alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### CONSOLIDATED TEXTILE CORPORATION, ELLA DIVISION, v. M. L. PATTERSON et al.

(Filed 21 December, 1932.)

Appeal by plaintiff from *Schenck, J.,*at July Term, 1932, of Cleve-LAND.

No error.

The plaintiff operated a cotton mill at Shelby, in which the defendant Patterson was employed as overseer of spinning. It is alleged in the *863complaint that Patterson fraudulently issued invoices of cotton and caused fraudulent sales thereof to be made to the plaintiff by Jim Camp and Griff Borders, who paid tbe proceeds to him less the amount agreed on as their compensation, and that Patterson deposited the funds in the United States Postal Savings Depository at Shelby. Patterson filed an answer and at the trial the jury returned the following verdict :

1. Did the defendant M. L. Patterson, by false and fraudulent representations and tokens obtain funds from the plaintiff, Consolidated Textile Corporation, as alleged in the complaint? Answer: Yes.

2. If so, in what amount, if any, is the defendant M. L. Patterson indebted to the plaintiff, Consolidated Textile Corporation, by reason of funds so fraudulently obtained? Answer: $973.75.

3. Are the funds deposited in the United States Postal Savings depository in Shelby, N. C., by the defendant M. L. Patterson the proceeds of the funds fraudulently obtained by him from the plaintiff, Consolidated Textile Corporation? Answer: No.

Judgment was given for the plaintiff in accordance with the verdict and upon exceptions entered of record the plaintiff appealed.

*B. T. Falls for plaintiff.*

*D. Z. Newton and Weathers & Kennedy for defendant Fatterson.*

Per Curiam.

The first two exceptions were taken to the rejection of evidence and the third, fourth, and fifth to the admission of proof that the defendant had in his possession $800 or $900 in 1917 and $2,340 in August, 1930. These exceptions present no satisfactory cause for a new trial; and so as to the sixth.

Exceptions 7, 8, 9, relate to the charge on the second and third issues, but in these instructions we find no error. As stated by the court the burden of these issues was on the plaintiff and was not necessarily affected by the principle applicable to property recently stolen. That Campbell deposited the money he received from Camp and Borders in the Postal Savings Account is not a necessary or presumptive deduction from his recent receipt of it.

*We*find no error upon the merits without passing on the question whether the appeal should be dismissed for the reason that the appellant elected to abide by the judgment and issued execution against the person as well as against the property of the defendant, and caused him to be imprisoned. If the plaintiff received no benefit the defendant at least suffered personal detriment.

No error.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 1995 / Notices 8441

Corporate Activities, Office of Thrift

Supervision, or her designee, acting

pursuant to delegated authority,

approved the application of Pendleton

Federal Savings and Loan Association,

Falmouth, Kentucky, to convert to the

stock form of organization. Copies of the

application are available for inspection

at the Information Services Division,

Office of Thrift Supervision, 1700 G

Street NW., Washington, D.C. 20552,

and the Central Regional Office, Office

of Thrift Supervision, 111 East Wacker

Drive, Suite 800, Chicago, Illinois

60601–4360.

Dated: February 8, 1995.

By the Office of Thrift Supervision.

Nadine Y. Washington,

Corporate Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–3584 Filed 2–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6720–01–M

[AC–01; OTS No. 07098]

Security Federal Bank, a Federal

Saving Bank, Tuscaloosa, Alabama;

Approval of Conversion Application

Notice is hereby give that on January

16, 1995, the Deputy Assistant Director,

Corporate Activities, Office of Thrift

Supervision, or her designee, acting

pursuant to delegated authority,

approved the application of Security

Federal Bank, a Federal Savings Bank,

Tuscaloosa, Alabama, to convert to the

stock form of organization. Copies of the

application are available for inspection

at the Information Services Division,

Office of Thrift Supervision, 1700 G

Street NW., Washington, D.C. 20552,

and the Southeast Regional Office,

Office of Thrift Supervision, 1475

Peachtree Street NE., Atlanta, Georgia

30309.

Dated: February 8, 1995.

By the Office of Thrift Supervision,

Nadine Y. Washington,

Corporate Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–3585 Filed 2–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6720–01–M

[AC–06; OTS No. 02984]

Wells Federal Bank, fsb, Wells,

Minnesota; Approval of Conversion

Application

Notice is hereby given that on

February 2, 1995, the Deputy Assistant

Director, Corporate Activities, Office of

Thrift Supervision, or her designee,

acting pursuant to delegated authority,

approved the application of Wells

Federal Bank, fsb, Wells, Minnesota, to

convert to the stock form of

organization. Copies of the application

are available for inspection at the

Information Services Division, Office of

Thrift Supervision, 1700 G Street NW.,

Washington, DC 20552, and the

Midwest Office, Office of Thrift

Supervision, 122 W. John Carpenter

Freeway, Suite 600, Irving, Texas 75039.

Dated: February 8, 1995.

By the Office of Thrift Supervision.

Nadine Y. Washington,

Corporate Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–3586 Filed 2–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6720–01–M
The
undersigned certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, that:





(1) The
accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30,
2008, 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 accompanying Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.





