alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           2,142
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  112,419
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (2,462)
<INVENTORY>                                     81,692
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               212,856
<PP&E>                                         206,724
<DEPRECIATION>                               (127,258)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 323,493
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          140,490
<BONDS>                                         36,184
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        16,475
<OTHER-SE>                                      96,364
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   323,493
<SALES>                                        694,490
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               694,490
<CGS>                                          581,649
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  673,487
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,025
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,725
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 14,495
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,066
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             10,429
<DISCONTINUED>                                   (254)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    10,175
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .79
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .78
        

</TABLE>
Case 1:07-cv-04420-AKH Document 2 Filed 11/12/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-04420-AKH Document 2 Filed 11/12/2007 Page 2 of 2
#### Raymond T. Heffernan et al., Respondents, v Village of Munsey Park, Appellant, et al., Defendants.

In a proceeding pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e for leave to serve a late notice of claim, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Lockman, J.), entered March 5,1986, which granted the application.

Ordered that the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, to hear and report on the questions of whether proper service of the judgment appealed from with notice of entry was made upon the appellant, and, if so, when that service was made, and the appeal is held in abeyance in the interim.

The petitioners contend that this appeal must be dismissed as untimely since the notice of appeal was not served or filed within 30 days after service upon the appellant of a copy of the judgment appealed from *(see,*CPLR 5513 [a]; 5515 [1]). The judgment granting the petitioners leave to file a late notice of claim pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e is dated March 5, 1986, and was entered on March 6, 1986. The notice of appeal filed by the appellant Village of Munsey Park is dated May 14, 1986. The petitioners’ affidavit of service, sworn to March 25, 1986, indicates that a copy of the judgment with notice of entry was served by mail upon the village on March *14025, 1986. The village denies receipt of the judgment. In order for an affidavit to constitute valid proof of service by mail, the affiant must have either personal knowledge of the mailing or the affiant must have personal knowledge of the procedure which was used in the handling and eventual mailing of the documents served *(see, Anzalone v State Farm Mut. Ins. Co.,*92 AD2d 238; *Capra v Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co.,*43 AD2d 986). The petitioners’ affidavit of service is insufficient to establish proper service by mail since the affiant did not personally mail the judgment nor is there any indication that the affiant had personal knowledge of the office procedure used in mailing it. Where, as in the case at bar, the party denies receipt of a judgment purportedly served by mail and there is insufficient evidence of proper service, a hearing is required for the resolution of this issue *(see, 14 Second Ave. Realty Corp. v Szalay,*16 AD2d 919). Accordingly, the instant appeal will be held in abeyance pending remittitur to the Supreme Court to hear and report on the issue of whether proper service of the judgment which is the subject of this appeal was made, and, if so, when that service was made. Niehoff, J. P., Weinstein, Rubin and Hooper, JJ., concur.
Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH     Document 25      Filed 09/13/2007     Page 1 of 3

Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH     Document 25      Filed 09/13/2007     Page 2 of 3

Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH     Document 25      Filed 09/13/2007     Page 3 of 3
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

 

The Board of Directorsand Shareholders

Evans &Sutherland Computer Corporation

 

                We consent to incorporation by reference in theRegistration Statements Nos. 33-39632, 333-53305, 333-58733, 333-104754, and 333-118277 onForms S-8 and Registration Statements No. 333-09657 on Form S-3 ofEvans & Sutherland Computer Corporation of our report datedMarch 31, 2006, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets ofEvans & Sutherland Computer Corporation as of December 31, 2005and December 31, 2004, and the related consolidated statements ofoperations, stockholders’ equity (deficit) and comprehensive loss, and cashflows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31,2005 and related financial statement schedule, which report appears in theDecember 31, 2005 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Evans &Sutherland Computer Corporation. 

 

                As discussed inNote 3 of the consolidated financial statements, the Company has restated itsconsolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2004 and2003.

 

 

**KPMG LLP**

 

Salt Lake City, Utah

March 31, 2006

 

----
NOTICE TO CLERK OF COURT: Please accept this Initiating Complaint as an initial pleading 

pursuant to CMO __, dated ____________, of Hon. Alvin K. Hellerstein in In Re World Trade 

Center Lower Manhattan Disaster Site Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH). 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

--------------------------------------------------------------X 

 

IN RE WORLD TRADE CENTER LOWER 

MANHATTAN DISASTER SITE LITIGATION 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------X 

21 MC 102 (AKH) 

--------------------------------------------------------------X 

XXXXX, 

 Plaintiff(s), 

 -againstXXXXX, 

 Defendants. 

