alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Euzebe TATE v. Odin GUILLAUMIN.

No. 892.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

Feb. 8, 1932.

Argued before MOUTON, ELLIOTT, and LE BLANC, JJ.

J. Hugo Dore, of Ville Platte, for appellant.

L. Austin Fontenot, of Opelousas, for appel-lee:

ELLIOTT, J.

Euzebe Tate claims of Odin Guillaumin $230 as damages on account of injury to mules belonging to him which were shot and badly wounded, but not hilled. He'alleges that Odin Guillaumin shot, them, causing him damages to the extent stated.

Guillaumin, defendant, denies shooting the mules and sets up a claim in reconvention based on a different matter. The lower court confined its action in the ease to plaintiff’s demand on account of the alleged' shooting of the mules and rejected same, taking no notice of defendant’s demand in reconvention. Defendant has not appealed nor answered the appeal. His demand in reconvention can not therefore be considered.

The evidence in support of plaintiff’s demand against the defendant is all circumstantial. There was no eyewitness to the shooting. Some facts and circumstances, developed on the trial, tend to indicate that defendant likely did it; but there are other facts and circumstances which tend to indicate otherwise. The plaintiff turhed his mules out at night, and the evidence shows that they sought his neighbor’s fields and, in their effort to feed on the grass and weeds inside the fields near the fences, would reach their heads and necks over the wire and, pushing with their weight against the fence, would break the fence post, which of course injured the ■ fence. Plaintiff had been notified of what his mules were doing and was requested to have it stopped. He should have done so, but neglected the matter.

In this instance there is circumstantial evidence which tends to indicate that another neighbor, instead of defendant, may have shot the mules.

The evidence does not establish with sufficient certainty that the shooting was done by the defendant.

Plaintiff’s demand was properly rejected.

Judgment affirmed. Plaintiff and appellant to pay the cost in both courts.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         324,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  130,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     40,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               444,000
<PP&E>                                       2,082,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,101,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          350,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       847,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,571,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,101,000
<SALES>                                        853,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               910,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,035,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (128,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (128,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                599,000
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   471,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06
        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Rubin Ayala, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The suppression court found that the photographic and lineup procedures employed by the police were not improperly suggestive and that the witnesses had an independent basis for their identification testimony. Those conclusions are supported by the record and thus defendant’s *Wade*motion was properly denied. (Appeal from judgment of Erie County Court, McCarthy, J.—robbery, first degree.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Denman, Green, Pine and Balio, JJ.
ExLPWT^- MOTION DENIED Xm 7WE. CjOukt oFDATE* MiO~IS dftwwurt-L/*flflg/W.S BY- 4^— ncXJEWP 

### ftgnOM fDR ftEVEK5iU.' ftMQ M£k3 Tttfl^ffffifccaWWW-A*6*4* to tfrie. Horo^wue SUPA£^ CjOUftrr 3UO€SOF 7#£- COURTS ^ l v 

### C$/tes jOou), SenwcXWitters^, fe ^plrcanV-pro s^ asrcl l^ggfeijota ^r fe/ersA oi^ A&o +TMd purS&vVt- Ao TEX. # .%?, fi sotei, ^ suppcrV o? su*ft\ ^ r\,A\„<^ ^n*wW Ch«W-\CW¥>^ offish waft Cxtf)fir*n tinch; *W fifes yij i7/eotp, m pretrial Ineaicfaq, nojWs\cm or XMft ] m \W&Mc] aMpn *% 

### mrcf wdrtof), AqSuy>rn afresh crfftcWlfe o*\ky\o SVsV pn&aixwy \ruVialv ^(^ UxO, ^>e^ H-rriva^ w.» 

### h, T^ceS Uuo.See fli+ifele ^.n ccAe Cm ftot uita*& Apphca^s fWAVaM JtakSlxfcVt ftcs^eWss verves4W<d aj^^Uuo onto "fe^ft.Ac«xft <&&.& -& ito-u>L 5ee ^-ne^v. ^e^H*.
Ttv v. w& c^use.Tsic^>,pool'33h ft&cAiwte+<^ev±<&4W; fcpro^iicf p)K^ 6 GimrW° Ryuj^otW foroed Hucge mdxdmems. from k# tarw CuVawjTsAawd ^\oxo^ks1%is granted because 4^e NuiaS.clouJlw DiskmfekwOW, T$to 77383



