alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Skip to Content
Release dates
About
Current release
*Other formats:*
 ASCII (48 KB)
PDF (160 KB)
CSV (184 KB)

----

**March 2008**

Section A
Section C

All files contain data as of the current quarter. Files in comma-separated variable (CSV) format contain all available historical data.Section BSelected Statistics from the Quarterly Reports of Condition of Commercial Banks  Commercial banks  B.1. Farm Debt Outstanding at Commercial BanksASCII (4 KB)PDF (3 KB)Screen ReaderCSV (6 KB)  B.2. Delinquent Non-real-estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial BanksASCII (5 KB)PDF (3 KB)Screen ReaderCSV (5 KB)  B.3. Net Charge-offs of Non-real-estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial BanksASCII (2 KB)PDF (3 KB)Screen ReaderCSV (2 KB)  B.4. Delinquent Real Estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial BanksASCII (5 KB)PDF (3 KB)Screen ReaderCSV (4 KB)  B.5. Net Charge-offs of Real Estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial BanksASCII (2 KB)PDF (3 KB)Screen ReaderCSV (1 KB)  Agricultural banks  B.6. Distribution of Agricultural Banks by Share of Their Total Loans that are NonperformingASCII (4 KB)PDF (3 KB)Screen ReaderCSV (3 KB)  B.7. Selected Measures of Financial Performance of Agricultural and Other Small BanksASCII (6 KB)PDF (3 KB)Screen ReaderCSV (6 KB)  B.8. Average Loan-Deposit Ratios at Agricultural Banks in Selected Federal Reserve DistrictsASCII (10 KB)PDF (5 KB)Screen ReaderCSV (12 KB)  B.9. Number of Agricultural Bank FailuresASCII (2 KB)PDF (3 KB)Screen ReaderCSV (1 KB)  Release dates |AboutCurrent release*Other formats:* ASCII (48 KB) |PDF (160 KB) |CSV (184 KB)
Statistical releases
Home |Economic research and dataAccessibility |Contact Us**Last update: March 26, 2008**
AMERUS LIFE HOLDINGS, INC.
EXHIBIT 11 - STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE 

<TABLE>
Pro Forma Weighted Average Number of Shares* (in thousands) 
<S>                                                         <C>
   Class A Common Stock owned by AmerUs Group                 11,707
   Class A Common Stock owned by the public                    6,449
   Class B Common Stock owned by AmerUs Group                  5,000
                                                           ---------
                                                              23,156
                                                           =========

  *  The issuance of Class A and Class B Common Stock is considered to
     have occurred as of January 1, 1996 for pro forma purposes;
     therefore, the weighted average number of shares outstanding is
     23,155,989.  The Company has no dilution of shares.
</TABLE>
Primary Pro Forma Earnings Per Common Share
<TABLE>
                                        Nine Months Ended Three Months Ended
                                           September 30,   September 30,
                                       ------------------- ---------------
                                   1997        1996         1997      1996
                                   ------     ------       ------     ------
<S>                              <C>          <C>         <C>         <C>
Primary Pro Forma Earnings 
   Per Common Share               $1.96         $2.72      $0.71      $0.28
                                  =====         =====      =====       =====
</TABLE>
IIB

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H.R. 1696

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 16 (legislative day, MAY 15), 2001

Received

MAY 21, 2001

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

AN ACT

To expedite the construction of the World War II memorial

in the District of Columbia.

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

HR 1696 RFS

1 SECTION 1. EXPEDITED COMMENCEMENT BY AMERICAN

2 BATTLE MONUMENTS COMMISSION OF CON3 STRUCTION OF WORLD WAR II MEMORIAL.

4 Section 2113 of title 36, United States Code, as

5 added by section 601(a) of the Veterans Millennium

6 Health Care and Benefits Act (Public Law 106–117; 113

7 Stat. 1576), is amended by adding at the end the following

8 new subsection:

9 ‘‘(i) CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTION TO COMMENCE

10 CONSTRUCTION.—(1) The requirements of the National

11 Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et

12 seq.), the Commemorative Works Act (40 U.S.C. 1001 et

13 seq.), and all other laws pertaining to the siting and design

14 for the World War II memorial having been met, the Com15 mission shall expeditiously proceed with the construction

16 of the World War II memorial at the dedicated Rainbow

17 Pool site in the District of Columbia.

18 ‘‘(2) The construction of the World War II memorial

19 authorized by paragraph (1) shall be consistent with—

20 ‘‘(A) the final architectural submission made to

21 the Commission of Fine Arts and the National Cap22 ital Planning Commission on June 30, 2000, as sup23 plemented on November 2, 2000; and

24 ‘‘(B) such reasonable construction permit re25 quirements as may be required by the Secretary of
3

HR 1696 RFS

1 the Interior, acting through the National Park Serv2 ice.

3 ‘‘(3) The decision to construct the World War II me4 morial at the dedicated Rainbow Pool site, decisions imple5 menting this subsection, and decisions regarding the de6 sign for the World War II memorial are final and conclu7 sive and shall not be subject to administrative or judicial

8 review.’’.

Passed the House of Representatives May 15, 2001.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-22-00574-CV

James Allen Brickley, Jr., Appellant

v.

Marie Laurence Gloria Joseph-Stephen, Appellee

FROM THE 426TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY 

NO. 22DFAM331978, THE HONORABLE STEVEN J. DUSKIE, JUDGE PRESIDING

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

The reporter’s record in this appeal was originally due to be filed on 

September 26, 2022. To date, the reporter’s record has not been filed.

The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure prohibit this Court from granting 

extensions of over 10 days for the filing of reporters’ records in accelerated appeals, including 

those from suits for termination of parental rights. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(c). Further, any 

extensions of time granted for the filing of the reporters’ records may not exceed 30 days 

cumulatively. See Tex. R. App. P. 28.4(b)(2). Accordingly, Cheryl Dixon is hereby ordered to 

file the reporter’s record in this case on or before December 14, 2022. If the record is not filed 

by that date, Dixon may be required to show cause why she should not be held in contempt 

of court.
2

It is ordered on December 12, 2022.

Before Justices Goodwin, Triana, and Kelly
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 15








TXU Corp.:

We have made a review, in accordance with standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States), of the unaudited condensed
consolidated interim financial information of TXU Corp. and subsidiaries (TXU
Corp.) as of September 30, 2004 and for the three-month and nine-month periods
ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, as indicated in our report dated November 4,
2004; because we did not perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on that
information.

We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in TXU Corp.'s
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, is
incorporated by reference in Registration Statements Nos. 333-37652, 333-64504,
333-64504-01, 333-64504-02, 333-71004, 333-71004-01, 333-71004-02, 333-84418,
333-84418-01, 333-84418-02, 333-110125 and Amendment No. 1 thereto, 333-103922,
and 333-115159 on Form S-3 and Registration Statements Nos. 333-32833,
333-32837, 333-45657, 333-46671, 333-79627 as amended by Post Effective
Amendment No. 1 thereto, 333-62014, 333-86640, 333-92260 and 333-105133 on Form
S-8.

We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under
the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration
Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Dallas, Texas
November 4, 2004
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

 

UNITED STATES SECURITIES ) 

AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION ) 

 ) 

Plaintiff, ) 

 ) 

 ) 

v. ) Civ.No.07-39-SM

 ) 

ERIC JAEGER and ) 

JERRY A. SHANAHAN, ) 

 ) 

Defendants. ) 

JERRY SHANAHAN’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Defendant Jerry Shanahan moves this Court for Summary 

Judgment against the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) 

as to all claims brought by the SEC in the First Amended 

Complaint. In support of this motion, Mr. Shanahan relies upon 

(a) the Consolidated Memorandum of Law in Support of His Motion 

for Summary Judgment and Opposition to the SEC’s Motion for 

Summary Judgment, (b) Defendant Jerry Shanahan’s Separate 

Statement of Undisputed Material Facts in Support of His Motion 

For Summary Judgment (with Exhibits); and (c) the Declaration of 

Jerry Shanahan, all of which are filed herewith and hereby 

incorporated by reference herein. 