--------------------------------------------------------------X 

 XX Civ. XXXX (AKH) 

INITIATING COMPLAINT

Pursuant to Case Management Order No. __ (“CMO __”) dated June __, 2007 by Hon. 

Alvin K. Hellerstein, U.S.D.J., in In Re World Trade Center Lower Manhattan Disaster Site 

Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH), Plaintiff(s) hereby submit this Initiating Complaint against the 

above named Defendants and state: 

1. Plaintiff ____________ (XXXX) [Å last 4 digits of social security number] 

currently resides at ______________. 

2. Plaintiff(s) have a claim for injury against the Defendants named above that 

would be encompassed within the scope of the In Re World Trade Center Lower Manhattan 

Disaster Site Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH). 

3. Plaintiffs will file a fully complete Check-Off Complaint under this docket 

number within 30 days of the filing of this Initiating Complaint. 

Case 1:07-cv-05317-AKH Document 2-4 Filed 06/29/2007 Page 1 of 2
NOTICE TO CLERK OF COURT: Please accept this Initiating Complaint as an initial pleading 

pursuant to CMO __, dated ____________, of Hon. Alvin K. Hellerstein in In Re World Trade 

Center Lower Manhattan Disaster Site Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH). 

Dated: _____ __, 200X 

{law firm name} 

Attorney(s) for 

Plaintiff(s)_______________________ 

By: ________ 

 {name} 

{law firm address} 

Telephone: _______________ 

Case 1:07-cv-05317-AKH Document 2-4 Filed 06/29/2007 Page 2 of 2
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Rocco Mininni, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Kuffner, J.), rendered February 5, 1987, convicting him of burglary in the second degree and grand larceny in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

On two occasions, the defendant requested, and was given, additional time to secure a transcript of a preliminary hearing. On the afternoon of jury selection, he announced that he was ready for trial pending receipt of this transcript. The following afternoon, the defendant announced that he was ready for trial without any qualification whatsoever, and trial began. There was no indication that the defendant had not yet received the transcript, or that he did not want to proceed without it. Nor did he raise any objection concerning the failure to receive the transcript prior to the defendant’s cross-examination of the police trial witnesses who had also been hearing witnesses. Not until the end of the People’s case did the defendant argue that his cross-examination had been restricted by the fact that he had not been provided with the transcript. Under the circumstances, the trial court’s refusal to grant any relief at that time was not an improvident exercise of discretion.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The record fully supports the defendant’s conviction. His fingerprint was found on the inside glass of a basement window in the premises which had been forced open, and the jury could properly have concluded from this evidence that the defendant was guilty of the crimes charged beyond a reasonable doubt *(see, People v Mercado,*117 AD2d 627, 628).

*755We have considered the defendant’s remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental *pro se*brief, and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J. P., Brown, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 10.2

  

  

  

  
    

    

    

    December 18, 2019

    

    

    James E. Evans

    Great American Insurance Group Tower

    301 East Fourth Street

    Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

    

    

    
      	 	
              RE:

            	
              Consulting Agreement Extension

            


    

    

    

    Dear Jim:

    

    

    The purpose of this letter is to set forth in writing our agreement concerning an extension of your service as an executive consultant to American
      Financial Group, Inc. (“AFG”) through 2020.

    

    

    To that end, you and the Company hereby agree to extend your current consulting arrangement through December 31, 2020.  During the term, you agree to
      provide consulting services to AFG and related organizations, including, without limitation, the subsidiaries and affiliates of AFG and their shareholders, officers, directors, employees and agents (collectively, the “Company”), making yourself
      available to answer questions and consult with the Company upon reasonable request.  This consulting arrangement shall be on the same terms as provided in our current consulting arrangement, except as provided herein.  Specifically, the Consulting
      Fee to be paid you for your consulting services to the Company during 2020 shall be $150,000, paid in quarterly installments.

     

    If after review of this letter, you find it acceptable, please sign, date and return an original copy to me.

     

    	

          	
            Very truly yours,

          
	 	 
	

          	
            AMERICAN FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.

          
	 	 
	

          	
            By:

          	/s/ Carl H. Lindner III	 


    	 	
            Carl H. Lindner III

          
	
            

            

          	Co-Chief Executive Officer


    ACCEPTED AND AGREED:

    

    

    
      	
              
                /s/ James E. Evans

              

            	 
	
              
                James E. Evans

              

            	 
	
               

            	 	 
	Dated:	
              December 18, 2019
Case 1:07-cv-05365-AKH     Document 6      Filed 09/05/2007     Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1718 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1718

  To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for clarification 
 regarding the children to whom entitlement to educational assistance 
 may be transferred under the Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 13, 2019

Mr. Foster (for himself and Mrs. Rodgers of Washington) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Veterans' 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for clarification 
 regarding the children to whom entitlement to educational assistance 
 may be transferred under the Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``GI Education Benefits Fairness 
Act''.

