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

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 670 

To authorize Federal payment to first responders for costs associated with 

providing emergency services at the international borders of the United 

States, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 26, 2009 

Mr. FILNER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To authorize Federal payment to first responders for costs 

associated with providing emergency services at the international borders of the United States, and for other 

purposes. 

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 ‘‘Save our Border Com5 munities Act of 2009’’. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•HR 670 IH

1 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZING FEDERAL PAYMENT TO FIRST RE2 SPONDERS FOR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH 

3 PROVIDING EMERGENCY SERVICES AT THE 

4 INTERNATIONAL BORDERS OF THE UNITED 

5 STATES. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Homeland Secu7 rity shall, from amounts appropriated under subsection 

8 (b), provide payment to first responders, including police, 

9 firefighters, and emergency medical technicians, for costs 

10 associated with providing emergency services at the inter11 national borders of the United States, but only to the ex12 tent that such costs are not otherwise reimbursed through 

13 any Federal program and cannot otherwise be recovered. 

14 (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 

15 authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary for each 

16 fiscal year, beginning with fiscal year 2010, such sums as 

17 may be necessary to carry out this section. 

Æ 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
Priority 1=Law/reg/directive 

2=Mission-critical 3=Frequently requested 4=Other (Some inventory items may fall into more than one priority. Assign them the highest priority. ) 

Audience(s) (May select >1) All Agribusiness Conservationists Consumers Cooperatives Educators/Students Landowners Media Parents/Caregivers Producers Researchers Rural Communities USDA Employees 

Subject Area(s) (May select >1)AllAG=Agriculture EO=Education/Outreach FN=Food/Nutrition LR=Laws/Regulations MT=Marketing/Trade NRE=Natural Resources/Environment RS=Research/Science RCD=Rural/Community Development TR=Travel/Recreation UER=USDA Employee Resources 

Content Description (Include why it was selected for inclusion and any site analytics or audience feedback/usability results.) 

Content Status A=Available on site I=In Process P=Planned N/A=Not applicable 

1 All LR 

USDA Privacy & Security Statement -- Required by law,regulation, Presidential directive, or other official directiveor to ensure national security. A

1 All LR 

Quality of Information --Required by law, regulation, Presidential directive, orother official directive or to ensure national security. A 

1 All LR 

NO FEAR Act Statement -Required by law, regulation, Presidential directive, orother official directive or to ensure national security. A 

1 All LR

Accessibility Statement --Required by law, regulation, Presidential directive, orother official directive or to ensure national security. A

1 All LR

FOIA Statement --Required by law, regulation, Presidential directive, orother official directive or to ensure national security. A
u

1 All LR

Non-Discrimination Statement --Required by law, regulation, Presidential directive, orother official directive or to ensure national security.

A

1 All LR

Disclaimer Statement --Required by law, regulation, Presidential directive, orother official directive or to ensure national security.

A

1 All LR

United States Grain Standards Act and associated regulations

A

1 All LR

Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 and associated regulations

A

1 All LR

Packers & Stockyards Act, 1921, as Amended and associated regulations

A

1 All LR

Section 1324, Food Security Act of 1985 and associated regulations

A

2 All All

News Releases - published as available A, I

2 Agribusiness AG, LR

Information on Inspection Services

A

2 All All

Information on US Standards for Grain

A

2 Agribusiness All

FGIS Forms -- Published as available

A

2 All All

Publications - published as available

A

2 All All

Directives - published as available

A

2 All EO

eLearning Courses, Brochures -- Published as necessary for educational purposes

A

3 All AG

Information on Agency Officials includingbiographical information and an organizationalchart. 

A

3 Agribusiness AG Map of regional offices

A

3 All EO, FN, LR, MT, RS, UER Help: Current site content incl

A
3 All All Links to GAM Applications P
Case 1:07-cv-05389-AKH Document 9 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 1 of 4Case 1:07-cv-05389-AKH Document 9 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 2 of 4Case 1:07-cv-05389-AKH Document 9 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 3 of 4Case 1:07-cv-05389-AKH Document 9 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 4 of 4
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 98-10558

Summary Calendar

_____________________

MARK VENTURA,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

RESCUE INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:95-CV-2578-J

March 25, 1999

Before POLITZ, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Mark Ventura appeals the judgment as a matter of law in favor

of Rescue Industries Incorporated, following a jury verdict in

favor of Ventura on a state law retaliation claim.

Ventura, a former Rescue employee (dispatcher), claimed that,

after he reported instances of sexual harassment concerning him and

a co-worker to Rescue’s human resources manager, his co-workers and

supervisors made derogatory comments to him, a promised wage

increase was decreased, and some of his job responsibilities were
- 2 -

removed. Finally, after Ventura taped (and distributed) a coworker’s telephone conversation, he was terminated. Ventura

claimed that, in violation of the Texas Commission on Human Rights

Act, he was terminated in retaliation for complaining about conduct

prohibited by Title VII; and that Rescue violated his privacy by

revealing that Ventura is a homosexual. 

