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

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1848 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1848

       To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to ensure that 
 electrochromic glass qualifies as energy property for purposes of the 
                             energy credit.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 13, 2019

Mr. Wicker (for himself and Mr. Markey) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
       To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to ensure that 
 electrochromic glass qualifies as energy property for purposes of the 
                             energy credit.

    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 ``Dynamic Glass Act''.

SEC. 2. INCLUSION OF ELECTROCHROMIC GLASS AS ENERGY PROPERTY.

    (a) In General.--Section 48(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (2)(A)(i)--
                    (A) in subclause (III), by striking ``and'' at the 
                end, and
                    (B) by adding at the end the following:
                                    ``(V) energy property described in 
                                paragraph (3)(A)(viii) but only with 
                                respect to property the construction of 
                                which begins before January 1, 2022, 
                                and'',
            (2) in paragraph (3)(A)--
                    (A) in clause (vi), by striking ``or'' at the end,
                    (B) in clause (vii), by adding ``or'' at the end, 
                and
                    (C) by adding at the end the following:
                            ``(viii) glass which uses electricity to 
                        change its light transmittance properties in 
                        order to heat or cool a structure,'', and
            (3) in paragraph (6), by striking ``paragraph (3)(A)(i)'' 
        each place it appears and inserting ``clause (i) or (viii) of 
        paragraph (3)(A)''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Case 1:06-cv-15030-AKH Document 5 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
#### PALMER S. MIDGETT v. MARTIN KELLOGG, JR., and F. T. HORNER, Executors of the Estate of CORNELIUS P. MIDGETT, Deceased.

(Filed 19 September 1962.)

Appeal by defendants from *Morris, J.,*January 1962 Term of Dase.

Civil action to recover from the executors of the estate of Cornelius P. Midgett, deceased, upon three causes of action: First, upon the following written instrument executed and delivered by Cornelius P. Midgett to plaintiff: “16 October 1958. I, C. P. Midgett, certify that I owe Palmer S. Midgett the sum of Five Hundred Ninety-eight Dollars, Sixty-two Cents ($598.62), for money spent in the operation of the hotel during the summer of 1958. C. P. MIDGETT

C. P. Midgett”; Second,

for various items of personal property allegedly purchased and paid for by plaintiff for and in behalf of Cornelius P. Midgett during the year 1959 in the amount of $1,016.15; and Third, for alleged services rendered by plaintiff during the years 1957, 1958, and 1959 to Cornelius P. Midgett in connection with the operation of his (Cornelius P. Midgett’s) hotel, known as the First Colony Inn at Nags Head, North Carolina, under an alleged agreement by Cornelius P. Midgett that he would pay plaintiff for his services by devising him an interest in his hotel aforesaid, that Cornelius P. Midgett breached his agreement to devise by devising in his last will and testament his hotel to other persons, and that his services during this period were reasonably worth $8,000.00.

The following issues were submitted to the jury, and answered as appears:

“1. In what amount, if any, are defendant executors indebted to plaintiff by reason of his first cause of action, alleged in the complaint?

“Answer: Full amount, $598.62.

“2. In what amount, if any, are defendant executors indebted to plaintiff by reason of his second cause of action, alleged in the complaint?

*672“Answer: $800 including interest.

“3. What amount, if any, is plaintiff entitled to recover of the defendant executors, upon a quantum meruit for services rendered by plaintiff to C. P. Midgett during the years 1957, 1958 and 1959?

“Answer: $3,000 including interest.”

From a judgment entered in accordance with the verdict, defendants appeal.

*John H. Hall for defendant appellants.*

*LeBoy, Wells and Shaw by J. H. LeRoy for plaintiff appellee.*

Per Cueiam.

The jury, under application of settled principles of law, resolved the issues of fact against the defendants. While the defendants’ well-prepared brief, and the argument of their counsel, present their contentions forcibly, a careful examination of their assignments of error discloses no new question or feature requiring extended discussion. The case was tried in substantial accord with established principles of law in this jurisdiction, and neither reversible nor prejudicial error has been made to appear sufficient to justify disturbing the trial below. The verdict and judgment are upheld.

No error.
EXHIBIT
(32)




CERTIFICATION
OF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS*




Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, each of the undersigned officers of La-Z-Boy
Incorporated (the “Company”) hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that
the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended October 24,
2009 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.