SEC. 2. CLARIFICATION REGARDING THE CHILDREN TO WHOM ENTITLEMENT TO 
              EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE MAY BE TRANSFERRED UNDER THE POST 
              9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.

    (a) In General.--Section 3319(c) of title 38, United States Code, 
is amended to read as follows:
    ``(c) Eligible Dependents.--
            ``(1) Transfer.--An individual approved to transfer an 
        entitlement to educational assistance under this section may 
        transfer the individual's entitlement as follows:
                    ``(A) To the individual's spouse.
                    ``(B) To one or more of the individual's children.
                    ``(C) To a combination of the individuals referred 
                to in subparagraphs (A) and (B).
            ``(2) Definition of children.--For purposes of this 
        subsection, the term `children' includes dependents described 
        in section 1072(2)(I) of title 10.''.
    (b) Applicability.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply with respect to educational assistance payable under chapter 33 
of title 38, United States Code, before, on, or after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                       561,370
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       511,058
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                   0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                   0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                        0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                    13,596,933
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                      13,471,525
<LOANS>                                   29,195,766
<ALLOWANCE>                                  101,529
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            47,615,156
<DEPOSITS>                                34,446,403
<SHORT-TERM>                               2,100,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          223,151
<LONG-TERM>                                5,840,456
<COMMON>                                       3,333
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<OTHER-SE>                                 5,001,813
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>            47,615,156
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              570,578
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            219,427
<INTEREST-OTHER>                              25,182
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             815,187
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           405,463
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           516,161
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        299,026
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  5,920
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              242,694
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               85,539
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                    62,139
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                  62,139
<EPS-BASIC>                                   0.20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   0.20
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                  2.68
<LOANS-NON>                                    8,190
<LOANS-PAST>                                       0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             104,735
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  9,126
<RECOVERIES>                                       0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            101,529
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         101,529
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            0


</TABLE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>



                                                                                                       EXHIBIT (12)

                                     CAROLINA TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY
                                              COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF
                                             EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES


                                                 1997           1996          1995          1994          1993
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       (in thousands)
Earnings
<S>                                        <C>            <C>          <C>            <C>           <C>        
    Income before income taxes and         $  199,639     $    188,285 $    158,442   $    151,120  $    76,323
      extraordinary items
    Capitalized interest                         (202)            (209)        (844)          (140)         (54)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subtotal                                      199,437          188,076      157,598        150,980       76,269
                                           ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fixed charges
    Interest charges                           22,531           21,471       23,257         22,245       21,960
    Interest factor of operating rents          1,325            1,554        1,280          1,039        2,320
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total fixed charges                            23,856           23,025       24,537         23,284       24,280
                                           ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Earnings, as adjusted                      $  223,293     $    211,101 $    182,135   $    174,264  $   100,549
                                           ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges            9.36             9.17         7.42 (1)       7.48         4.14 (2)
                                           ------------------------------------------------------------------------
</TABLE>


(1)  Excluding  the 1995 $8 million restructuring  charge, the ratio of earnings
     to fixed charges would have been 7.75.

(2)  Excluding the 1993 $46 million merger and  integration  charges  related to
     the merger of Sprint and Centel, the ratio of earnings to fixed  charges
     would have been 6.05.

NOTE:    The ratios were  computed by dividing  fixed  charges into the sum of
         earnings  (after  certain  adjustments)  and  fixed  charges.  Earnings
         include  income  before  income  taxes and  extraordinary  items,  less
         capitalized  interest.  Fixed  charges  include  interest  on all  debt
         (including  amortization  of debt  issuance  costs)  and  the  interest
         component of operating rents.
Case 1:07-cv-05317-AKH Document 21 Filed 03/17/2008 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-05317-AKH Document 21 Filed 03/17/2008 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.2

                    Certification of Chief Financial Officer
                         Pursuant to Section 906 of the
                           Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

     In connection with this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of United Tennessee
Bankshares, Inc. I, Chris H. Triplett, CFO of United Tennessee Bankshares, Inc.,
certify, 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 this report fairly presents,  in all material
     respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of  operations  of United
     Tennessee Bankshares, Inc.

Date:  August 8, 2005                  /s/Chris H. Triplett
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Chris H. Triplett
                                       Chief Financial Officer