alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 08-2892

___________ Michael S. Griffis, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Western * District of Arkansas. Chuck Medford; Lt. Beth Reely; * Jimmy Keeland; Michael Brown; * [UNPUBLISHED] Pete Moss; Jack Gentry; Mark Lotta; * Dr. Theresa Farrow; Dr. Donald Clay; * Shelia M. Howerton; Regina Fox * Jeffrey, Personal Representative of * the Estate of George Jeffrey, * * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: October 14, 2009 Filed: October 21, 2009

___________ Before BYE, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.1 The Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas, a dopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable James R. Marschewski, United St ates Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.

2 The remaining claims, concerning lo ckdown and a restraint chair, were disposed of (in his favor) following a hearing. This ruling is not at issue on appeal.

-2- Arkansas inmate Michael S. Gri ffis appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of partial summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. 2The claims disposed of in these rulings concerned Griffis’s allegations of poor housing conditions and deficient medical care at the Carroll County Detention Center, where he spent almost three years as a pretrial detainee. Havi ng found no merit to the issues Griffis raises on appeal, see Roe v. Crawford , 514 F.3d 789, 793 (8th Cir.) (standard of review), cert. denied , 129 S. Ct. 109 (2008), we affirm, see 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________
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 -0.37 -0.63 -10% -14%

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: Level of Monthly Benefits

Current law

[percent of payroll]

Change from current law

[percent of payroll] Shortfall eliminated

Proposed Provision: B5.10. Reconfigure the special minimum benefit, phased in for retired and disabled 

workers newly eligible from 2030 through 2039: (a) A year of work (YOW) coverage is equal to earnings at 

or above $10,875 in 2023 (reflecting a full-time worker earning the federal minimum wage), adjusted 

thereafter for wage growth. (b) At implementation, set the minimum PIA at zero percent of AWI for those 

with 10 or fewer YOWs to 15 percent of AWI for those with 15 YOWs, increasing linearly so that it reaches 

19 percent for 19 YOWs. Then the minimum PIA would jump up to 25 percent of AWI for those with 20 

YOWs, increasing linearly so that it equals 35 percent of AWI for those with 35 or more YOWs. (c) Use 

the AWI for two years prior to the year of initial eligibility in the minimum PIA calculation with COLA 

increase after the year of initial eligibility. (d) Scale the YOW requirements for disabled workers, based on 

the number of years of non-disabled potential work.

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
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 250 (Friday, December 29, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 67351]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-31484]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket Nos. ER95-1543-002, ER95-764-003, and EL96-20-000]


Illinois Power Company; Notice of Initiation of Proceeding and 
Refund Effective Date

December 26, 1995.
    Take notice that on December 20, 1995, the Commission issued an 
order in the above-indicated dockets initiating a proceeding in Docket 
No. EL96-20-000 under section 206 of the Federal Power Act.
    The refund effective date in Docket No. EL96-20-000 will be 60 days 
after publication of this notice in the Federal Register.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-31484 Filed 12-28-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit 32.2


CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002, AS AMENDED


I, Kathleen M. Crusco, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Activant Solutions Inc. (the “Company”), do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as amended, that, to the best of my knowledge:


|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1. | the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months endedMarch 31, 2011as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”); 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 28, 2011


/s/ Kathleen M. CruscoName: Kathleen M. CruscoTitle: Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


The foregoing certification which accompanies the Report is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
Order entered October 20 , 2016

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 16
- 00747
- CV MORRIS MILLER, Appellant

V.
DESIGN MASTERPIECE L ANDSCAPE, INC., Appellee On Appeal fro m the County Court at Law Rockwall County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1
- 14
- 110


### O RDER
Before the Court is court reporter Deborah Hamon’s October 17, 2016 request for extension of time to file the reporter’s record. The Court GRANTS Ms. Hamon’s request. We
ORDER Ms. Hamon to file the reporter’s record within THIRTY DAYS from the date of this
order.
/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE
**Exhibit 13.2**

**CERTIFICATION**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ENACTED PURSUANT**

**TO SECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Annual Report of Intertape Polymer Group Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year endedDecember 31, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Bernard J. Pitz, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