# L ft>£\e IcU
#### PARA LAND COMPANY, A Dissolved Florida Corporation, and W. Frank Blanton, J. H. Swink and A. A. Brown, Members of the Last Board of Directors Thereof, and as Trustees of the Property of Said Corporation, Appellants, v. Oscar HOWARD, Appellee.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division B.

May 28, 1954.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6917 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.6917

                    One Hundred Seventeenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,
          the third day of January, two thousand and twenty-two

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
 301 East Congress Parkway in Crystal Lake, Illinois, as the ``Ryan J. 
                    Cummings Post Office Building''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. RYAN J. CUMMINGS POST OFFICE BUILDING.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 301 East Congress Parkway in Crystal Lake, Illinois, shall 
be known and designated as the ``Ryan J. Cummings Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Ryan J. 
Cummings Post Office Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 42 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.J.Res.42

                      One Hundred Seventh Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
             the third day of January, two thousand and one

                            Joint Resolution

 
Memorializing fallen firefighters by lowering the American flag to half-
 staff in honor of the National Fallen Firefighters Memorial Service in 
                          Emmitsburg, Maryland.

Whereas 1,200,000 men and women comprise the American fire and 
  emergency services;

Whereas the fire and emergency services is considered one of the most 
  dangerous jobs in the United States;

Whereas fire and emergency services personnel respond to over 16 
  million emergency calls annually, without reservation and with little 
  regard for their personal safety;

Whereas fire and emergency services personnel are the first to respond 
  to an emergency, whether it involves a fire, medical emergency, spill 
  of hazardous materials, natural disaster, act of terrorism, or 
  transportation accident;

Whereas approximately one-third of all active fire and emergency 
  personnel suffer debilitating injuries annually; and

Whereas approximately 100 fire and emergency services personnel die 
  annually in the line of duty: Now, therefore, be it

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That each year, the American 
flags on all Federal office buildings will be lowered to half-staff in 
honor of the National Fallen Firefighters Memorial Service in 
Emmitsburg, Maryland.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
#### John A. Carver, Appellant, v Apple Rubber Products Corp., Respondent.

Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs, in accordance with the following memorandum: Plaintiff instituted this action to recover damages allegedly incurred as the result of defendant’s breach of a 1977 employment agreement between the *850parties. Supreme Court found that the doctrines of abandonment and ratification operated to defeat plaintiffs claim. We disagree, and conclude that the court erred in granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs complaint.

Whether both parties consented to abandon the contract between them is a question of fact for the jury *(see, Green v Doniger,*300 NY 238, 245; *see also, Staebell v Bennie,*83 AD2d 765). The mere fact that defendant may have breached its agreement with plaintiff is insufficient to establish abandonment *(Atlantic Co. v Jarll Realty Corp.,*36 AD2d 883, 884). The record fails to demonstrate whether, or to what extent, the parties actually performed under the contract. We are thus unable to ascertain, as a matter of law, whether an "abandonment may be inferred from the conduct of the parties and the attendant circumstances” *(Matter of Schanzer,*7 AD2d 275, 278, *affd*8 NY2d 972; *see, Ferran Concrete Co. v Commerce Elec.,*118 AD2d 619, 620; *see also, Matter of Macy & Co. [National Sleep Prods.],*39 NY2d 268, 271).

Moreover, the defense of ratification cannot be applied to defeat plaintiff’s claim at this stage of the proceedings because plaintiff has not sought to annul or void any agreement he had with defendant and the record does not establish, as a matter of law, that the annual salary he was receiving was less than was called for under the 1977 agreement *(see, Smith v Jones,*76 Misc 2d 656, 660).

