurricanes Harvey and María.

U.S. Commission on Civil Rights for the first time in its 65-year history examines the civil rights implications of federal disaster response. This report examines factors such as barriers to providing aid, FEMA’s coordinating role in disaster recovery efforts including local factors impacting damage assessments and delivering resources, and efforts by federal agencies to comply with the Stafford Act and other civil rights obligations.

Report

Report Infographic

Executive Summary and Letter of Transmittal (Spanish)

Report

Report Press Release

Save the Date Press Release

Briefing June 25, 2021 - Hurricanes María and Harvey

Briefing October 21, 2021 - Hurricane Harvey in Texas

Briefing December 10, 2021 - Hurricane María in Puerto Rico

Puerto Rico

Texas

-  All Reports 
-  Annual Statutory Enforcement 
-  Briefing Reports 
-  Advisory Committees Reports 
-  Budget and Performance 
-  FOIA Reports 
-  Data Inventory Program 
-  Civil Rights Complaints 
-  Historical Publications 
-  Archives
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

United States Coast GuardU.S. Department of Homeland Security

Search
Search

Search

-  Home    -  News Room             
  -  Reserve             
  -  Forcecom             
  -  Operations             
  -  Mission Support             
  -  Atlantic Area             
  -  Pacific Area             
  -  History 
-  Units    -  Organization             
  -  Coast Guard A to Z             
  -  Atlantic Area             
  -  Pacific Area             
  -  Force Readiness Command 
-  Leadership    -  Commandant’s Initiatives             
  -  Senior Leadership             
  -  Deputy Commandant for Operations             
  -  Deputy Commandant for Mission Support             
  -  Atlantic Area Commander             
  -  Pacific Area Commander             
  -  Reserve             
  -  Auxiliary 
-  Resources    -  CG Support             
  -  Legal      -  JoinCGJAG             
    -  Legal_Assistance        -  Find-A-Legal-Assistance-Lawyer             
      -  FAQ 
  -  Civil Rights             
  -  Work-Life             
  -  Administrative Law Judges      -  Virtual Hearing 
  -  Newsroom             
  -  Family             
  -  Library             
  -  CG Web Mail             
  -  Return 2 Service      -  FAQ 
-  Community    -  Art Program             
  -  Girl Scouts / Boy Scouts      -  Eagle Scout Recognition 
  -  Coast Guard Band             
  -  Coast Guard Cities             
  -  Honor Guard             
  -  JROTC      -  NEWS 
  -  Special Programs      -  Industry Academy        -  Contacts             
      -  2018 
  -  Trademark             
  -  Resources      -  History             
    -  CGC Eagle 
-  Mariners    -  National Vessel Documentation Center             
  -  National Maritime Center             
  -  National Pollution Funds Center      -  NRD        -  NRD_FAQs             
      -  Trustee_Links             
      -  NRD_DOCS             
      -  About_NRD_Funding 
  -  Boating Safety 
-  doing business		 
-  Join		 
-  Recruiting		 
-  contact		 
-  About		 

HomeBiographies

# Biographies

 Admiral Linda L. FaganCommandant, U.S. Coast Guard

**

                      - FOIA
                      - Privacy Policy
                      - MHS Notice of Privacy Practices
                      - Accessibility
                      - No FEAR
                      - Whistleblower Protection
                      - U.S. Department of Homeland Security
                      - DHS Office of Inspector General
                      - WhiteHouse.gov
                      - USA.gov

### Stay Connected

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
#### Frank Goodside v. The State.

Where an appeal was sent from Medina (which was assigned to the session of the Supreme Court at Austin) to the session at Galveston, it was,, on the motion of the attorney general, dismissed.

Appeal from Medina. The case was tried before Hon. George H. Hoonan, one of the district judges.

Goodside, having been convicted of illegally branding a horse, appealed to the -Supreme court.

Ho brief for the appellant has been furnished to the *He-porter.*

*■E. B. Turner, Attorney General,*

moved to dismiss the appeal, because it did not belong to the Galveston session.

Lindsay, J.

—This case must be dismissed. For the purpose of appeals, the county of Medina is assigned by law to the Austin branch of the Supreme Court. Appeals from each county must be taken to that branch of the Supreme Court to which it is assigned by statute, unless the parties, or their attorneys, file an agreement with the clerk of the district court from which the appeal is prayed, directing the record or transcript, with a certified copy of such agreement, to be transmitted to the Supreme Court where it may be then holding its session. The case is therefore

Dismissed.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 178 (Friday, September 17, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51885-51886]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-20195]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK


Sunshine Act Meetings; Correction

AGENCY: Export-Import Bank.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Export-Import Bank published a notice in the Federal 
Register of September 14, 2021. This document is intended to correct 
the link to register for the meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: India Walker, External Enagagement 
Specialist, at 202-480-0062.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of a public meeting of the Advisory 
Committee to be held virtually, was announced on September 14, 2021. 
The following is the correct link to register for the meeting.
    Public Participation: The meeting will be open to public 
participation and time will be allotted for questions or comments 
submitted online. Members of the public may also file written 
statements before or after the meeting to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7a1f020e1f08141b163a1f021317541d150c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4c293438293e222d200c29342521622b233a">[email protected]</span></a>. Interested 
parties may register here for the meeting:

https://teams.microsoft.com/registration/
PAFTuZHHMk2Zb1GDkIVFJw,5M1LfonJMEi2VFUgYRv6oQ,i145n2l9vkmDj5btNlkuGw,OBD
NWGHni0u0T3ceNNIRZQ,dkSDmLQxcUOIzb6FFvE-yg,yZddqPI9TkSqQ2-

[[Page 51886]]

w2BOsbg?mode=read&tenantId=b953013c-c791-4d32-996f-518390854527.