Date:  November
      13, 2008
            By
      /s/ Mark N.
  SchwartzMark
      N. SchwartzChief
      Executive Officer











Date:  November
      13, 2008
            By
      /s/ Mark P.
O’NeillMark
      P. O’NeillManager
      of Finance and Accounting
## Detailed Single Year Tables

- Individual Provisions
- Level of Monthly Benefits

### **Description of Proposed Provision:						B6.7: Starting in January 2030, provide an addition to monthly benefits for all beneficiaries who have been eligible for at least 20 years, with the following specifications:  (1) Augment benefits (not the PIA) for those of qualifying age and eligibility duration with a MAGI below about $29,400 if single and $58,800 if married. MAGI is set to equal the IRMAA definition (AGI plus tax-exempt interest income). Index these thresholds after 2030 by the increase in the C-CPI-U; (2) The full additional amount is applicable for those born 1963 and later, once 24 years elapse from initial eligibility. The basic additional amount is calculated as 5 percent of the PIA for a hypothetical worker with earnings equal to the AWI each year; (3) For those born prior to 1963, the full additional amount is multiplied by the number of years they have been affected by the C-CPI-U, divided by 24; (4) Beneficiaries will receive 20 percent of their additional amount in their 20th year after initial eligibility, 40 percent in their 21st year after initial eligibility,..., and 100 percent of their additional amount in their 24th and later years after benefit eligibility; (5) Retired and disabled worker beneficiaries, dually entitled spouse beneficiaries, and all survivor beneficiaries received their addition as described above. Spousal beneficiaries (aged or with child in care) and child beneficiaries of a living retired or disabled worker receive 50 percent of the additional amount described above. Other beneficiary types (such as parents of deceased workers) will receive the percentage of the flat benefit that equals the percentage of the insured worker's PIA that they receive; (6) The AWI used is for the second year prior to the beneficiary's initial eligibility year, with applicable COLAs applied up to the age when the addition is received; and (7) The additional amount is added to the monthly benefit after reductions for early claiming or increases for delayed claiming have been applied.**

### Financial Estimates for the OASDI Trust Fund Program

### Summarized Estimates
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 31 (Wednesday, February 15, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8645-8646]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-3790]



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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
[OMB Control No. 9000-0122]


Clearance Request for Scope and Duration of Contract

agencies: Department of Defense (DOD), General Services Administration 
(GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

action: Notice of request for an extension to an existing OMB clearance 
(9000-0122).

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

summary: Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 
(44 U.S.C. 3501), the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Secretariat 
has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request to 
review and approve an extension of a currently approved information 
collection requirement concerning Scope and Duration of Contract.

for further information contact: Beverly Fayson, Office of Federal 
Acquisition Policy, GSA (202) 501-4755.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Purpose

    The FAR clause at 52.241-3 requires the utility to furnish the 
Government with a complete set of rates, terms and conditions, and any 
subsequently approved or proposed revisions when 
proposed. [[Page 8646]] 

B. Annual Reporting Burden

    Public reporting burden for this collection of information is 
estimated to average .25 hours per response, including the time for 
reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and 
maintaining the date needed, and completing and reviewing the 
collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate 
or any other aspect of this collection of information, including 
suggestions for reducing this burden, to General Services 
Administration, FAR Secretariat, 18th & F Streets, NW., Room 4037, 
Washington, DC 20405, and to the FAR Desk Officer, Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 
Washington, DC 20503.
    The annual reporting burden is estimated as follows: Respondents: 
1,000; responses per respondent, 5; total annual responses, 5,000; 
preparation hours per response, .25; and total response burden hours, 
1,250.

C. Annual Recordkeeping Burden

    The annual recordkeeping burden is estimated as follows: 
Recordkeepers, 1,000; hours per recordkeeper, 1; and total 
recordkeeping burden hours, 1,000.
    Obtaining Copies of Proposals: Requester may obtain copies of OMB 
applications or justifications from the General Services 
Administration, FAR Secretariat (VRS), Room 4037, Washington, DC 20405, 
telephone (202) 501-4755. Please cite OMB Control No. 9000-0122, Scope 
and Duration of Contract, in all correspondence.

    Dated: February 9, 1995.
Beverly Fayson,
FAR Secretariat.
[FR Doc. 95-3790 Filed 2-14-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-34-M
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Richard S. Paradise, certify that:

1. the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 3, 2010 (the Report), fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2.
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Keystone Automotive Operations, Inc. at the dates and for the periods indicated.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Keystone Automotive Operations, Inc. and
will be retained by Keystone Automotive Operations, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The undersigned expressly disclaims any obligation to update the foregoing certification except as required by law.