/s/ Kurt L. DarrowKurt
      L. DarrowPresident
      and Chief Executive OfficerNovember
      17, 2009/s/ Louis M. Riccio, Jr.Louis
      M. Riccio, Jr.Senior
      Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerNovember
      17, 2009




*The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section
1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER>   1
       
<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       Dec-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                          Jan-02-1995
<PERIOD-END>                            Oct-01-1995
<CASH>                                    2,482,258
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                             1,364,218
<ALLOWANCES>                                932,000
<INVENTORY>                               1,934,968
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          5,821,971
<PP&E>                                    4,072,399
<DEPRECIATION>                            2,867,102
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            7,114,191
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     2,028,642
<BONDS>                                           0
<COMMON>                                    464,212
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                  993,292
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              7,114,191
<SALES>                                  11,316,701
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         11,836,706
<CGS>                                     7,943,402
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            12,688,183
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          (1,375,102)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      (1,462,919)
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                             (1,462,919)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0
        

</TABLE>
CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT

                    OF RESTATED CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION

                         OF COYOTE NETWORK SYSTEMS, INC.

     Coyote Network Systems, Inc., a corporation organized and existing under
and by virtue of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware,

     DOES HEREBY CERTIFY:

     FIRST: That at a meeting of the Board of Directors of Coyote Network
Systems, Inc. resolutions were duly adopted setting forth a proposed amendment
of the Restated Certificate of Incorporation of said corporation, declaring said
amendment to be advisable and directing that the proposed amendment be
considered at the next annual meeting of the stockholders of said corporation
for consideration thereof. The resolution setting forth the proposed amendment
is as follows:

     RESOLVED, that the Restated Certificate of Incorporation of this
     corporation be amended by changing the article thereof numbered Article I
     so that, as amended, said Article shall be and read as follows:

     "The name of the corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "Corporation")
is QUENTRA NETWORKS, INC."

     SECOND: That at a meeting of the Board of Directors of Coyote Network
Systems, Inc. resolutions were duly adopted setting forth a proposed amendment
of the Restated Certificate of Incorporation of said corporation, declaring said
amendment to be advisable and directing that the proposed amendment be
considered at the next annual meeting of the stockholders of said corporation
for consideration thereof. The resolution setting forth the proposed amendment
is as follows:

     RESOLVED, that the Restated Certificate of Incorporation of this
     corporation be amended by changing the first paragraph of Article IV of the
     Restated Certificate of Incorporation so that, as amended, said paragraph
     shall be and read as follows:

     "The total number of shares of all classes which the corporation shall have
     authority to issue is 80,000,000, of which 10,000,000 shares shall be
     shares of Preferred Stock, $.01 par value per share, and 70,000,000 shares
     shall be shares of Common Stock, $1.00 par value per share."

     THIRD: That thereafter, at the next annual meeting of stockholders of said
corporation, duly called and held upon notice in accordance with Section 222 of
the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, the necessary number of
shares as required by statute were voted in favor of the amendments.

     FOURTH: That said amendments were duly adopted in accordance with the
provisions of Section 242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of
Delaware.

     FIFTH: That the capital of said corporation shall not be reduced under or
by reason of said amendment.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said Coyote Network Systems, Inc. has caused this
certificate to be signed by Timothy G. Atkinson, an Authorized Officer, this
27th day of July, 2000.

                                              /s/ Timothy G. Atkinson
                                              ------------------------------
                                              Timothy G. Atkinson, Secretary
#### EARP v. EARP

No. 328P82.

Case below: 57 N.C. App. 194.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 dismissed 19 July 1982.
Case 1:07-cv-03522-PKC     Document 8      Filed 07/17/2007     Page 1 of 2

Case 1:07-cv-03522-PKC     Document 8      Filed 07/17/2007     Page 2 of 2
#### AMERICAN FOODS, INC. v. GOODSON FARMS, INCORPORATED, and J. MICHAEL GOODSON

No. 52

(Filed 3 November 1981)

APPEAL from decision of the Court of Appeals affirming judgment in favor of plaintiff entered by *Llewellyn, J.,*in PENDER Superior Court. The Court of Appeals opinion, 50 N.C. App. 591, 275 S.E. 2d 184 (1981), is by *Judge Hill*with *Judge Arnold*concur*387ring. *Judge Wells*dissented from that part of the majority opinion affirming summary judgment in plaintiffs favor on defendants’ counterclaim.

Pursuant to G.S. 7A-30(2), defendants appealed from the portion of the majority opinion affected by the dissent. Defendants petitioned this court for discretionary review of the remainder of the Court of Appeals decision but that petition was denied on 2 June 1981.