2. The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

Date: March 26, 2013
À“×Ã¤‹ ÕÃflÃ¤Õ ›—ÀŒÃ —⁄ fl––¤fl‘Õ

⁄—Œ Ãÿ¤ “×“Ãÿ ›×Œ›À×Ã

ŸflŒ« ...×‘‘×fl” ÿfl‘‘⁄—Œ‹Ù

 –¥ø·2 ̈·oo Û fl°°a¥¥ø2 ̈Ù

TMÚ

ÿ×‘‘flŒ« Œ—‹ÿfl” ›‘×“Ã—“Ù

 ‹aoa2oø2 ̈ Û fl°°a¥¥aaÚ

“±Ú ÔðÛÔÈÎÏÈ

‹Ú›Ú “±Ú ÌÊÔðÛ1⁄2TMÛðÏÏËËÛ...ÿfl

“±Æ ̈ ̧aÆ2 ‹·­ ̈Æ·1⁄2 ̈ ±o ›ø¥·o±Æ2·øÙ 

Õø2 ⁄Æø21⁄2·­1⁄2±

—Œ‹¤Œ

fiao±ÆaÊ ⁄flŒŒ×ÕÙ ‘¤fl «Ù ø2o fi«fi¤¤Ù ›·Æ1⁄2 ́· ̈ ÷ ́o1a­Ú

Ã ̧a 3a3±Æø2o ́3 o·­°±­· ̈·±2 o·¥ao 1⁄2±21⁄2 ́ÆÆa2 ̈¥ß ©· ̈ ̧  ̈ ̧·­ ±ÆoaÆ Æa°¥ø1⁄2a­  ̈ ̧a

3a3±Æø2o ́3 o·­°±­· ̈·±2 o·¥ao ±2 ”øß ÔÈÙ ÓðÔÔÚ 

...· ̈ ̧  ̈ ̧·­ 1⁄2 ̧ø21aÙ  ̈ ̧a °ø2a¥  ̧ø­ TM± ̈ao  ́2ø2·3± ́­¥ß  ̈± oa2ß  ̈ ̧a °a ̈· ̈·±2 o±Æ

Æa ̧aøÆ·21Ú Ã ̧a °a ̈· ̈·±2 o±Æ Æa ̧aøÆ·21 ·­ oa2·aoÚ

⁄×‘¤‹

÷À‘ Óð ÓðÔÔ

”—‘‘« ›Ú ‹...«¤ŒÙ ›‘¤Œ’

ÀÚÕÚ ›—ÀŒÃ —⁄ fl––¤fl‘Õ
Ã ̧·­ o·­°±­· ̈·±2 ·­ 2± ̈ ø°°Æ±°Æ·ø ̈a o±Æ ° ́æ¥·1⁄2ø ̈·±2 ø2o ·­ 2± ̈ °Æa1⁄2aoa2 ̈ ˆ

a®1⁄2a° ̈ ø­ °Æ±TM·oao æß Á ̈ ̧ ›·ÆÚ ŒÚ ÌÍÛÌÚ

Ã ̧a °ø2a¥  ́2ø2·3± ́­¥ß 1⁄2±21⁄2¥ ́oa­  ̈ ̧·­ 1⁄2ø­a ·­ ­ ́· ̈øæ¥a o±Æ oa1⁄2·­·±2 ˆˆ