Date: May 18, 2010



/s/ Richard S. ParadiseRichard S. ParadiseChief Financial OfficerDated: May 18, 2010


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to the requirements of 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed
as a part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

April 28, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
129901 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 129901 COA: 261078 Calhoun CC: 90-000641-FC DONALD ALLEN PARKER, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal th e September 21, 2005 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

s0424 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

April 28, 2006

Clerk
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 9, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 6922]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-02646]


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

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY


Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

Meeting No. 16-01

    The TVA Board of Directors will hold a public meeting on February 
11, 2016, in the Missionary Ridge Auditorium of the Chattanooga Office 
Complex, 1101 Market Street, Chattanooga, Tennessee. The public may 
comment on any agenda item or subject at a public listening session 
which begins at 8:30 a.m. (ET). Following the end of the public 
listening session, the meeting will be called to order to consider the 
agenda items listed below. On-site registration will be available until 
15 minutes before the public listening session begins at 8:30 a.m. 
(ET). Preregistered speakers will address the Board first. TVA 
management will answer questions from the news media following the 
Board meeting.
    Status: Open.

Agenda

Chair's Welcome
Old Business
Approval of minutes of the November 20, 2015, Board Meeting
New Business
1. Report from President and CEO
2. Governance Items
    A. Committee Charters
    B. Board Practice on Confidential Information
3. Report of the Audit, Risk, and Regulation Committee
    A. Regulation of Pole Attachment Fees
4. Report of the Finance, Rates, and Portfolio Committee
5. Report of the Nuclear Oversight Committee
6. Report of the External Relations Committee
7. Report of the People and Performance Committee
    A. Chair Selection
8. Information Items
    A. Kingston Insurance Arbitration Settlement
    B. Watts Bar Unit 2 Capital Project Budget Increase
    C. Vehicular Accident Litigation Settlement

    For more information: Please call TVA Media Relations at (865) 632-
6000, Knoxville, Tennessee. People who plan to attend the meeting and 
have special needs should call (865) 632-6000. Anyone who wishes to 
comment on any of the agenda in writing may send their comments to: TVA 
Board of Directors, Board Agenda Comments, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, 
Knoxville, Tennessee 37902.

    Dated: February 4, 2016.
Sherry A. Quirk,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2016-02646 Filed 2-5-16; 11:15 am]
 BILLING CODE 8120-08-P
Exhibit 32   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 Quarterly Report of Actavision Ventures Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Chief Executive Officer & Chief Financial Officer, certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:  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 results of operations of the Company.   Date:  April 14, 2009               /s/ Ching-Sang Hong ------------------------------- Ching-Sang Hong, CEO & CFO
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of Premiere Global Services, Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company”) No. 333-79599, 333-87635, 333-89891, 333-51380, 333-57698, 333-67292, 333-101262, and 333-116506on Form S-8 of our reports dated February 29, 2008 (October 10, 2008 as to the effects of the restatement described in Note 3), relating to the consolidated financial statements of the Company (which report expresses an unqualified opinion andincludes an explanatory paragraph regarding the Company’s adoption on January 1, 2006, of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123R, *Share-Based Payment*, the Company’s adoption on January 1, 2007, of Statement ofFinancial Accounting Standards Interpretation No. 48, *Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109,*and includes an explanatory paragraph related to the restatement described in Note 3 of theconsolidated financial statements), and our report relating to management’s report on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting dated February 29, 2008 (October 10, 2008 as to the material weaknesswith respect to controls in place related to the accounting for the Company’s interest rate swaps) (which report expresses an adverse opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting because of a materialweakness), appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2007.

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Atlanta, GA
| Skip to contentSocial Security Online | Actuarial Publications |
|---------------------------------------|------------------------|

| www.socialsecurity.gov | Home  FAQs  Contact Us  Search | **Search**  |
|------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|------------------|

| Solvency provisions | Summary Measures and Graphs |
|---------------------|-----------------------------|

| Level of Monthly Benefits (PIA) | Description of Proposed Provision:      Beginning with those newly eligible for OASDI benefits in 2016 and later, reduce PIA formula factors so that benefits grow by inflation rather than by increases in real wages. |
|---------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                 |

*Estimates based on the intermediate assumptions        of the 2009 Trustees Report*

|  |  |
|--|--|

|        |
|--------|
|   | Privacy Policy      | Website Policies        & Other Important Information      | Site Map     Last reviewed or modified August 26, 2009 |
_______________________________________ __ ___________________ ________________ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order
Lansing, Michigan

June 20, 2007

133912

JOHN ROBERT UMBARGER, #251202

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Defendant-Appellee. Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

SC: 133912 CoA: 277255

On order of the Chief Justice, plaintiff-appellant having failed to pay the partial filing fee as re quired by the order of May 15, 2007, the Cl erk of the Court is hereby directed to close this file.

jm I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 20, 2007
Clerk
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-6196

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

MICHAEL GREG PERRY,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at 

Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles, District Judge. (1:14-cr-00401-CCE-1; 1:20-cv-00568-

CCE-JEP)

Submitted: April 27, 2021 Decided: May 3, 2021

Before KEENAN, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Greg Perry, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Michael Greg Perry seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the 

recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Perry’s 28 U.S.C. § 2255

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of 

appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B). A certificate of appealability will not issue 

absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(2). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this 

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists could find the district court’s assessment 

of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis, 137 S. Ct. 759, 773-74 

(2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the motion

states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 

134, 140-41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Perry has not made 

the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the 

appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. 

DISMISSED