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

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1161 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  1st Session

                               H. R. 1161

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

   To authorize the Government of the Czech Republic to establish a 
    memorial to honor Tomas G. Masaryk in the District of Columbia.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1161

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To authorize the Government of the Czech Republic to establish a 
    memorial to honor Tomas G. Masaryk in the District of Columbia.

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

SECTION 1. AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH MEMORIAL.

    (a) In General.--The Government of the Czech Republic is authorized 
to establish a memorial to honor Tomas G. Masaryk on the Federal land 
in the District of Columbia.
    (b) Compliance With Standards for Commemorative Works.--The 
establishment of the memorial shall be in accordance with the 
Commemorative Works Act (40 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.), except that sections 
2(c), 6(b), 8(b), and 10(c) of that Act shall not apply with respect to 
the memorial.
    (c) Limitation on Payment of Expenses.--The United States 
Government shall not pay any expense for the establishment of the 
memorial or its maintenance.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 2, 2001.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

STEVEN A. SWAN

vs.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

MC NO. 07-008ML

ORDER

The undersigned hereby recuse themselves from participation in the

above-referenced matter.

SO ORDERED:

May M. Visi

Chief U.S. District Judge

January ,'f , 2007

William E. Smith

U.S. District Judge

January S r , 2007

Ernest C. Torres

Senior U. S. District Judge

January 13o 2007

Case 1:06-cv-00404-JAW Document 14-1 Filed 01/31/07 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1552 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 204
107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1552

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 17, 2001

                                Received

                            October 25, 2001

                          Read the first time

                            October 30, 2001

            Read the second time and placed on the calendar

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To extend the moratorium enacted by the Internet Tax Freedom Act 
           through November 1, 2003, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Internet Tax Nondiscrimination 
Act''.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF INTERNET TAX FREEDOM ACT MORATORIUM.

    Section 1101(a) of the Internet Tax Freedom Act (47 U.S.C. 151 
note) is amended by striking ``3 years after the date of the enactment 
of this Act'' and inserting ``on November 1, 2003''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 16, 2001.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.

                                                       Calendar No. 204

107th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 1552

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

   To extend the moratorium enacted by the Internet Tax Freedom Act 
           through November 1, 2003, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            October 30, 2001

            Read the second time and placed on the calendar
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 06-cr-196-01-SM

Antonio Ortiz

O R D E R

Defendant Ortiz’s motion to continue the final pretrial conference and trial

is granted (document 15). Trial has been rescheduled for the February 2007

trial period. Defendant Ortiz shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights not later

than November 29, 2006. On the filing of such waiver, his continuance shall be

effective. 

The Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance

outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, 18

U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would

unreasonably deny defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence under the

circumstances. 

Final Pretrial Conference: February 1, 2007 at 3:30 p.m.

Jury Selection: February 6, 2007 at 9:30 a.m.

Case 1:06-cr-00196-SM Document 16 Filed 11/21/06 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

 Chief Judge

November 21, 2006

cc: Jonathan Saxe, Esq.

Robert Veiga, AUSA

US Probation

US Marshal

Case 1:06-cr-00196-SM Document 16 Filed 11/21/06 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 06-cr-28-01-PB

Anthony Licciardi

O R D E R

The defendant has moved to continue the April 4, 2006 trial

in the above case, citing the need for additional time to

complete discovery and prepare a defense. The government does

not object to a continuance of the trial date.

Accordingly, in order to allow the parties additional time

to properly prepare for trial, the court will continue the trial

from April 4, 2006 to July 6, 2006. In agreeing to continue the

trial, the court finds pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. § 3161(h)(8)(A)

that for the above-stated reasons, the ends of justice served in

granting a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public

and the defendant in a speedy trial.

Case 1:06-cr-00028-PB Document 6 Filed 03/20/06 Page 1 of 2
2

The March 21, 2006 final pretrial conference is continued

until June 26, 2006 at 4:00 p.m.

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

March 20, 2006

cc: Ray Raimo Esq.

Terry Ollila, AUSA

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:06-cr-00028-PB Document 6 Filed 03/20/06 Page 2 of 2
#### WREN v. BROCK.

No. 2214.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

April 24, 1942.

Ellis & Bostick, of Amite, for appellant.

Ponder & Ponder, of Amite, for appel-lee.

DORE, Judge.

