alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
OFFICE OF THE AlTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

- AUSTIN

*rroa*n ou-

. ‘ -

Honorable George H. Sheppard Goxptrollerof Publio Accounts 'Austin,Texas Dear Sir:
appropriationfor na nalntenanoe of epa,rtckeent

for the oginnie.,Ssptember

meterg .: :,~.:

,~ a.

# ‘ , .:.r : Ed ,. . ‘ .,

. . I-fOilbrable.Gaorge

B.'Sheppard,

Page $2.

. -
On August 'y/1943, at ~aregul!r term of the 98th District Court of Tarrant County,Texas, in Causa Noi 25570-A, Xount Olivat Ce.aetery C~n;sny~vs.

State of **T ’**  **exos, et**  al, 8 corn-~ promise judgmentwas entered between tho prrties decreeing that Tlaintiff, ?.5ount

Gllvet kaatary Company, hava judgment against 'the Defendan~ts,

Tfu, Stu';E of ~Texas,and the Texas fii(@ay Codssion,.ln the amount of Yhlrty'FiveKundred ($3500.00) I)ollars; and further, thst Plaintiffhave judgment,against the Defendants for’ costs.

In Opinion x0. o-32;Ci; .this Lepsrtmrt held thst the Lee@latura.has,

the power to appropriatefrom tha Ststo Highway **rUnd** monags t0 pey'the jud&!Uent.render~d~ against tha~StatE of Taras on the case of II'. -Sd ?iaii\le,~

etux? vs. Tho:Stateof T6xas, et. al. The question'prtisonted, in this Opinisnis'whkthor or not 'theLsgIslaturehaa upp~O;lriat,~d'~from:tho Sate XlIle,h::ay

Funds monays to 'pay the.

above gention& &Ngmnt, or in other words is.thiere

o,n appropriation

avails,blr

:from vthioh saidjudgment can' beg .paid. -:-/

; ., ,' : '.I.' .~. '~.
,, ~) /:,

,, ,~ .,:

,,,,. ,' ., .'In:conneotii~c'aithr$our'~~equest'we have ~'onrefullg -'oo&iidered

‘Sanate’.DiXX~~Ho..

332,. Acts'of ths,:44th..Le~~Ylaturs 'Rtigul~~:r~

Eession,

;:1943,’ (.C~pte.r.~.400;',Ep. 942-948) an8 fall to find 'any

~,available:a$propriatioq from uhioh **:33ifJ** ~judgumqt~ can ba'piaf; , ,,':,~~

;',,, :;,.-,: "~ ,i: '..::;; .,y;;, ,,; '. ~' .".,, i,, ',:

.;Q ,,.. ,. ,' **It ‘**  **irr ‘**  **6UP** G&i.iOk'fhatthe .jud@tIant Cannot be'yoici from tha'

abroprfktion,for.ths.'support and aui?znterien&

~of the Highway .Department,~aaer~t,~~,itresgpt',A~proyriation.iiot. I.', .i ,, - .,, :: 1 ‘4

-. ., (I .p lrrJ,
## Detailed Single Year Tables

- Individual Provisions
- Payroll Taxes (including maximum taxable)

### **Description of Proposed Provision:						E2.17: Apply 12.4 percent payroll tax rate on earnings above $400,000 starting in 2024 and tax all earnings once the current-law taxable maximum exceeds $400,000. Do not provide benefit credit for additional earnings taxed.**

### Financial Estimates for the OASDI Trust Fund Program

### Summarized Estimates
UNITED STAT ES DIS TRICT COURT F OR THE D ISTRIC T OF CO LU M BIA

___________________________________ ) COURTNEY ANT HONY B AI L EY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 08-0283 ( CKK) ) UNI TED STATES MARSHAL ) SER VI CE et al., ) ) De fe nd ants
. )

___________________________________ ) ) COURTNEY ANT HONY B AI L EY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 08-0754 ( CKK) ) DI STRI CT OF COLUMBIA e t al

. , ) ) De fe nd ants
. )