The jury found for Ventura on the retaliation claim and

awarded damages of approximately $270; it did not find a violation

of privacy by Rescue. The district court then granted Rescue’s

motion for a judgment as a matter of law on the retaliation claim.

Ventura contends that he presented sufficient evidence of

retaliatory motives to support the jury’s verdict.

Judgments as a matter of law are reviewed de novo. After

viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, we

will “uphold the jury verdict unless there is no legally sufficient

evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find as the jury did”.

Brady v. Houston Independent Sch. Dist., 113 F.3d 1419, 1422 (5th

Cir.), rehearing en banc denied, 121 F.3d 706 (5th Cir. 1997)

(internal quotations omitted); see also Texas Farm Bureau v. United

States, 53 F.3d 120, 123 (5th Cir. 1995); FED. R. CIV. P. 50(a)(1).

We affirm for essentially the reasons stated by the district court.

See Ventura v. Rescue Indus., Inc., 3:95-CV-2578-J (N.D. Tex. Apr.

15, 1998).

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                        5,525,428
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                        3,593,965
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                      0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                      0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                       10,627,937
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                         10,790,476
<LOANS>                                      25,090,909
<ALLOWANCE>                                     188,869
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               44,006,844
<DEPOSITS>                                   34,591,051
<SHORT-TERM>                                    900,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             109,378
<LONG-TERM>                                   3,106,149
<COMMON>                                          3,703
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<OTHER-SE>                                    5,296,563
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               44,006,844
<INTEREST-LOAN>                               1,549,456
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               299,695
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                115,067
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                              1,964,218
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                            1,197,503
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            1,237,918
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           726,300
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   133,856
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                    0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 681,836
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  28,269
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       28,269
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                     28,269
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      0.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      0.22
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                     2.55
<LOANS-NON>                                      11,516
<LOANS-PAST>                                          0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                      0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                       0 
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                149,795
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    93,849
<RECOVERIES>                                          0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               188,869
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                              5,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                   0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                         183,869
        

</TABLE>
(105 So. 718)

#### Ex parte CORONA COAL CO. et al. CORONA COAL CO. et al. v. SEXTON.

(6 Div. 505.)

(Supreme Court of Alabama.

Oct. 15, 1925.)

Evidence <&wkey;47l(l3) — Not erroneous to permit question whether plaintiff was as able to work now as before injury.

In action for injury sustained by reason of defendant’s drug clerk selling wrong drug, it was not error to permit question of whether plaintiff was as able to work now as he was before injury.1

cg^jFor other eases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes

Certiorari to Court of Appeals.

Petition of the Corona Coal Company and Weyman Hembree for certiorari to the Court of Appeals to review and revise the judgment and 'decision there rendered in the case of Corona Coal Co. et al. v. Sexton, 105 So. 716.

Writ denied.

The following question was propounded to plaintiff, testifying as 'a witness in his own behalf, the overruling of defendants’ objection to which is made the basis of assignment of error numbered 2: “Q. Are you as able now to work as you were before [the alleged injury]?”

A. F. Fite, of Jasper, for appellants.

It is not necessary to repeat an objection, and the ground for it, every time an additional question to elicit the same illegal testimony is propounded to a witness. Nat. Cas. Co. v. Dunn, 209 Ala. 484, 96 So. 576.

Gray & Powell, of Jasper, for appellee.

Brief of counsel did not reach the Reporter.

PER CURIAM.

No reversible error is found in the opinion and decision of the Court of Appeals. The court here notes, however, its opinion that the allowance of the question made the subject of appellants’ assignment of error No. 2 on the record of appeal to the Court of Appeals was not error, and that the authority of the decision of this court in National Casualty Co. v. Dunn, 209 Ala. 484, 96 So. 576, where it was held that repeated objections to questions attempting to elicit illegal evidence are not necessary to raise the point on appeal, is not to be considered as impaired by the refusal of the writ in this case.

Writ denied.

ANDERSON, C. X, and SAYRE, GARDNER, and MILLER, JJ., .concur.
#### STATE OF CONNECTICUT *v.*THEO SARGENT

*Elizabeth M. Inkster,*senior assistant public defender, in support of the petition.