*Poisson, Barnhill & Britt, by L. J. Poisson, Jr., for defendant-appellants.*

*Murchison, Fox & Newton, by William R. Shell, for plaintiff-appellee.*

PER CURIAM.

The only question presented to this court is whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the judgment of the trial court dismissing defendants’ counterclaim. After carefully reviewing the opinion of the Court of Appeals and the briefs and authorities on this question, we conclude that the result reached by the Court of Appeals, its reasoning and the legal principles enunciated by it, are correct. Consequently, we adopt the majority opinion as our own and the decision is

Affirmed.
#### POOLE & KENT CORP. v. THURSTON & SONS

No. 63 PC.

Case below: 21 N.C. App. 1

. , Petition, for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 8 May 1974.
EXHIBIT D

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-6 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 1 of 30
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1729 

To enhance consumer rights relating to consumer report disputes by requiring 

provision of documentation provided by consumers. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 5, 2019 

Ms. KLOBUCHAR (for herself and Mr. DAINES) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs 

A BILL 

To enhance consumer rights relating to consumer report 

disputes by requiring provision of documentation provided by consumers. 

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 ‘‘FIX Credit Reporting 

5 Errors Act’’ or the ‘‘FIX Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROVISION OF DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED BY 

7 CONSUMERS. 

8 Section 611 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 

9 U.S.C. 1681i) is amended— 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1729 IS

1 (1) in subsection (a)— 

2 (A) in paragraph (2)— 

3 (i) in subparagraph (A), by inserting 

4 ‘‘, including documentation provided by the 

5 consumer,’’ after ‘‘relevant information’’; 

6 and 

7 (ii) in subparagraph (B), by inserting 

8 ‘‘, including documentation provided by the 

9 consumer,’’ after ‘‘relevant information’’; 

10 and 

11 (B) in paragraph (4), by inserting ‘‘, in12 cluding documentation,’’ after ‘‘relevant infor13 mation’’; and 

14 (2) in subsection (f)(2)(B)(ii), by inserting ‘‘, 

15 including documentation,’’ after ‘‘relevant informa16 tion’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
UNL'I'LL) S'l'A'l'LS IIISTRICT COUK'I' 

SOUTHERN DISTRIC'S 01: NEW YORK 

IN RE: 

i hl:ZSTER FILE 

FOSAMAX PKOLl1!C'TS LIABILITY L,lTIGA'I'lON 

1 106-M 11- 1 789 (JFK) 

'177i.~ Llocuntent Keicrles To All Ac1ion.c 

ORDER FOR .4DhIISSION PRO HAG VICE 

Considering the Cerlijicate 01' Good Standing and ol l othcr docut~~cnts rcquired by Case 

Management Order No. 5 submitted by counsel, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

..ll-'pl icant's Name: Kathlccn Sullivan Hardway UC-' r;srz,L *--I--- ---- 

Firm N;~mt.: Venable LLP 

Address: -1'tvo I Iopkins Plaza. Suite 1 800 

1 

CityIStatclZip: Haltimore. Maryland 2 1201 . w ,--- -- , ) 

3 -/y-u3 f 

_--..--....-- ii L-.- - .' "---"--urn"- 

-- .AIWI 

.I TelephoneTax: (4 1 0) 244-7400/(4 10) 244-7742 

Email Address: k shard~~-ay51::ve11able.com 

is acimilted to practice pro har \ icc as counsel lbr hIt.1-c.k & Co.. Iric. in the ahoi r. c:iptioned case 

in the I!nited Statcs I)isrric~ C'our~ fill- the Southern District of New York. 

New Yorli. Neu 1'~lrk 

d' 

r - 

(/ Il'nited States District Judge 

Case 1:07-cv-03462-JFK Document 23 Filed 03/14/2008 Page 1 of 2
Certificate of Good 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DISTRICT OF MARYLAND 

I, Felicia C. Cannon, Clerk of the United States District Court for the District 

of hlaryland, 

DO HEREBY CERTIFY that, KATHLEEY F. SCLLI17AN, 

ESQUIRE, BAR NUMBER 25406, was duly admitted to practice in the 

United States District Court for the District of Mar?land on September I I, 1998, 

and is currently in good standing as a member of the bar of this Court. 

Dated at Baltimore, Maryland FEI,ICIA C. CANNOY 

Clerk 

Tina Stavrou - Deputy Clerk 

Case 1:07-cv-03462-JFK Document 23 Filed 03/14/2008 Page 2 of 2
#### STATE v. JEFFERIES

No. 142 PC.