Finally, Supreme Court erred in denying plaintiffs motion to dismiss defendant’s counterclaim for costs pursuant to CPLR 8303-a. That section permits imposition of costs upon frivolous claims "in [actions] to recover damages for personal injury, injury to property or wrongful death” (CPLR 8303-a [a]). Since this action is essentially one for breach of contract, that section of the CPLR is inapplicable.

Accordingly, the order of Supreme Court should be modified by reversing those parts of the order that granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment and denied plaintiffs motion to dismiss defendant’s counterclaim. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, McGowan, J.—summary judgment.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Doerr, Pine and Lawton, JJ.
#### Jean M. Lawrence, Respondent, v Andrew Meloni, as Sheriff of Monroe County, et al., Defendants, and Utica National Insurance Group, Appellant.

Order unanimously *828reversed on the law without costs and judgment of Rochester City Court reinstated. Memorandum: County Court erred in concluding that plaintiff acquired title to stolen property by adverse possession of stolen property for a period in excess of the Statute of Limitations for conversion. It is well established that an innocent purchaser of stolen property does not become a wrongdoer until she refuses the owner’s demand for return of the property *(MacDonnell v Buffalo Loan, Trust & Safe Deposit Co.,*193 NY 92, 101; *Gillet v Roberts,*57 NY 28, 34; *Menzel v List,*22 AD2d 647; *Duryea v Andrews,*12 NYS 42; *see also, Kunstsammlungen Zu Weimar v Elicofon,*678 F2d 1150, 1161-1164). Until the refusal, the innocent purchaser is deemed to be in lawful possession *(MacDonnell v Buffalo Loan, Trust & Safe Deposit Co., supra; Gillet v Roberts, supra; Kunstsammlungen Zu Weimar v Elicofon, supra).*Plaintiff’s possession, therefore, was never adverse to that of defendant Utica National. Because the owner could not make a demand until the stolen property was located on April 27, 1988, the Statute of Limitations governing the owner’s cause of action to recover the property (CPLR 214 [3]) did not begin to run, at the earliest, until that date. Accordingly, we reinstate the judgment of Rochester City Court, granting summary judgment in favor of Utica National. (Appeal from order of Monroe County Court, Celli, J.—declaratory judgment.) Present— Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 173 (Friday, September 5, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 51870]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20707]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]


In the Matter of Continental Beverage and Nutrition, Inc.; Order 
of Suspension of Trading

September 3, 2008.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is 
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of 
Continental Beverage and Nutrition, Inc. (``Continental'') because it 
has not filed any periodic reports since it filed a Form 10-QSB for the 
period ended November 30, 2006.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the 
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the 
securities of Continental.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the 
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of 
Continental is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT on September 
3, 2008, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on September 16, 2008.

    By the Commission.
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-20707 Filed 9-3-08; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7096 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7096

   To amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to enhance the authority of U.S. 
  Customs and Border Protection to share information with respect to 
 merchandise suspected of violating intellectual property rights with 
              rights holders and other interested parties.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 16, 2022

   Mr. Buck introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to enhance the authority of U.S. 
  Customs and Border Protection to share information with respect to 
 merchandise suspected of violating intellectual property rights with 
              rights holders and other interested parties.

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

SECTION 1. ENHANCED AUTHORITY TO SHARE INFORMATION WITH RESPECT TO 
              MERCHANDISE SUSPECTED OF VIOLATING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 
              RIGHTS.

    Section 628A of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1628a) is 
amended--
            (1) in subsection (a), by striking paragraph (1) and 
        inserting the following:
            ``(1) shall provide to the person information that appears 
        on the merchandise, including--
                    ``(A) its packaging, materials, and containers, 
                including labels; and
                    ``(B) its packing materials and containers, 
                including labels; and''; and
            (2) in subsection (b)--
                    (A) in paragraph (3), by striking ``; and'' and 
                inserting a semicolon;
                    (B) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the 
                end and inserting ``; and''; and
                    (C) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(5) any other party with an interest in the merchandise, 
        as determined appropriate by the Commissioner.''.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES
                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C. 20549

                                    Form 13F

                               Form 13F COVER PAGE

Report for the Calendar Year or Quarter Ended:  June 30, 1999

Check here if Amendment [    ]; Amendment Number: ____
    This Amendment (Check only one.): [    ] is a restatement.
                                      [    ] adds new holdings entries.