*James M. Ralls,*assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

Decided March 2, 2005

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 87 Conn. App. 24 (AC 23863), is denied.
##### 



Exhibit 10.11.01 December 10, 2004 James R. McQueen
262 Essex Road
Old Saybrook, CT 06475 Dear Jim: The Connecticut Water Company agrees to enter into a consulting arrangement with you for a period
of not more than three years, starting on January 1, 2005, at an annual retainer rate payable to
you of $8,000. In addition to the annual retainer, the Company agrees to pay you $75 per hour for
hours worked, and such hours worked should not exceed 500 hours per year. This arrangement has been approved by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors who has
authorized Marshall T. Chiaraluce to sign on the Companys behalf. Your signature acknowledges your
acceptance of the terms herein. Sincerely,/s/ Michele G. DiAcriMichele G. DiAcriCorporate SecretaryTHE CONNECTICUT WATER COMPANY
    
    JAMES R. McQUEENMarshall T. ChiaralucePresident, CEO, and Chairman/s/ Marshall T. Chiaraluce
    
    /s/ James R. McQueenDate: December 10, 2004
    
    Date: December 10, 2004Cc: Maureen P. Westbrook
# C_2009133EN.01000501.xml

| 12.6.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 133/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.6.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 133/5

---

| 1. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amounts of the fines as regards the infringement on the beer market in the Netherlands. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amounts of the fines as regards the infringement on the beer market in the Netherlands.

| 2. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission, as regards the infringement on the beer market in the Netherlands, on the amount of reduction of the fines based on the 1996 Commission Notice on the non-imposition or reduction of fines in cartel cases. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission, as regards the infringement on the beer market in the Netherlands, on the amount of reduction of the fines based on the 1996 Commission Notice on the non-imposition or reduction of fines in cartel cases.

| 3. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission, as regards the infringement on the beer market in the Netherlands, on the exceptional reduction of the amount of the fines in view of the length of the procedure. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission, as regards the infringement on the beer market in the Netherlands, on the exceptional reduction of the amount of the fines in view of the length of the procedure.

| 4. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines for the infringement on the beer market in the Netherlands. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines for the infringement on the beer market in the Netherlands.

| 5. | The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

5.

The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Official Journal of the European Union

---
##### 



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 Annual Report of Connecticut Water Service, Inc. (the  Company) on Form
10-K for the period ending December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the Report), I, Marshall T. Chiaraluce, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, hereby 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 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. /s/ Marshall T. Chiaraluce
Marshall T. Chiaraluce
Chief Executive Officer
March 31, 2005
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Project Nos. 11616-000-Michigan; 2566-010-Michigan]

In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission's) regulations, 18 CFR part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897), the Office of Energy Projects has reviewed the City of Portland's application for original license for the operating unlicensed Portland Municipal Hydroelectric Project, and Consumers Energy Company's new license for the continued operation of the Webber Hydroelectric Project, located on the Grand River, in the City of Portland, Ionia County, Michigan, and has prepared a Final Environmental Assessment (FEA) for the projects. In the FEA, the Commission's staff has analyzed the potential environmental effects of the projects and has concluded that licensing the projects, with staff's recommended measures, would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.

                    Copies of the FEA are available for review in the Public Reference Branch, Room 2-A, of the Commission's offices at 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. The DEA may also be viewed on                           ( print page 23249)                        the web at                     *http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm.*                     Please call (202) 208-2222 for assistance. If you have any questions regarding this notice, please contact Tom Dean at (202) 219-2778.                

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01-11483  Filed 5-7-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit (10)(a)

    

    

    

    

    

    

    Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

    

    

    

    

    We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in
      Post-Effective Amendment No. 39 to the 1933 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-141763) and Amendment No. 385 to the 1940 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 811-08441), and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) April 1, 2019,
      with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln Life & Annuity Company of New York and (b) April 16, 2019, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln Life & Annuity Variable Annuity Account H for the registration of interests in
      a separate account under individual flexible payment deferred variable annuity contracts.

    

    

    

    

    /s/Ernst & Young, LLP

    

    

    

    

    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

    December 20, 2019
<PAGE>

                                                                Exhibit 23(a)

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 
2-82662,2-85336, 2-94926, 33-12280, 33-16088, 33-28764, 33-45474, 33-63289, 
33-64039, 33-70960, 333-14529, 333-03139, 333-26149, 333-44495, and 333-53175 
each on Form S-8 and Registration Statement Nos. 33-62715, 333-05971, 
3330-20209, 333-44493 and 333-59005 each on Form S-3 of our report dated 
January 18, 1999, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Robotic 
Vision Systems, Inc. for the fiscal year ended September 30, 1998.

Boston, Massachusetts
January 18, 1999
Clear All

        14 September 2023    

#                     Hampton Roads Ombudsman Appreciation Dinner                 

                 Good evening – and thank you, Joel (Vargas), for the kind introduction and for the important work you do with the U-S-A-A team across the nation on behalf of our nation’s warfighters, our veterans, and our families. It is a true honor to be here celebrating those who give of themselves and their            

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website