Case below: 17 N.C. App. 195.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 6 February 1973.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

MARVIN SANDERS,
Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM & ORDER
-against- 07 Civ. 3370 (SHS) (MHD)

NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS et al.,

Defendants.

se plaintiff, formerly an inmate in the Néw York City

MICHAEL H. DOLINGER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE:

The pr

correctional system, has applied by letter for appointment of an
attorney to represent him in this lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983
against a number of prison officials and employees for allegedly
failing to protect him from an assault by a fellow inmate. (See May
30, 2007 letter to the Court from Marvin Sanders). We have reviewed
a transcript of the deposition of plaintiff and conclude that there
is sufficient possible merit to his claim, at least with respect to
one of the defendants -- a Captain Lockhard -- to justify a finding
that plaintiff is eligible for appointment of counsel. Nonetheless,
we recognize that plaintiff has not filled out the required form
application, and he must do so. Hence he is to obtain the form from
the Office of the Pro Se Clerk in this court, fill it out and file

it here, and this must be done by no later than July 7, 2008.


Upon receipt of the formal application, we will refer this

case to the Pro Se Clerk for assignment of an attorney.

Dated: New York, New York
June 20, 2008

a)

a

MICHAEL H, DOLINGER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Copies of the foregoing Memorandum and Order have been mailed to:

Mr. Marvin Sanders
BASICS

1064 Franklin Avenue
Bronx, New York 10456

Mr. Marvin Sanders
1268 Stratford Avenue
Apt. F-4

Bronx, New York 10472

Gabriel P. Harvis, Esq.
Assistant Corporation Counsel
for the City of New York

100 Church Street
New York, New York 10007
#### BELL v. WALLACE

No. 71 PC.

Case below: 32 N.C. App. 370.

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 5 April 1977.
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2006 

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit certain conduct relating 

to the use of horses for human consumption. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 27, 2019 

Mr. MENENDEZ (for himself, Mr. GRAHAM, Mr. WHITEHOUSE, and Ms. COLLINS) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to 

the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit certain 

conduct relating to the use of horses for human consumption. 

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 ‘‘John Stringer Rainey 

5 Safeguard American Food Exports Act’’ or the ‘‘John 

6 Stringer Rainey SAFE Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•S 2006 IS

1 SEC. 2. SLAUGHTER OF HORSES FOR HUMAN CONSUMP2 TION. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 3 of title 18, United 

4 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol5 lowing: 

6 ‘‘§ 50. Slaughter of horses for human consumption 

7 ‘‘(a) OFFENSE.—It shall be unlawful to knowingly— 

8 ‘‘(1) possess, ship, transport, purchase, sell, de9 liver, or receive, in or affecting interstate or foreign 

10 commerce, any horse with the intent that it is to be 

11 slaughtered for human consumption; or 

12 ‘‘(2) possess, ship, transport, purchase, sell, de13 liver, or receive, in or affecting interstate or foreign 

14 commerce, any horse flesh or carcass or part of a 

15 carcass, with the intent that it is to be used for 

16 human consumption. 

17 ‘‘(b) PENALTY.—Any person who violates subsection 

18 (a)— 

19 ‘‘(1) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned 

20 not more than 2 years, or both; or 

21 ‘‘(2) in the case of a covered offense, shall be 

22 fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 1 

23 year, or both. 

24 ‘‘(c) DEFINITIONS.—In this section— 

25 ‘‘(1) the term ‘covered offense’ means a viola26 tion of subsection (a) in which— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•S 2006 IS

1 ‘‘(A) the defendant has no prior conviction 

2 under this section; and 

3 ‘‘(B) the conduct involves fewer than 5 

4 horses or fewer than 2000 pounds of horse flesh 

5 or carcass or part of a carcass; and 

6 ‘‘(2) the term ‘horse’ means any member of the 

7 family Equidae.’’. 

8 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

9 for chapter 3 of title 18, United States Code, is amended 

10 by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘50. Slaughter of horses for human consumption.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 11 Filed 06/14/2007 Page 1 of 6Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 11 Filed 06/14/2007 Page 2 of 6Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 11 Filed 06/14/2007 Page 3 of 6Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 11 Filed 06/14/2007 Page 4 of 6Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 11 Filed 06/14/2007 Page 5 of 6Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 11 Filed 06/14/2007 Page 6 of 6
#### STATE v. HILL

No. 155 PC.

Case below: 23 N.C. App. 614.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 30 December 1974.