On March 4, 1941, we dismissed, on our own motion, the appeal taken in this matter for lack of a signed judgment and the lack of certain documents purportedly to have been offered in evidence. 200 So. 674. Our decree was reversed by the Supreme Court, and the case remanded to us for further proceedings. 198 La. 1026, 5 So.2d 323.

In our opinion of March 4, 1941, we fully set forth the necessary and essential documents missing from the record, namely: (1) The original or certified copy of the judgment appealed from; (2) “Record in the Succession of Henderson Wren and Re; Minor No. 208 of the Docket of this Court”; (3) “Two provisional accounts filed by the Amite Bank & Trust Co., Administrators, and sworn to by H. S. Weigel, Trust Officer, on June 1, 1929, and a similar account sworn to by Mr. Weigel, Trust Officer, before F. E. Dolhonde on the 22nd day of April, 1931”; (4) “Appointment of the Tangipahoa Bank & Trust Company as the Tutor to the minor, and also the appointment of the Guaranty Bank & Trust Company as Tutor to the minor”; (5) “The transfer of the Assets of the Amite Bank & Trust Com*672pany to the Tangipahoa Bank & Trust Company”. The last four items were supposedly offered by plaintiff-appellant.

In accordance with the decree of the Supreme Court, the appellant, Lela Wren, is ordered to complete the record by filing in this court a supplemental transcript, under the certificate of the Clerk of Court for the Parish of Tangipahoa, containing the original or certified copy of the missing judgment and documents named herein within thirty days from the date this decree becomes final, and in the event of her failure to comply with this order, the appeal will be dismissed at her costs.

LeBLANC and OTT, JJ., concur.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Olga L. Bogdanov, Chapter 7 Trustee

of Amherst Technologies , LLC, et al.,

Plaintiff

V. Civil No. 1:07-mc-11-SM

Physicians Specialty Hospital of El Paso East, L.P.,

Defendant

ORDER

In accordance with the Report Regarding Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

Law issued by Bankruptcy Judge J. Michael Deasy on January 9, 2007, the Plaintiff's Motion for

Default Judgment is granted. Default judgment shall be entered against the Defendant.

SO ORDERED.

Date : February 9, 2007 /s/ Steven J. McAulliffe

United States District Judge

cc: Olga L. Bogdanov, Esq.

Daniel W. Sklar, Esq.

Physicians Specialty Hospital of El Paso East, L.P., pro se

US Bankruptcy Court - NH, Clerk

Geraldine L. Karonis, Esq.

Case 1:07-mc-00011-SM Document 3-2 Filed 02/09/07 Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 23, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 54853]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22238]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[AK010-1410-FP]


Notice of Realty Action; Airport Lease, Sitka, Alaska

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of Realty Action.

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

SUMMARY: The State of Alaska, Department of Transportation and Public 
Facilities (proponent) submitted an application for a 20 year lease for 
222 acres to continue and maintain safe operations at the Sitka Rocky 
Gutierrez Airport in Sitka, AK pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 211; 43 U.S.C. 
1701 et seq. and regulations at 43 CFR part 2911.

DATES: Interested parties may submit comments until November 7, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Mail comments to Jim Fincher, Field Manager, Anchorage Field 
Office, 4700 BLM Road, Anchorage, Alaska 99507-2599.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harrison Griffin, (907) 267-1210 or 
(800) 478-1263.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a notice of an application for the 
issuance of an Airport Lease. No additional proposals will be accepted. 
The proponent will reimburse the United States for reasonable 
administrative fees and other costs incurred by the United States in 
processing the proposed lease. The proposed lease would authorize the 
proponent's current infrastructure and future improvements to remain on 
the land.
    The proposed lease for 222 acres would be offered to the applicant 
for a term of 20 years and would require rent (if applicable) to be 
paid to the United States at market value. While the 20-year lease is 
in effect, allowing operations to continue as they have, the Bureau of 
Land Management (BLM), Federal Aviation Administration, Alaska 
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities will coordinate the 
permanent conveyance of the aforementioned 222 acres. In the absence of 
a timely objection, this proposal may become the final decision of the 
Department of the Interior. The 222 acres encompasses a large portion 
of Japonski Island and, to a lesser extent, Whiting Harbor, located 
within the Copper River Meridian, T. 56 S., R. 63 E., Sections 2 and 3.

    Dated: September 15, 2008.
James M. Fincher,
Anchorage Field Office Manager,.
[FR Doc. E8-22238 Filed 9-22-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-JA-P
#### DOLL v. DEARIE et al.