Institutional Investment Manager Filing this Report:

Name:      Citicorp
Address:   399 Park Avenue
           New York, New York 10043

Form 13F File Number:              28-45

The institutional investment manager filing this report and the person by whom
it is signed hereby represent that the person signing the report is authorized
to submit it, that all information contained herein is true, correct and
complete, and that it is understood that all required items, statements,
schedules, lists, and tables, are considered integral parts of this form.

Person Signing this Report on Behalf of Reporting Manager:

Name:      Kenneth S. Cohen
Title:     Assistant Secretary
Phone:     (212) 559-6528

Signature, Place, and Date of Signing:

/s/ Kenneth S. Cohen         New York, New York              August 16, 1999
--------------------

Report Type (Check only one.):

[   ] 13F  HOLDINGS  REPORT.   (Check  here  if  all  holdings  of  this
      reporting manager are reported in this report.)

[ X ] 13F NOTICE. (Check here if no holdings reported are in this report,
      and all holdings are reported by other reporting manager(s).)

[   ] 13F COMBINATION REPORT. (Check here if a portion of the holdings for
      this reporting manager are reported in this report and a portion are
      reported by other reporting manager(s).)

List of Other Managers Reporting for this Manager:

Form 13F File Number 28-2427
Name:  Citigroup Inc.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 176 (Wednesday, September 10, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52647-52648]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21029]


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

DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD


Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board

AGENCY: Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the membership of the Defense Nuclear 
Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Senior Executive Service (SES) 
Performance Review Board (PRB).

DATES: Effective Date: September 10, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Send comments concerning this notice to: Defense Nuclear 
Facilities Safety Board, 625 Indiana Avenue, NW., Suite 700, 
Washington, DC 20004-2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Biscieglia by telephone at 
(202) 694-7041 or by e-mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3a5e5f5858535f587a5e545c4958145d554c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4f2b2a2d2d262a2d0f2b21293c2d61282039">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(1) through (5) requires 
each

[[Page 52648]]

agency to establish, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the 
Office of Personnel Management, one or more performance review boards. 
The PRB shall review and evaluate the initial summary rating of the 
senior executive's performance, the executive's response, and the 
higher level official's comments on the initial summary rating. In 
addition, the PRB will review and recommend executive performance 
bonuses and pay increases.
    The DNFSB is a small, independent Federal agency; therefore, the 
members of the DNFSB SES Performance Review Board listed in this notice 
are drawn from the SES ranks of other agencies. The following persons 
comprise a standing roster to serve as members of the Defense Nuclear 
Facilities Safety Board SES Performance Review Board: Christopher E. 
Aiello, Director of Human Resources, Federal Deposit Insurance 
Corporation David M. Capozzi, Director of Technical and Information 
Services, United States Access Board DeDe Greene, Executive Officer, 
Civil Rights Division, Department of Justice Raymond Limon, Chief Human 
Capital Officer, Corporation for National & Community Service 
Christopher W. Warner, General Counsel, U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard 
Investigation Board.

    Dated: September 3, 2008.
Brian Grosner,
Chairman, Executive Resources Board.
[FR Doc. E8-21029 Filed 9-9-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3670-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                     <C>       
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       Dec-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                            Mar-31-1999                     
<CASH>                                       13,706
<SECURITIES>                                 13,724
<RECEIVABLES>                                31,530
<ALLOWANCES>                                    575
<INVENTORY>                                  33,512 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             94,674    
<PP&E>                                      127,921
<DEPRECIATION>                               54,717
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              171,178    
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        17,676
<BONDS>                                           0 
<COMMON>                                         90
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                  144,396
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                171,178
<SALES>                                      46,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             46,310
<CGS>                                        31,512
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                40,215  
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               6,095
<INCOME-TAX>                                  2,039
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           4,056
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                  4,056
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.47
        

</TABLE>