alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                   EXHIBIT 11

             INTERNATIONAL MULTIFOODS CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

                Computation of Earnings (Loss) per Common Share
                                   (unaudited)

                    (in thousands, except per share amounts)




<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                     THREE MONTHS ENDED      NINE MONTHS ENDED
                                     ------------------     -------------------
                                     Nov. 25,   Nov. 30,     Nov. 25,   Nov. 30,
                                        2000       1999         2000       1999
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

<S>                                  <C>        <C>          <C>       <C>
Average shares of
   common stock outstanding           18,740     18,760       18,739     18,755
Dilutive potential common shares         143         49           97         78
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total adjusted average shares         18,883     18,809       18,836     18,833
===============================================================================

Earnings from continuing operations   $8,503     $8,129      $18,532   $ 17,782
Loss from discontinued operations          -          -            -    (19,560)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net earnings (loss) applicable
   to common stock                    $8,503     $8,129      $18,532   $ (1,778)
===============================================================================

Basic earnings (loss) per share:
   Continuing operations              $  .45     $  .43      $   .99   $    .95
   Discontinued operations                 -          -            -      (1.04)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Total                            $  .45     $  .43      $   .99   $   (.09)
===============================================================================

Diluted earnings (loss) per share:
   Continuing operations              $  .45     $  .43      $   .98   $    .94
   Discontinued operations                 -          -            -      (1.03)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Total                            $  .45     $  .43      $   .98   $   (.09)
===============================================================================
</TABLE>



Basic earnings (loss) per share are computed by dividing net earnings (loss) by
the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the
period.

Diluted earnings per share are computed similar to basic earnings per share
except that the weighted average shares outstanding are increased to include
additional shares from the assumed exercise of stock options, if dilutive. The
number of additional shares is calculated by assuming that outstanding stock
options were exercised and the proceeds from such exercises were used to acquire
shares of common stock at the average market price during the period.
IIB 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5051 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 12, 2010 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 23 Genesee Street in Hornell, New York, 

as the ‘‘Zachary Smith Post Office Building’’. 

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


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 5051 RFS

1 SECTION 1. ZACHARY SMITH POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 23 Genesee Street in Hornell, 

4 New York, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Zachary 

5 Smith Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, or other record of the United States 

8 to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed 

9 to be a reference to the ‘‘Zachary Smith Post Office Build10 ing’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives May 11, 2010. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

N.M., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, 

DALLAS VA MEDICAL CENTER, Dallas, TX, 

Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-0008

Issued: October 26, 2021

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On October 1, 2021 appellant filed an appeal from a September 17, 2020 merit decision of 

the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards

assigned Docket No. 22-0008.

The Board has duly considered the matter and notes that the Board has jurisdiction to 

review final adverse decisions of OWCP issued under the Federal Employees’Compensation Act.1 

For final adverse decisions of OWCP issued on or after November 19, 2008, the Board’s review 

authority is limited to appeals which are filed within 180 days from the date of issuance of OWCP’s 

decision.2

The 180th day following the September 17, 2020 decision was March 16, 2021. As 

appellant did not file an appeal with the Board until October 1, 2021,more than 180 days after the

September 17, 2020 OWCP decision, the Board finds that the appeal docketed as No. 22-0008 is 

untimely filed. The Board is without jurisdiction to review the appeal. Appellant has not offered 

1

5 U.S.C. § 8149; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a) (2009).

2

Id. at § 501.3(e).
2

a reason to explain the failure to timely file an appeal with supporting documentation sufficient to 

establish compelling circumstances.

The Board’s decisions and orders are “final upon the expiration of 30 days from the date 

of their issuance.”

3

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 22-0008 is dismissed.

Issued: October 26, 2021

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

3

Id. at § 501.6(d).
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

C.G., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, DEFENSE 

COMMISSARY AGENCY, LITTLE CREEK 

COMMISSARY, Norfolk, VA, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-0496

Issued: April 7, 2022

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On February 15, 2021 appellant filed a timely appeal from November 3, 2020 and 

January 6, 2021 merit decisions of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The 

Clerk of the Appellate Boards assigned Docket No. 21-0495. 

Subsequently, the Clerk of the Appellate Boards inadvertently assigned Docket No. 

21-0496 to this case. 

The Board has duly considered the matter and concludes that, since there are now two 

docket numbers assigned for a review of the same OWCP decisions, one of the docket numbers 

must be dismissed. Since the Clerk of the Appellate Boards inadvertently assigned Docket No. 