Joyce B. Stone,
Assistant Corporate Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-20195 Filed 9-15-21; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD

_________________________________

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD,

Complainant

vs.

BENJAMIN FREDRICH ZACH,

Respondent.

_________________________________

Docket Number 2023-0442

Enforcement Activity No. 7826137

CONSENT ORDER

Issued: February 14, 2024

By Administrative Law Judge: Honorable Timothy G. Stueve

Appearances:

LT John Crow

Sector Virginia

For the Coast Guard

Benjamin Fredrich Zach, Pro Se

For Respondent
CONSENT ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

On or about January 23, 2024, the parties in this case submitted a Motion for Approval of 

Settlement Agreement and Entry of Consent Order to be approved as a settlement of the case 

under 33 C.F.R. § 20.502.

I have carefully reviewed the terms of the Settlement Agreement and find it is fair and 

reasonable and in substantial compliance with the requirements of 33 C.F.R. § 20.502.

ORDER

Upon consideration of the record, it is hereby ORDERED, the Settlement Agreement is 

APPROVED in full and incorporated herein by reference. This Consent Order shall constitute 

full, final, and complete adjudication of this proceeding.

Done and dated February 14, 2024, at

Alameda, California

 

_____________________

Hon. Timothy G. Stueve

Administrative Law Judge

U.S. Coast Guard
Dismissed; Opinion Filed November 27, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-19-01243-CV

JOHN BRADLEY MITCHELL AND KONAE SABRINA NOWELL, Appellants

V.

TRACY ALAN NOWELL, Appellee

On Appeal from the 86th Judicial District Court

Kaufman County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 97171-86

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Osborne, Partida-Kipness, and Pedersen, III

Opinion by Justice Partida-Kipness

Before the Court is the November 19, 2019 joint notice of settlement and request for 

dismissal of this appeal. We grant the motion and dismiss this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a).

191243F.P05

/Robbie Partida-Kipness/

ROBBIE PARTIDA-KIPNESS

JUSTICE
–2–

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

JOHN BRADLEY MITCHELL AND 

KONAE SABRINA NOWELL, Appellants

No. 05-19-01243-CV V.

TRACY ALAN NOWELL, Appellee

On Appeal from the 86th Judicial District 

Court, Kaufman County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 97171-86.

Opinion delivered by Justice PartidaKipness, Justices Osborne and Pedersen, III 

participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal.

Subject to any agreement of the parties, we ORDER that each party bear its own costs of 

this appeal.

Judgment entered this 27th day of November, 2019.
#### Delancy Jencks *v.*The United States.

*On the Proofs.*

*'This, like the preceding ease, presents only questions of fact: The ownership of the cotton, its seizure, sale, and payment into the Treasury of the net proceeds, and the loyalty of the claimantheing fully proved, a judgment is therefore rendered in his favor. It is printed as one of the decisions of the court.*

*Messrs. Riddle and Leshi*for the claimant:

The claimant is a colored man, residing at Savannah; his loyalty to the United States is clearly established.

The official records of the War Department show that three bales of upland cotton were reported in claimant’s name, and that the same were taken in the name of the United States. The Secretary of the Treasury reports that the net proceeds of the cotton amount to $176 56 per bale.

It is submitted that the claimant is clearly entitled to a judgment for the proceeds of his three bales of cotton.

*Mr. R. 8. Male,*special counsel of the Treasury, for the ■defendants.

*588Per Curiam:

The claimant is a colored, man, living at Savannah, Georgia. He proves that he owned three bales of cotton when the Union army captured that city. It was taken by the United States and sold and the proceeds paid into the Treasury. ITe proves his loyalty, and so is entitled to recover.

A judgment will be rendered in his favor for the net proceeds of three bales so soon as we shall be more fully advised as to the amount of such proceeds.

And now, to wit, May 26,3.869; The court, on due considera- ■ tion of the premises, find for the claimant for three bales of cotton, and do order, adjudge, and decree that the said Delancey Jencks have and recover of and from the United States the sum of five hundred and seventy-one dollars and twenty-nine cents ($57129.)
#### FARMERS’ LOAN & TRUST CO. v. MILBANK.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

December 18, 1896.)

Action by the Farmers’ Loan & Trust Company against Samuel W. Milbank, as receiver.

No opinion. Motion granted.
RIO GRANDE AT WAGON WHEEL GAPLatitude: 37.766Longitude: -106.831Elevation: None

RIO GRANDE AT WAGON WHEEL GAP

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Wager Gulch Site Page...



Wager Gulch

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Beartown Site Page...



Beartown

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Middle Creek Site Page...



Middle Creek

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Upper Rio Grande Site Page...



Upper Rio Grande