No. 19087.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

Nov. 29, 1948.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 10, 1949.

Marion G. Seeber and Delvaille H. The-ard, both of New Orleans, for plaintiff-ap-pellee.

Fred G. Veith, of New Orleans, for defendants-appellants.

PER CURIAM.

This court previously denied a motion of plaintiff-appellee to dismiss the appeal ■of defendants from a judgment taxing the amount of court costs to be paid by them. See 37 So.2d 61.

Appellee has filed a second motion to ■dismiss the appeal, which is now before us. The basis of the present motion to ■dismiss is that defendants confessed or acquiesced in the judgment, and that they therefore had no right of appeal.

Article 567, Code Practice declares:

> “The party against whom judgment has been rendered can not appeal:

> “1. If such judgment have been confessed by him, or if he have acquiesced in the same, by executing it voluntarily.

> *“2.*If he has suffered the time prescribed by law for appealing to elapse. ”

When the matter was called for trial in the lower court, the issue of the amount of the costs to be taxed having been presented by a rule taken by plaintiff, the following admission was dictated into the re-ord by appellants’ counsel: “It is admitted that the total cost expended by the plaintiff in these proceedings is $61.30.”

The trial court then remarked: "The rule will be made absolute, fixing the amount of cost covered by the prior judgment at the amount stipulated. Since the judgment already provided for costs and condemned the defendant to pay the cost, and the judgment is final, this court cannot change the judgment whether it is right or wrong.”

The original judgment which condemned defendants to liability for costs is now executory, defendants having prosecuted only a devolutive appeal therefrom. The motion to dismiss presents no other issue save and except the question whether counsel’s quoted admission in the lower court constitutes a confession of judgment. We think it does. The admission of the amount of the costs due was unequivocal and unqualified. Plaintiff produced no proof and relied upon the admission, and the court, evidently being of the opinion that $61.30 was the correct amount of the costs, rendered judgment on the rule accordingly.

In Skinner v. Dameron, 5 Rob. 447, cited with approval in Sample v. Wheless, 159 La. 844, 106 So. 325, 326, the Supreme Court said: “We are not aware that under our laws any particular form is required in confessing judgment. Any admission of the debt sued for, which is such that it leaves no issue to be tried, is, in fact, a confession of judgment.”

See also Greater New Orleans Homestead Ass'n v. Korner, 14 La.App. 282, 128 So. 49.

A motion to dismiss an appeal, grounded on the want of a legal right to *609the appeal, may be made at any time. Sample v. Wheless, supra, and cases therein cited.

The motion to dismiss is sustained, and appellants’ appeal from the judgment taxing costs' is dismissed.

Motion sustained.
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1422

To amend title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974

to provide, in the case of an employee welfare benefit plan providing

benefits in the event of disability, an exemption from preemption under

such title for State tort actions to recover damages arising from the

failure of the plan to timely provide such benefits.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 4, 2001

Mr. ANDREWS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Education and the Workforce

A BILL

To amend title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to provide, in the case of an employee

welfare benefit plan providing benefits in the event of

disability, an exemption from preemption under such title

for State tort actions to recover damages arising from

the failure of the plan to timely provide such benefits.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 1422 IH

1 SECTION. 1. EXEMPTION FROM ERISA PREEMPTION FOR

2 STATE CAUSES OF ACTION IN TORT TO RE3 COVER DAMAGES ARISING FROM THE FAIL4 URE OF A PLAN PROVIDING BENEFITS IN THE

5 EVENT OF DISABILITY TO TIMELY PROVIDE

6 SUCH BENEFITS.

7 Section 514(b) of the Employee Retirement Income

8 Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1144(b)) is amended—

9 (1) by redesignating paragraph (9) as para10 graph (10); and

11 (2) by inserting after paragraph (8) the fol12 lowing new paragraph:

13 ‘‘(9) Subsection (a) shall not be construed to pre14 clude, in the case of an employee welfare benefit plan pro15 viding benefits in the event of disability, any cause of ac16 tion in tort under State law to recover damages arising

17 from the failure of such plan to timely provide such bene18 fits.’’.