21-0496 to appellant’s appeal request, this docket number must be dismissed. The appeal docketed 

as No. 21-0495 will go forward. Accordingly,
2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 21-0496 is dismissed.

Issued: April 7, 2022

Washington, DC

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

J.C., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, 

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 

AGENCY, Bothell, WA, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-0511

Issued: September 10, 2021

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL AND DENYING

REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On February 17, 2021 appellant sought an appeal from purported November 6, 7, and 13, 

2020 decisions of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). Together with her 

appeal request, she submitted a request for oral argument pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 501.5(b). The 

Clerk of the Appellate Boards assigned Docket No. 21-0511.

The Board, having duly considered the matter, notes that the Board has jurisdiction to 

review final adverse decisions of OWCP issued under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

(FECA).1 This jurisdiction encompasses any final decision issues by OWCP within 180 days of 

the date appellant filed her appeal.2 The case record as transmitted to the Board does not contain 

a final adverse OWCP decision issued within 180 days from the date of docketing of the current 

 

1

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a).

2

Id. at § 501.3(e) provides in pertinent part: “Any notice of appeal must be filed within 180 days from the date of 

issuance of a decision of OWCP.”
2

appeal.

3

 The last decision or order in this case was a Board order dated September 16, 20204that

became final upon the expiration of 30 days from the date of its issuance and is not subject to 

further review.5 As there is no final adverse decision issued by OWCP, the Board concludes that 

the appeal docketed as No. 21-0511 must be dismissed. Because the appeal docketed as No. 

21-0511 must be dismissed, appellant’s request for oral argument must be denied. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 21-0511 is dismissed and 

the request for oral argument is denied.

Issued: September 10, 2021

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

 

3

Id.

4 Order Dismissing Appeal, Docket No. 20-0475 (issued September 16, 2020).

5

See 20 C.F.R. § 501.6(d).
Exhibit 99.1
                                  ------------
 
                        CIT HOME EQUITY LOAN TRUST 1998-1
                          ANNUAL OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE

                           COMPLIANCE WITH AGREEMENT

The undersigned  certifies that he is a Vice President of The CIT Group/
Consumer Finance,  Inc., a corporation  organized under the laws of the 
state of Delaware ("CITCF"),  and that as such he is duly authorized to 
execute and deliver this certificate on behalf of CITCF in connection with 
Section 6.06 (a) of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of July 1, 
1998 (the "Agreement") among CITCF,  as Seller and Master  Servicer, The 
CIT Group Securitization Corporation III, as Depositor, and The Bank of New 
York,  as Trustee for CIT Home Equity Loan Trust 1998-1 (all capitalized  
terms used herein without  definition having the respective  meanings 
specified in the Agreement).  The undersigned  further  certifies to the 
Trustee that a review of the  activities  of  CITCF  during  the  preceding  
calendar year and of its performance  under the Agreement has been made under 
his  supervision and to the best of his knowledge, based on such review, CITCF 
has fulfilled its obligations under the Agreement during the preceding calendar 
year.


      IN WITNESS WHEREOF,  I have affixed hereto my signature this 10th day 
of March, 1999.


                                          /s/    Frank J. Madeira
                                          --------------------------
                                          Name:  Frank J. Madeira
                                          Title: Vice President
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5315 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5315

To amend title 38, United States Code, to extend the period of time in 
which a member of the Armed Forces may transfer educational assistance 
   under the Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program to a dependent 
                                 child.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 13, 2010

  Mr. Welch introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 38, United States Code, to extend the period of time in 
which a member of the Armed Forces may transfer educational assistance 
   under the Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program to a dependent 
                                 child.

    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 ``Post-9/11 GI Bill Improvement Act''.

SEC. 2. TIME PERIOD FOR TRANSFER OF EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE UNDER THE 
              POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (5) of section 3319(h) of title 38, 
United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
            ``(5) Limitation on age of transfer and use by children.--
        Educational assistance transferred under this section to a 
        child--
                    ``(A) may be transferred at any time before the 
                child attains the age of 26 years; and
                    ``(B) may be used without regard to the 15-year 
                delimiting date, but may not be used after the child 
                attains the age of 26 years.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall take 
effect on the date that is 90 days after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 517 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the dependent 

care credit to take into account expenses for care of parents and grandparents who do not live with the taxpayer. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 14, 2009 

Mr. ISRAEL (for himself, Mr. RODRIGUEZ, Mr. RYAN of Ohio, Mr. WEINER, 

Ms. BEAN, and Ms. SHEA-PORTER) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify 

the dependent care credit to take into account expenses 

for care of parents and grandparents who do not live 

with the taxpayer. 