___________________________________ ) M EM OR

AN DU M OP IN ION AN D O RD ER Plaintiff actions wer e dismissed by final orde r on Nove mber 4, 2008. Plaintiff has take n appea ls from those final orde rs. He ha s also filed three succe ssive motions i n this court for r elief fr om t he jud g me nt i n e a c h o f t

he c a se s, e a c h o f whic h h a s b e e n d e nie d w ithe xplanatio n. With his appea ls curre ntly

active, he now has filed a motion asking this court to enjoin depor tation pr oc e e din g s. Hi s mo tio n w ill be c on str ue d a s o ne fo r a

pr e lim ina

ry inj un c tio n ma de un de r R ule 65 of the F eder al Rules of Civil P roce dure, a nd denied. A pre liminary

injunction is emerg ency

relief available only

upon a showingthat (1) the moving pa

rty is substantially

likely to succe ed on the merits of the lawsuit; (2) he w ould suffer-2-

irrepa rable harm in the a

bsence of an injunction; (3) the injunction would not subst antially harm other pa rties; and (4) the injunction would not substantially harm the public inter est. Taylor v. Resolution Trust

Corp. , 56 F.3d 1497, 1505- 06 (D.C. Cir. 1995). The c ourt conc ludes that the plaintiff is not likely

to succe ed on the merits of his underlying a ction, a dete rmination that the court ha s expl ained multiple times elsewher e and de clines to repe at her e. See B ailey v. U .S. Marshal Service

, 584 F. Supp. 2d 128 (D.D .C. 2008); slip op. Bailey v . U.S. Marshall Service , 2008 WL5133958 (D.D.C. De c. 5, 2008); slip op. Bailey v . U.S. Marshall Service , Civil Action No. 08-283 (CKK) (D.D .C. Apr. 2, 2009). In a dd iti on , p la int if

f’ s mo tio n s e e ks an in

jun c tio n th at w ou ld r e str a in a no n- pa rt y to t his l aw s u i t
. T h e c o urti s “ p o w e r l e s s t o i s s u e ani n j un c t i o na g a i n s t ” a

n o n - p arty. Citi

ze ns Ale rt Regarding the Env ironment v. U.S. E.P .A., 25 9 F . Su pp . 2 d 9 , 1 7 ( D. D. C. 2 00 3) (c iti ngF e d. R. Civ . P. 65 (d )) . A c c or din g ly , it is OR DE RE D that plaintiff’s motion for injunctive re lief to fore stall deportation pr oc e e din g s is DENIED.
/ s / C O LLE EN K O LLA R
- K O T E LLY Da t e: Ap ri l 6 , 2 0 0 9 Un i t edS t at es Di s tri ctJ u d ge
#### CITY OF GASTONIA v. JOHN DAVID GLENN.

(Filed 20 November, 1940.)

1. Eminent Domain § 14—

This proceeding was instituted by a municipality to condemn an easement over respondent’s land for a sewer line, O. S., 2791, 2792, 1705, *et seq.*The petition described defendant’s tract of land over which the easement was sought but did not describe the property sought to be condemned. *Meld,:*Defendant’s demurrer to the petition for insufficiency of the description should have been sustained. C. S., 1716.

2. Pleading § 23—

Where it is determined on appeal that respondent’s demurrer to the petition in condemnation proceedings should have been sustained, petitioner may apply to the court below for leave to amend the petition if so advised. O. S., 515.

Appeal by respondent from *Clement, J.,*at July Term, 1940, of GaSTON.

Special proceeding under C. S., 2791-2792 and 1705, *et seq.,*to condemn right of way, privilege, or easement, over respondent’s land for extension of municipal sewer line.

It is set out in the petition that the city of Gastonia, in order to meet the necessity of extending its sewerage system, “has constructed and is constructing a sewer pipe line across the lands of the defendant . . . described as follows: Beginning at a point in the center of the Gastonia-Dallas Highway . . . containing 25% acres”; that petitioner and respondent have failed to agree upon the compensation that should be paid for ■ such right of way because of the excessive demand of the respondent, and that respondent has denied to petitioner the right to construct the line across his lands.

Demurrer interposed on the ground that the petition contains no description of the property sought to be condemned and fails to show the location of the line by map, profile, or otherwise.

Demurrer overruled, and respondent appeals.

*Ernest R. Warren for petitioner, appellee.*

*J. L. Hamme for respondent, appellant.*

Stacy, C. J.

