alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### PEOPLE v. ST. NICHOLAS BANK. In re KERR, et al.

(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department.

April 13, 1894.)

Appeal from special term, New York county.

Application by Thomas B. Kerr and others for an order directing Hugh J. Grant, as temporary receiver of the St. Nicholas Bank, to pay over certain sums deposited by petitioners in said bank before its failure. From an order in favor of petitioners, the receiver appeals. Reversed.

Argued before VAN BRUNT, P. J., and O’BRIEN and FOLLETT, JJ.

John M. Bowers, for appellant.

Edwin B. Smith, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

In accordance with the views expressed in the case of People v. St. Nicholas Bank (In re Lathrop) 28 N. Y. Supp. 407 (decided herewith), the order appealed from should be reversed, and the application denied, with costs.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 82 (Friday, April 27, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 21157]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-10490]


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

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

[FEMA-1364-DR]


Massachusetts; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, (FEMA-1364-DR), dated April 10, 
2001, and related determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 19, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Madge Dale, Response and Recovery 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, 
(202) 646-3772.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is hereby amended to include the 
following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely 
affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President 
in his declaration of April 10, 2001:

Bristol, Plymouth, Suffolk, and Worcester Counties for Individual 
Assistance.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, Community 
Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis 
Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services Program; 83.541, 
Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression 
Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family Grant (IFG) Program; 
83.544, Public Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing Program; 
83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

Robert J. Adamcik,
Deputy Associate Director, Response and Recovery Directorate.
[FR Doc. 01-10490 Filed 4-26-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6718-02-P
**Exhibit 23.1****Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**Stockholders and Board of DirectorsCeres Group, Inc.     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registrationstatement (No. 33-62657) on Form S-8 of Ceres Group,Inc. of our reports dated March 18, 2005, with respect tothe consolidated balance sheets of Ceres Group, Inc. as ofDecember 31, 2004 and 2003, and the related consolidatedstatements of operations, stockholders’ equity, and cashflows, for the years then ended, and all related financialstatement schedules, management’s assessment of theeffectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as ofDecember 31, 2004 and the effectiveness of internal controlover financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, whichreports appear in the December 31, 2004 annual report onForm 10-K of Ceres Group, Inc.     KPMG LLPColumbus, OhioMarch 18, 2005
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1997
<CASH>                                         166,192
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  174,747
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               604,611
<PP&E>                                       1,474,450
<DEPRECIATION>                                  72,898
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,087,842
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,990,596
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       829,050
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,087,842
<SALES>                                        376,822
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               376,822
<CGS>                                          357,246
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,370,325
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              43,349
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,394,088)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,394,088)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,394,088)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.70)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.70)
        

</TABLE>
H. R. 6399 

One Hundred Eleventh Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the fifth day of January, two thousand and ten 

An Act 

To improve certain administrative operations of the Office of the Architect of the 

Capitol, and for other purposes. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. CONSOLIDATION OF STAFF POSITIONS. 

(a) CONSOLIDATION.—Section 108 of the Legislative Branch 

Appropriations Act, 1991 (2 U.S.C. 1849) is amended to read as 

follows: 

‘‘SEC. 108. The Architect of the Capitol may fix the rate of 

basic pay for not more than 32 positions at a rate not to exceed 

the highest total rate of pay for the Senior Executive Service under 

subchapter VIII of chapter 53 of title 5, United States Code, for 

the locality involved.’’. 

(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 1203(e) of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2003 (2 U.S.C. 1805(e)) is amended 

by striking paragraph (3). 

(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this section 

shall apply with respect to pay periods beginning on or after the 

date of the enactment of this Act. 

SEC. 2. AVAILABILITY OF APPROPRIATED FUNDS TO ACQUIRE 

BUILDING. 

(a) AVAILABILITY.—The amounts described in subsection (b) 

shall be available to the Architect of the Capitol for the acquisition 

(through purchase, lease, transfer from another Federal entity, 

or otherwise) of real property for the use of the Capitol Police. 