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 ‘‘Elder Care Tax Credit 

5 Act of 2009’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 Congress finds the following: 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
2 

HR 517 IH

1 (1) Approximately two-thirds of the 5.5 million 

2 seniors over age 65 who receive long-term care rely 

3 exclusively on family, friends, and other informal 

4 caregivers. 

5 (2) Two in ten adults age 41 to 59 are sup6 porting their parents financially, and slightly more 

7 than one in ten are providing financial help to a par8 ent while also raising or supporting a child. 

9 (3) Adults who provide care for an aging rel10 ative have extensive costs. Long-distance caregivers 

11 spend an average of $8,728 annually, and those who 

12 care for someone nearby spend $4,570. 

13 SEC. 3. MODIFICATION OF CREDIT FOR EXPENSES FOR 

14 HOUSEHOLD AND DEPENDENT CARE SERV15 ICES NECESSARY FOR GAINFUL EMPLOY16 MENT. 

17 (a) CREDIT ALLOWED FOR COSTS INCURRED TO

18 CARE FOR PARENTS AND GRANDPARENTS WHO DO NOT

19 LIVE WITH THE TAXPAYER.— 

20 (1) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 

21 21(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relat22 ing to qualifying individual) is amended by striking 

23 ‘‘or’’ at the end of subparagraph (B), by striking the 

24 period at the end of subparagraph (C) and inserting 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
3 

HR 517 IH

1 ‘‘, or’’, and by adding at the end the following new 

2 subparagraph: 

3 ‘‘(D) a dependent of the taxpayer (as de4 fined in section 152, determined without regard 

5 to subsections (b)(1), (b)(2), (d)(1)(B), and 

6 (d)(1)(C)) who is the father or mother of the 

7 taxpayer (or an ancestor of such father or 

8 mother) and who is physically or mentally in9 capable of caring for himself or herself.’’. 

10 (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Subparagraph 

11 (B) of section 21(b)(1) of such Code is amended by 

12 inserting ‘‘(other than a dependent described in sub13 paragraph (D))’’ after ‘‘and (d)(1)(B))’’. 

14 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

15 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

16 December 31, 2008. 

Æ 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
<PAGE>   1


                                                                      EXHIBIT 24

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

     KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature appears
below constitutes and appoints ROBERT C. WOODWORTH and RONALD H. RIDGWAY, and
each of them, his true and lawful attorneys-in-fact and agents, with full power
of substitution and resubstitution, for him and in his name, place and stead, in
any and all capacities, to sign Pulitzer Inc.'s Annual Report on Form 10-K, and
to file the same, with all exhibits thereto and other documents in connection
therewith, and any amendments thereto, with the Securities and Exchange
Commission and New York Stock Exchange, Inc., granting unto said
attorneys-in-fact and agents and each of them, full power and authority to do
and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in
and about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or
could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said
attorneys-in-fact and agents, or each of them, or their substitute or
substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
           Signature                                   Title                                   Date
           ---------                                   -----                                   ----
<S>                                   <C>                                                 <C>
      /s/ Michael E. Pulitzer                    Director; Chairman                       January 20, 2000
---------------------------------
       (Michael E. Pulitzer)

      /s/ Robert C. Woodworth                   Director; President and                   January 20, 2000
---------------------------------               Chief Executive Officer
       (Robert C. Woodworth)                 (Principal Executive Officer)

      /s/ Ronald H. Ridgway              Director; Senior Vice President-Finance            January 20, 2000
---------------------------------     (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
       (Ronald H. Ridgway)


      /s/ Ken J. Elkins                               Director                            January 20, 2000
---------------------------------
         (Ken J. Elkins)


      /s/ David E. Moore                              Director                            January 20, 2000
---------------------------------
         (David E. Moore)


      /s/ William Bush                                Director                            January 20, 2000
---------------------------------
         (William Bush)


      /s/ Emily Rauh Pulitzer                         Director                            January 20, 2000
---------------------------------
      (Emily Rauh Pulitzer)


     /s/ Alice B. Hayes                               Director                            January 20, 2000
---------------------------------
        (Alice B. Hayes)


     /s/ James M. Snowden Jr.                         Director                            January 20, 2000
---------------------------------
     (James M. Snowden, Jr.)
</TABLE>
H. R. 5341 

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 designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 100 Orndorf 

Drive in Brighton, Michigan, as the ‘‘Joyce Rogers Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. JOYCE ROGERS POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 100 Orndorf Drive in Brighton, Michigan, shall 

be known and designated as the ‘‘Joyce Rogers Post Office Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Joyce Rogers Post Office Building’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.