©· ̈ ̧± ́ ̈ ±Æø¥ øÆ1 ́3a2 ̈Ú Õaa ⁄aoÚ ŒÚ fl°°Ú –Ú ÌÏ ̄ø ̃ ̄Ó ̃Ú

“—Ã ⁄—Œ –Àfi‘×›flÃ×—“

À“×Ã¤‹ ÕÃflÃ¤Õ ›—ÀŒÃ —⁄ fl––¤fl‘Õ

⁄—Œ Ãÿ¤ “×“Ãÿ ›×Œ›À×Ã

ŸflŒ« ...×‘‘×fl” ÿfl‘‘⁄—Œ‹Ù

 –¥ø·2 ̈·oo Û fl°°a¥¥ø2 ̈Ù

TMÚ

ÿ×‘‘flŒ« Œ—‹ÿfl” ›‘×“Ã—“Ù

 ‹aoa2oø2 ̈ Û fl°°a¥¥aaÚ

“±Ú ÔðÛÔÈÎÏÈ

‹Ú›Ú “±Ú ÌÊÔðÛ1⁄2TMÛðÏÏËËÛ...ÿfl

”¤”—Œfl“‹À”ˆ

fl°°aø¥ oÆ±3  ̈ ̧a À2· ̈ao Õ ̈ø ̈a­ ‹·­ ̈Æ·1⁄2 ̈ ›± ́Æ ̈

o±Æ  ̈ ̧a “±Æ ̈ ̧aÆ2 ‹·­ ̈Æ·1⁄2 ̈ ±o ›ø¥·o±Æ2·ø

...·¥¥·ø3 ÿÚ fl¥­ ́°Ù ‹·­ ̈Æ·1⁄2 ̈ ÷ ́o1aÙ –Æa­·o·21

Õ ́æ3· ̈ ̈ao ”øÆ1⁄2 ̧ ËÙ ÓðÔÔˆˆ 

fiao±ÆaÊ ⁄flŒŒ×ÕÙ ‘¤fl «Ù ø2o fi«fi¤¤Ù ›·Æ1⁄2 ́· ̈ ÷ ́o1a­Ú

›ø¥·o±Æ2·ø ­ ̈ø ̈a °Æ·­±2aÆ ŸøÆß ...·¥¥·ø3 ÿø¥¥o±Æo ø°°aø¥­ °Æ± ­a oÆ±3  ̈ ̧a

o·­ ̈Æ·1⁄2 ̈ 1⁄2± ́Æ ̈é­ o·­3·­­ø¥ o±Æ oø·¥ ́Æa  ̈± ­ ̈ø ̈a ø 1⁄2¥ø·3 ±o  ̧·­ ø1⁄2 ̈·±2 ­aaμ·21 ø ...Æ· ̈ ±o

–Æ± ̧·æ· ̈·±2 ø1ø·2­ ̈  ̈ ̧a Õa1⁄2Æa ̈øÆß ±o Õ ̈ø ̈a  ̈± °ÆaTMa2 ̈  ̧aÆ oÆ±3 a2o±Æ1⁄2·21 ø2 ø1a

ÆaØ ́·Æa3a2 ̈ ·2  ̧·Æ·21 a3°¥±ßaa­ o±Æ  ̈ ̧a À2· ̈ao “ø ̈·±2­Ú ...a  ̧øTMa ¶ ́Æ·­o·1⁄2 ̈·±2

⁄×‘¤‹

÷À‘ Óð ÓðÔÔ

”—‘‘« ›Ú ‹...«¤ŒÙ ›‘¤Œ’

ÀÚÕÚ ›—ÀŒÃ —⁄ fl––¤fl‘Õ
 ́2oaÆ ÓË ÀÚÕÚ›Ú y ÔÓÁÔÚ ...a ÆaTM·a© oa 2±TM±  ̈ ̧a o·­ ̈Æ·1⁄2 ̈ 1⁄2± ́Æ ̈ ̆­ oa1⁄2·­·±2  ̈± o·­3·­­

ø 1⁄2±3°¥ø·2 ̈  ́2oaÆ ÓË ÀÚÕÚ›Ú y ÔÁÔÎflÙ Œø3·Æa¶ TMÚ Ÿø¥ø¶øÙ ÌÌÏ ⁄ÚÌo ËÎðÙ ËÎÌ  ̄Á ̈ ̧

›·ÆÚ ÓððÌ ̃Ú ...a øoo·Æ3 o±Æ  ̈ ̧a Æaø­±2­ ­ ̈ø ̈ao æß  ̈ ̧a o·­ ̈Æ·1⁄2 ̈ 1⁄2± ́Æ ̈ ·2 · ̈­ ±ÆoaÆ

o·­3·­­·21  ̈ ̧a 1⁄2ø­aÙ o·¥ao ±2 “±TMa3æaÆ ÔÙ ÓðÔðÚ 

fl⁄⁄×Œ”¤‹Ú
| Skip to contentSocial Security Online | Actuarial Publications |
|---------------------------------------|------------------------|

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

| Solvency provisions | Detailed Single Year TablesUpdated May 3, 2006   |
|---------------------|-------------------------------------------------------|

| Level of Monthly Benefits (PIA) | Description of Proposed Provision:      Reduce benefits by 5 percent for those newly eligible for benefits in 2006 and later |
|---------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                 |

*Estimates based on the intermediate assumptions      of the 2005 Trustees Report*