It is provided by O. S., 1716, that in condemnation, the petition, when filed by the condemnor, “must contain a description of the real estate which the corporation seeks to acquire.” This we apprehend means a description of the property sought to be acquired and not merely a description of the entire tract over which the right of way, *511privilege, or easement is to run. Tbe right o£ way is to be located before it can be taken. It must be fixed and not fugitive. See *Johnston County v. Stewart,*217 N. C., 334, 7 S. E. (2d), 708. In other words, to paraphrase a certain parody, “the recipe for taking property in condemnation begins by saying ‘first locate the property.’ ” Such is the statutory requirement in condemning a right of way for a railroad. C. S., 3471; *S. v. Wells,*142 N. C., 590, 55 S. E., 210.

' In the present state of the record, we are constrained to reverse the ruling on the demurrer for insufficient description of the property sought to be condemned, with the observation that petitioner may apply to the court below, under C. S., 515, for leave to amend the petition, if so advised. This might have been done in the first instance under 3 C. S., 513. *Petty v. Lemons,*217 N. C., 492.

Eeversed.
Exhibit 32


CERTIFICATION
 OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

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 report on Form 10-Q ofSolar
 Energy Limitedfor thequarterly
 period endedJune 30,
 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I,Michael
 James Gobuty, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906
 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

| | (1) | Thisreport 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 fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the registrant at the end of the period covered by this report and results of operations of
the registrant for the period covered by this report.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date:August18,
 2009





/s/
 Michael James Gobuty

Michael
 James Gobuty

Chief
 Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer



Thiscertification
 accompanies this report pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not,
 except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the
 registrant for the purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
 This certification shall not be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
 Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of this report),
 irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.   A signed original of this written
 statement required by §906 has been provided to the registrant
 and will be retained by the registrant
 and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

28
| Skip to contentSocial Security Online | Actuarial Publications |
|---------------------------------------|------------------------|