19 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

20 The amendments made by this Act shall apply with

21 respect to failures occurring on or after the date of the

22 enactment of this Act.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 132 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 132

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 620 Jacaranda Street in Lanai City, Hawaii, as the ``Goro Hokama 
                        Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 620 
Jacaranda Street in Lanai City, Hawaii, shall be known and designated 
as the ``Goro Hokama Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Goro Hokama Post Office 
Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives February 7, 2001.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
107th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 132

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 620 Jacaranda Street in Lanai City, Hawaii, as the ``Goro Hokama 
                        Post Office Building''.
```
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 8 A1 83 5 . J AMES EARL ROBERTS, J R. v . THE STATE.

J am es E arl Ro b ert s , J r., pl ead ed g u i l t y t o n u m ero u s co un t s o f ch i l d m o l es t at i o n

an d ag g rav at ed ch i l d m o l es t at i o n i n 2 0 0 8

. He h as s i n ce fi l ed m u l t i p le p ro s e m o t i on s

an d sev eral ap peal s

. On M arch 1

, 2 0 1 8

, t h e t ri al co u rt en t ered an o rd er res ol v i n g al l

p en di n g m ot i on s

. Ro b ert s t hen fi l ed b o t h an ap p l i cat i o n fo r d i s cret i o n ary ap p eal an d

t h i s d i rect ap peal

. Th i s Co u rt den i ed Ro b ert ’ s ap p l i cat io n fo r di s cret i on ary ap p eal

. See Cas e No

. A1 8 D0 40 2 (d eci d ed Ap ri l 24

, 2 0 1 8). A s a res u lt

, t h e d o ct ri ne o f res ju d i cat a b ars

Ro b ert s fro m seek i ng fu rt her ap p el l at e rev i ew o f t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s March 1 o rd er. See

El r o d v. Su n

fl o wer Mea d

o ws Dev., LLC

, 3 2 2 G a. Ap p

. 6 6 6

, 6 70 (4 ) (7 4 5 SE2 d 8 4 6 )
(2 0 1 3) (“ [W ] h en th i s Co u rt ex am i n es a req u es t fo r a d i s cret io n ary ap p eal

, i t act s in

an erro r-co rrect i ng m o d e su ch th at a d en i al o f t h e ap p l icat i o n i s o n t h e m eri ts

, an d t h e

o rd er d en y i n g t h e ap p l i c a t i o n i s res ju d i cat a wi th res p ect t o t h e su b s t an ce o f t h e

req u es t ed rev i ew.”); Ho o k v. B er gen , 2 8 6 Ga. Ap p. 25 8

, 2 6 1 (1 ) (6 4 9 SE2 d 3 1 3 )
(2 0 0 7). In l i g h t o f t h e fo reg o i ng , t h i s ap p eal i s h ereb y DISM ISSED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e
, A t la n t a
,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t if y t h a t th e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. August 22, 2018

08/22/2018
C.5. Average Variable Interest Rates on Farm Loans
Percent
___________________________________________________________________________

                    Other operating  Intermediate non-real-  Long-term real
Quarter                 loans 1           estate loans        estate loans
___________________________________________________________________________

  Ninth (Minneapolis) Federal Reserve District (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*)
___________________________________________________________________________
2000: Q3...    |               n.a.                    n.a.            n.a.
      Q4...    |               n.a.                    n.a.            n.a.

2001: Q1...    |                9.7                     9.6             9.1
      Q2...    |                9.3                     9.1             8.5
      Q3...    |                8.8                     8.7             8.1
      Q4...    |                7.9                     7.7             7.2

2002: Q1...    |                7.4                     7.5             7.0
      Q2...    |                7.2                     7.2             6.8
      Q3...    |                6.8                     6.7             6.4
      Q4...    |                6.7                     6.6             6.3
___________________________________________________________________________

Tenth (Kansas City) Federal Reserve District (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY)
___________________________________________________________________________
2000: Q3...    |               n.a.                    n.a.            n.a.
      Q4...    |               n.a.                    n.a.            n.a.

2001: Q1...    |               n.a.                    n.a.            n.a.
      Q2...    |               n.a.                    n.a.            n.a.
      Q3...    |               n.a.                    n.a.            n.a.
      Q4...    |               n.a.                    n.a.            n.a.

2002: Q1...    |               n.a.                    n.a.            n.a.
      Q2...    |                7.7                     7.6             7.1
      Q3...    |                7.5                     7.4             6.9
      Q4...    |                7.2                     7.0             6.6
___________________________________________________________________________
   1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production
expenses and the care and feeding of livestock (including poultry).
   * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District.
   n.a. Not available.
   Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit
conditions at commercial banks.

39