       Financial Estimates for the OASDI Trust Fund Program                Percentage of taxable payroll           Trust fundratio as ofJanuary 1CalendaryearCostrateIncomerateAnnualbalance 200511.1312.721.59 320200610.9912.731.74 338200710.9212.741.82 356200810.9312.781.85 372200911.0412.771.73 386201011.1312.791.66 400201111.2612.841.57 412201211.4712.871.40 421201311.6912.891.20 429201411.9312.910.98 434201512.1712.920.76 438201612.4312.940.52 440201712.6912.960.27 440201812.9612.980.01 438201913.2412.99-0.25 435202013.5313.01-0.51 430202113.8113.03-0.78 424202214.0813.04-1.04 417202314.3613.06-1.29 408202414.6213.08-1.55 398202514.8913.09-1.80 387202615.1513.11-2.04 375202715.3913.12-2.27 362202815.6113.14-2.47 349202915.8013.15-2.65 335203015.9713.16-2.81 320203116.1413.17-2.96 305203216.2813.18-3.09 289203316.3913.19-3.19 273203416.4713.20-3.27 256203516.5413.20-3.33 240203616.5913.21-3.38 223203716.6313.21-3.42 206203816.6513.22-3.43 188203916.6513.22-3.44 171204016.6613.22-3.44 153204116.6613.22-3.44 135204216.6713.22-3.44 116204316.6713.22-3.45 98204416.6713.23-3.45 79204516.6813.23-3.45 60204616.6913.23-3.46 40204716.7113.23-3.48 20204816.7213.23-3.49 ----204916.7413.23-3.51 ----205016.7713.24-3.53 ----205116.8013.24-3.56 ----205216.8313.24-3.59 ----205316.8713.24-3.63 ----205416.9113.25-3.66 ----205516.9513.25-3.70 ----205617.0013.25-3.75 ----205717.0513.26-3.80 ----205817.1013.26-3.84 ----205917.1513.26-3.89 ----206017.2013.27-3.93 ----206117.2513.27-3.98 ----206217.3113.28-4.03 ----206317.3713.28-4.09 ----206417.4213.28-4.14 ----206517.4813.29-4.19 ----206617.5413.29-4.25 ----206717.5913.29-4.30 ----206817.6513.30-4.35 ----206917.7013.30-4.40 ----207017.7413.30-4.44 ----207117.7913.31-4.48 ----207217.8313.31-4.52 ----207317.8713.31-4.56 ----207417.9113.31-4.60 ----207517.9513.32-4.64 ----207618.0013.32-4.68 ----207718.0413.32-4.72 ----207818.0813.32-4.76 ----207918.1313.33-4.80 ----208018.1713.33-4.84 ----Summarized RatesYearsCostrateIncomerateActuarialbalance         Change inactuarialbalance2005-207915.15%13.84%-1.3%0.61% Privacy Policy      | Website Policies        & Other Important Information      | Site Map
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

*Notice is hereby given*                     that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) as Receiver for Haven Trust Bank Florida, Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida (“the Receiver”) intends to terminate its receivership for said institution. The FDIC was appointed receiver of Haven Trust Bank Florida on September 24, 2010. The liquidation of the receivership assets has been completed. To the extent permitted by available funds and in accordance with law, the Receiver will be making a final dividend payment to proven creditors.                

Based upon the foregoing, the Receiver has determined that the continued existence of the receivership will serve no useful purpose. Consequently, notice is given that the receivership shall be terminated, to be effective no sooner than thirty days after the date of this Notice. If any person wishes to comment concerning the termination of the receivership, such comment must be made in writing and sent within thirty days of the date of this Notice to: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, Attention: Receivership Oversight Department 32.1, 1601 Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201.

No comments concerning the termination of this receivership will be considered which are not sent within this time frame.

Dated: February 5, 2016.
      ( print page 7101)    
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Robert E. Feldman,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2016-02661 Filed 2-9-16; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
#### PAUL COCKRELL, Administrator of K. B. COCKRELL, Deceased, v. ATLANTIC COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY.

(Filed 19 March, 1952.)

Railroads § 4—

Evidence tending to show that plaintiff’s intestate could have seen one-fourth of a mile in the direction from whence defendant’s train was approaching, without evidence that the condition of the crossing caused his vehicle to stall or prevented him from looking before entering upon the crossing, *held*to disclose contributory negligence barring recovery as a matter of law.

Appeal by plaintiff from *Hatch, Special Judge,*January Term, 1952, JohNstoN.

Affirmed.

Civil action to recover damages for tbe alleged wrongful death of plaintiff’s intestate wbo was killed wben be drove bis truck in front of an oncoming train at a neighborhood public road crossing.

At tbe conclusion of plaintiff’s evidence in chief, tbe court, upon motion of defendant, dismissed tbe cause as in case of nonsuit. Plaintiff excepted and appealed.

*Levinson •& Batton for plaintiff appellant.*

*Shepard <& Wood for defendant appellee.*

PeR CuriaM.

While the details, as always, are somewhat different, there is nothing in tbe testimony in this case which serves to distinguish it from the long line of railroad crossing cases appearing in our reports in which judgments of nonsuit were either affirmed or directed. Plaintiff’s intestate could see clearly for at least one-fourth mile down the track in the direction from which the train approached. Unfortunately he failed to look, or, looking, failed to heed the presence of the oncoming train. It does not appear that the condition of the crossing caused his vehicle to stall or prevented him from looking before entering the zone of danger. Therefore, the judgment of nonsuit must be affirmed on authority of the line of decisions represented by *Parker v. R. R.,*232 N.C. 472, 61 S.E. 2d *304370; *Herndon v. R. R.,*234 N.C. 9; *Godwin v. R. R.,*220 N.C. 281, 17 S.E. 2d 137; *Miller v. R. R.,*220 N.C. 562, 18 S.E. 2d 232.