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

| Office of the Chief Actuary | Single-Year Tables Consistent with 2006 OASDI Trustees ReportUpdated May 1, 2006 |
|-----------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
```

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 9, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 6848]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-02504]

[[Page 6848]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER16-861-000]

Iron Springs Solar, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of 
Iron Springs Solar, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, 
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes 
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future 
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, 
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's 
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone 
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that 
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with 
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability, is February 23, 2016.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet 
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an 
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the 
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the 
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in 
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in 
the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the 
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an 
eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive 
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). 
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email 
[email protected]. or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: February 3, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-02504 Filed 2-8-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```
#### EDNA HENSLEY v. PRISCILLA HARRIS, PAUL O. LAMB and PAUL T. LAMB.

(Filed 21 September, 1955.)

Trial § 17—

Exception to the admission of a document on which appeared the summons, affidavit, warrant of attachment, and return of the officers, offered for the purpose of showing that the action was instituted within one year from the accident in order to claim the benefits of G.S. 20-71.1, is not sustained, it appearing that appellant did not move that the admission of the document be limited, and it not appearing that the contents of the writ of attachment were read to the jury.

*600Winborne and Higgins, JJ., took no part in tlie consideration or decision of this case.

Appeal by defendant Paul T. Lamb from *Nettles, J.,*April Term, 1955, BuNCOmbe.

Civil action to recover compensation for damages to plaintiff’s cafe building.

An automobile belonging to the appellant and occupied by the infant defendants, while traveling north on Highway 19-23, cut to the left, crossed the south lane of traffic and the shoulder of the road, and crashed into plaintiff’s building. There was judgment for plaintiff and defendant Paul T. Lamb appealed.

*E. L. Loftin for 'plaintiff appellee.*

*Harkins, Van Winkle, Walton & Buck for defendant appellant.*

PeR Cukiam.

Plaintiff produced ample evidence to require the submission of issues to a jury. *Etheridge v. Etheridge,*222 N.C. 616, 24 S.E. 2d 477. To claim the benefits of G.S. 20-71.1, it was necessary for the plaintiff to show that she instituted her action within twelve months after the accident. For this purpose she offered the paper or document on which appeared the summons, the affidavit, the warrant of attachment, and the return of the officers. Appellant did not move that the admission of the document be limited to this purpose, and it does not appear in the record that the contents of the writ of attachment were ever read to the jury. Exception thereto is without merit.

The defendant has had a fair trial in which the court made a commendably accurate application of the provisions of G.S. 20-71.1, and the jury has decided, the facts adverse to the defendant. As no reversible error is made to appear, the judgment entered in the court below must be

Affirmed.

WiNboene and HiggiNS, JJ., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 23 (Thursday, February 4, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 6104]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-02106]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary


Application of Elite Airways, LLC for Certificate Authority

AGENCY: Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice of Order to Show Cause (Order 2016-1-12); Docket DOT-
OST-2015-0095.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Transportation is directing all interested 
parties to show cause why it should not issue an order finding Elite 
Airways, LLC fit, willing, and able, and awarding it a certificate of 
public convenience and necessity to conduct interstate scheduled air 
transportation of persons, property and mail.

DATES: Persons wishing to file objections should do so no later than 
February 11, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Objections and answers to objections should be filed in 
Docket DOT-OST-2015-0095 and addressed to the U.S. Department of 
Transportation, Docket Operations, (M-30, Room W12-140), 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, and should be served upon the 
parties listed in Attachment A to the order.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Snoden, Air Carrier Fitness 
Division (X-56, Room W86-471), U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366-4834.

    Dated: January 28, 2016.
Susan L. Kurland,
Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2016-02106 Filed 2-3-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
|EXHIBIT 32.2


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICEROF GUARANTY
BANCSHARES, INC.PURSUANT TO SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Clifton A. Payne, Chief Financial
Officer of Guaranty Bancshares, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify, pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection with this Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), that:
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 1 |  | the Report fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934, as
         amended, and
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2 |  | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
Companys financial condition and results of operations.
| | - |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|By: /s/ Clifton A. Payne
Clifton A. PayneSr. Vice President & Chief Financial Officer

Dated: August 13, 2003
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|30
|--
Long-Range 

Actuarial 

Balance

Annual 

Balance in 

75th Year

Long-Range 

Actuarial 

Balance

Annual Balance 

in 75th Year

Long-Range 

Actuarial 

Balance

Annual 

Balance in 

75th Year

-2.00% -4.34% 0.36% 0.50% -1.64% -3.84%

Estimates based on the intermediate assumptions of the 2009 Trustees Report Office of the Chief Actuary, Social Security

August 26, 2009

Summary Measures and Graphs

Category of Change: Level of Monthly Benefits (PIA)

Proposed Provision: Reduce benefits by 3 percent for those newly eligible for benefits in 2010 and later.

Present Law Change From Present Law in Results with this provision

OASDI Cost Rates and Income Rates

(as a percentage of taxable payroll)

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0

2009 2019 2029 2039 2049 2059 2069 2079

Year

Percent

Cost rates with this provision

Cost rates under present law

Income rates with this provision

Income rates under present law

OASDI Trust Fund Ratio

 (assets as a percentage of annual expenditures)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

2009 2019 2029 2039 2049 2059 2069 2079

Year

Percent

Present law With this provision
## Summary of Provisions That Would Change             the Social Security Program

- Office of the Chief Actuary
- Individual Provisions

### **Description of Proposed Provisions:            Provisions Affecting Retirement Age**

Printer-friendly Version
Long-range 

actuarial 

balance

Annual 

balance in 

75th year

Long-range 

actuarial 

balance

Annual 

balance in 

75th year

Long-range 

actuarial 

balance

Annual 

balance in 

75th year

-3.61 -4.35 0.83 1.18 23% 27%

Estimates based on the intermediate assumptions of the 2023 Trustees Report Office of the Chief Actuary

Social Security Administration

September 15, 2023

Summary Measures and Graphs

Category of Change: Payroll Taxes (including maximum taxable)

Current law

[percent of payroll]

Change from current law

[percent of payroll] Shortfall eliminated

Proposed Provision: E3.6. Increase the taxable maximum each year by an additional 2 percent beginning 

in 2026 until taxable earnings equal 90 percent of covered earnings. Do not provide benefit credit for 

additional earnings taxed.

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0

2023 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090

Percent

Year

OASDI Cost Rates and Income Rates

(as a percentage of taxable payroll)

Income rates under current law

Income rates with this provision

Cost rates under current law

Cost rates with this provision

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2023 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090

Percent

Year

OASDI Trust Fund Ratio

(assets as a percentage of annual expenditures)

Current law With this provision