(b) AMOUNTS DESCRIBED.—The amounts described in this subsection are amounts appropriated to, and remaining available for 

obligation by, the Architect of the Capitol under the heading 

‘‘Architect of the Capitol, Capitol Police Buildings and Grounds’’ 

or under the heading ‘‘Architect of the Capitol, Capitol Police 
H. R. 6399—2 

Buildings, Grounds and Security’’ in any Act making appropriations 

for the legislative branch for fiscal years 2007 through 2010. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 1, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 21755]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-10951]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[EB Docket No. 01-99; DA 01-1044]


Designation of Consolidated Hearing To Adjudicate Damages Claims 
in the End User Common Line Charge Proceeding

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: On April 24, 2001, the Enforcement Bureau of the Federal 
Communications Commission (``Commission'') released a Hearing 
Designation Order (``HDO'') initiating a consolidated hearing to 
adjudicate the damages claims of several complainant independent 
payphone providers (``Complainants'') against certain local exchange 
carriers (``Defendants''). To avail themselves of the opportunity to 
participate in this hearing, the parties are required to file a written 
Notice of Appearance with the Office of the Commission Secretary, 
stating an intention to appear on the date fixed for the hearing and 
present evidence on the issues specified in the HDO, within 20 days of 
the mailing of the HDO to the parties.

DATES: The HDO was mailed to the parties on April 24, 2001. The parties 
are required to file their Notice of Appearance by May 14, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit the Notice of Appearance to the Office of the 
Commission Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th 
Street, SW, Room TW-204B, Washington DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tejal Mehta, 202-418-7397.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission has previously ruled that the 
Defendants violated section 201(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, 
as amended, and part 69 of the Commission's rules by improperly 
assessing End User Common Line charges upon the Complainants. See C.F. 
Communications Corp., et al. v. Century Telephone of Wisconsin, Inc., 
et. al., Memorandum Opinion and Order on Remand, 15 FCC Rcd 8759 
(2000). The HDO resolves certain outstanding issues and refers others, 
including whether Complainants are entitled to an award of damages, to 
an Administrative Law Judge.

Federal Communications Commission.
David H. Solomon,
Chief, Enforcement Bureau.
[FR Doc. 01-10951 Filed 5-1-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
# CE2010137EN.01005101.xml

| 27.5.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 137/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.5.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 137/51

---

Thursday 2 April 2009Community statistics on the information society ***I

P6_TA(2009)0197

European Parliament legislative resolution of 2 April 2009 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 808/2004 concerning Community statistics on the information society (COM(2008)0677 – C6-0381/2008 – 2008/0201(COD))

2010/C 137 E/11

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2008)0677),

having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 285(1) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6-0381/2008),

having regard to the opinion of the Statistical Programme Committee, established by Council Decision 89/382/EEC, Euratom (1),

1

having regard to Rule 51 and 43(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A6-0128/2009),

| 1. | Approves the Commission proposal as amended; |
| --- | --- |

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; |
| --- | --- |

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. |
| --- | --- |

3.

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

---

(1)  OJ L 181, 28.6.1989, p. 47.

1

---

Thursday 2 April 2009P6_TC1-COD(2008)0201

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 2 April 2009 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EC) No .../2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 808/2004 concerning Community statistics on the information society

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position at first reading corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EC) No 1006/2009.)

---
#### LATIMORE, Respondent, v. LEDERMAN et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court General Term, Fourth Department.

May 18, 1894.)

Action by Moses Latimore against Moses Lederman and another.

Argued before HARDIN, P. J„ and MARTIN and MERWIN, JJ.

No opinion. Judgment and order reversed on the facts, and a new trial granted, without costs of the appeal to either party, upon the payment of costs of former trial within 20 days. If such costs are not so paid, judgment and order affirmed, with costs of the appeal to the respondent.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Calvin Siplin, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him of second degree robbery and third degree grand larceny, defendant’s sole contention is that he was denied his statutory right to a speedy trial (CPL 30.30). The action was commenced on May 14, 1986 by the filing of a felony complaint. The People *959announced their readiness for trial on December 15, 1986, 215 days after the commencement of the action. The issue is whether there are periods of delay totaling at least 31 days that are chargeable to defendant. The parties focus on an adjournment from November 7 to December 15, 1986, which they deem critical, but our review of the record indicates that there are other periods of delay which are chargeable to defendant and which result in exclusion, of periods aggregating more than the 31 days necessary to bring the People’s declaration of readiness within the six-month period (CPL 30.30 [1] [a]; *People v Dean,*45 NY2d 651, 656-659; *see, People v Lomax,*50 NY2d 351, 358, n 2). The 21-day period between May 20 and June 10, 1986 is chargeable to defendant. The case was adjourned with the express consent of defense counsel for "screening” (CPL 30.30 [4] [b]). Similarly, the one-day adjournment from November 6 to November 7, 1986 was. requested by defense counsel in order to enable him to file bail documents (CPL 30.30 [4] [b]). Finally, the 18-day period from November 24 to December 12, 1986 is chargeable to defendant as a "reasonable period of delay resulting from other proceedings”, viz., defendant’s demand to produce (CPL 30.30 [4] [a]). Defendant concedes that he served a "discovery agreement” upon the People on November 24 and that the People supplied him with discovery material on December 12. The discovery agreement specifically states that it is to be treated as a demand to produce, and we conclude that the People’s compliance with the discovery demand within 18 days was reasonable.