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 27 (Thursday, February 9, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 7753]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-3215]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service
[I.D. 121294B]


Marine Mammals

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce; and Fish and Wildlife 
Service (FSW), Interior.

ACTION: Issuance of scientific research permit no. 938 (P368D).

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that Moss Landing Marine Laboratories, 
P.O. Box 450, Moss Landing, CA 95039-0450, (Principal Investigators: 
Drs. James T. Harvey, Daniel P. Costa, John Calambokidis, and Ms. Dawn 
Goley) has been issued a permit to take marine mammals for purposes of 
scientific research.

ADDRESSES: The permit and related documents are available for review 
upon written request or by appointment, in the following offices:
    Chief, Permits Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 
East-West Highway, Room 13130, Silver Spring, MD 20910 (301/713-2289); 
and
    Director, Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 W. Ocean Boulevard, Long 
Beach, CA 90802-4213 (310/980-4047).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 11, 1994, notice was published in 
the Federal Register (59 FR 51418) that a request for a scientific 
research permit to take several species of marine mammals had been 
submitted by the above-named organization and individuals. The 
requested permit has been issued under the authority of the Marine 
Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), the 
Regulations Governing the Taking and Importing of Marine Mammals (50 
CFR part 216), the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA) (16 
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), the Regulations Governing the Taking, Importing, 
and Exporting of Endangered Fish and Wildlife (50 CFR part 222), the 
Fur Seal Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1151 et seq.), and fur seal 
regulations at 50 CFR part 215.
    Issuance of this permit, as required by the ESA, was based on a 
finding that such permit: (1) Was applied for in good faith; (2) will 
not operate to the disadvantage of the endangered species which is the 
subject of this permit; and (3) is consistent with the purposes and 
policies set forth in section 2 of the ESA.

    Dated: February 2, 1995.
William W. Fox, Jr.,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.

    Dated: February 2, 1995.
Margaret Tieger,
Acting Chief, Branch of Permits, Office of Management Authority, U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 95-3215 Filed 2-8-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
#### LON POWERS v. COMMERCIAL SERVICE COMPANY, Incorporated, et al.

(Filed 23 December, 1931.)

Evidence D d — Testimony of contents of telephone conversation held incompetent under the facts of this case.

Where a witness is allowed to testify over objection to the substance of an alleged telephone conversation with an unknown person for the purpose of showing the contents of the conversation which alone gave it pertinency and rendered it hurtful, the testimony is incompetent as hearsay, and its admission constitutes reversible error.

Appeal by plaintiff from *McElroy, J.,*at Second April Term, 1931, of BUNCOMBE.

Civil action for damages, tried in the General County Court of Buncombe, which resulted in a verdict and judgment for plaintiff. On appeal to the Superior Court, four exceptions “upon which the defendants have assigned error as appears by the record” were sustained, and the cause remanded for another hearing. From this order, plaintiff, appeals, contending that no reversible error appears on the record.

*14*J ohnson, Smothers & Rollins for plaintiff.*

*Zeb. V. Nettles and Carter & Carter for defendants.*

Stacy, C. J.

Putting aside tbe doubt as to whether it “appears by the record” that the four assignments of error, sustained by the Superior Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, are based on exceptions duly taken and entered *(Sanders v. Sanders,*201 N. C., 350), which otherwise might call for a dismissal of the appeal, the ruling on the first assignment of error seems to be well supported by the authorities.

The trial court permitted a witness for the plaintiff, over objection of defendants, to give in evidence the substance of an alleged telephone conversation which he had with some unknown person. This was hearsay, and as it was offered for the purpose of showing the contents of said conversation, which alone gave it pertinency and rendered it hurtful in effect, the ruling of admission was erroneous. The Superior Court, therefore, properly sustained the assignment of error based on this exception. Occasion was presented in each of the following cases to deal with the competency of conversations had over the telephone: *Lumber Co. v. Askew,*185 N. C., 87, 116 S. E., 93, *Sanders v. Griffin,*191 N. C., 447, 132 S. E., 157, *Mfg. Co. v. Bray,*193 N. C., 350, 137 S. E., 151, *S. v. Burleson,*198 N. C., 61, 150 S. E., 628, *Harvester Co. v. Caldwell,*198 N. C., 751, 153 S. E., 325.

The remaining exceptions are not considered, as it is unnecessary to pass upon them now.

Affirmed.