The aforementioned periods of delay total 40 days. Subtracting such period from the time between commencement and the People’s declaration of readiness renders such declaration timely. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Mark, J. — robbery, second degree; grand larceny, third degree.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Denman, Green and Pine, JJ.
<PAGE>

                                                              EXHIBIT 99.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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 Telecommunications Income Fund XI
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Thomas J. Berthel, Chief Executive Officer of Berthel Fisher & Company
Leasing, Inc., General Partner 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:

          (1) The Company's 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.


November 12, 2002                      /s/ Thomas J. Berthel
                                       President and Chief Executive Officer
                                       Berthel Fisher & Company Leasing, Inc.
                                       General Partner
                                       Telecommunications Income Fund XI, L.P.

                                       15
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket Nos. 44076 & 44077

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

MICHAEL PAUL MAGILL,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2016 Unpublished Opinion No. 813

Filed: December 9, 2016

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada

County. Hon. Jason D. Scott, District Judge. 

Judgments of conviction and unified sentence of fifteen years, with a minimum 

period of confinement of five years, for sexual battery of a minor child sixteen or 

seventeen years of age; a consecutive unified sentence of fifteen years, with a 

minimum period of confinement of five years, for sexual abuse of a child under 

the age of sixteen years; and a concurrent unified sentence of ten years, with a 

minimum period of confinement of five years, for sexual exploitation of a child, 

affirmed. 

Nevin, Benjamin, McKay & Bartlett LLP; Deborah A. Whipple, Boise, for 

appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before MELANSON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge;

and GRATTON, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM 

In Docket No. 44076, Michael Paul Magill pled guilty to one count of sexual battery of a 

minor child sixteen or seventeen years of age, I.C. § 18-1508A, and one count of sexual abuse of 

a child under the age of sixteen years, I.C. § 18-1506(1)(b). In Docket No. 44077, Magill pled 

guilty to one count of sexual exploitation of a child. I.C. § 18-1507(2)(a). In exchange for his 
2

guilty pleas, additional charges were dismissed. The district court sentenced Magill to a unified 

term of fifteen years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years, for sexual battery of a 

minor child sixteen or seventeen years of age; a consecutive unified term of fifteen years, with a 

minimum period of confinement of five years, for sexual abuse of a child under the age of 

sixteen years; and a concurrent unified term of ten years, with a minimum period of confinement 

of five years, for sexual exploitation of a child. Magill appeals.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the 

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and 

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez, 121 Idaho 114, 117-18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014-

15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez, 106 Idaho 447, 449-51, 680 P.2d 869, 871-73 (Ct. App. 

1984); State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing 

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver, 144 Idaho 

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record 

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Magill’s judgments of conviction and sentences are affirmed.
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

                                    FORM 10-K

                ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 or 15 (d) OF
                       THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934


For fiscal year ended September 30, 1996       Commission file Number 0-7376

Hynes & Howes Insurance Counselors, Inc.
       (Exact name of registrant as specified in its' charter)


              Iowa                                  42-0948341
(State or other jurisdiction          I.R.S. Employer Identification No.
of incorporation or organization)


2920 Harrison St., Davenport, Iowa  52803
(Address of principal                 (Zip Code)
 executive office)

Registrant's telephone number, including area code     (319) 326-6401

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12 (b) of the Act:

Title of each class                 Name of each exchange on which registered

None                                None-filing pursuant to Section 12 (g)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12 (g) of the Act:


                   Common Stock, No Par Value
                         (Title of Class)
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all annual,
quarterly and other reports required to be filed with the Commission and (2) has
been
subject to the filing requirements for at least the past ninety (90) days.
Yes  X  No

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer's classes of
common stock, as of the close of the period covered by this report.

11,222,699