 WHEREFORE, Jerry Shanahan respectfully requests that this 

Case 1:07-cv-00039-SM Document 278 Filed 12/16/11 Page 1 of 2
Court grant summary judgment against the SEC. 

DATED: December 16, 2011 

Respectfully submitted, 

 Jerry A. Shanahan 

 By his attorneys, 

 /s/ Andrew Good

 Andrew Good 

 /s/ Philip G. Cormier

 Philip G. Cormier 

 Good & Cormier 

 83 Atlantic Avenue 

 Boston, MA 02110 

 (617) 523-5933 

Certificate of Service

 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Motion was 

hereby served, via the ECF system, upon the following: 

Leslie J. Hughes hugheslj@sec.gov 

Jeffrey S. Lyons lyonsj@sec.gov

Jeffrey B. Rudman jeffrey.rudman@wilmerhale.com

James A. Scoggins, II scogginsj@sec.gov 

Jonathan A. Shapiro jonathan.shapiro@wilmerhale.com

DATED: December 16, 2011 

 /s/ Andrew Good

 Andrew Good 

G:\CLIENTS\Shanahan (Civil)\Summary Judgment\Shanahan\Motion for Summary Judgment.doc 

2

Case 1:07-cv-00039-SM Document 278 Filed 12/16/11 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 07-cr-91-01-SM

Juan Evaristo Sanchez-Noboa

 a/k/a Luis Castro

O R D E R

Defendant Sanchez-Noboa’s motion to continue the final pretrial

conference and trial is granted (document 23). Trial has been rescheduled for

the March 2008 trial period. Defendant Sanchez-Noboa shall file a waiver of

speedy trial rights not later than December 31, 2007. 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 22, 2008 at 4:30 p.m.

Jury Selection: March 4, 2008 at 9:30 a.m.

Case 1:07-cr-00091-SM Document 24 Filed 12/17/07 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

 Chief Judge

December 17, 2007

cc: Jonathan Saxe, Esq.

Debra Walsh, AUSA

US Probation

US Marshal

Case 1:07-cr-00091-SM Document 24 Filed 12/17/07 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit (10)(a)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

  

  

  

  

  We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Post-Effective Amendment No. 27 to the 1933 Act
    Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-186894) and Amendment No. 711 to the 1940 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 811-08517), and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) March 13, 2019, with respect to the
    consolidated financial statements of The Lincoln National Life Insurance Company and (b) April 16, 2019, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln Life Variable Annuity Account N for the registration of interests in a separate account under
    individual flexible payment deferred variable annuity contracts.

  

  

  /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

  

  

  

  

  

  Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

  September 6, 2019
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

JEAN LOUISE VILLANI, INDIVIDUALLY 

AND IN HER CAPACITY AS PERSONAL 

REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF 

GUERINO VILLANI, DECEASED 

 v. 

JOHN SEIBERT, JR. AND MARY 

SEIBERT 

FREDERICK JOHN SEIBERT, JR. AND 

MARY SEIBERT 

 v. 

JEAN LOUISE VILLANI AND THOMAS D. 

SCHNEIDER 

PETITION OF: MARY SEIBERT AND 

FREDERICK JOHN SEIBERT, JR. 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 11 MM 2016 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 15th day of June, 2016, the Application for Leave to File 

Supplemental Answer and the Petition for Permission to Appeal are GRANTED. 

The issue on appeal, as framed by Petitioners, is: 

Did the trial court err when it held that the Dragonetti Act, 42 Pa.C.S. 

§8351 et seq., is an unconstitutional infringement upon the Supreme

Court’s authority to regulate the conduct of attorneys under Article V, 

§10(c) of the Pennsylvania Constitution such that attorneys are immune 

from suit for Wrongful Use of Civil Proceedings? 

M.D. Appeal Dkt.

66 2016
11 MM 2016 - 2 

 The Prothonotary is DIRECTED to provide notice of this order to the Office of 

Attorney General. Cf. Pa.R.A.P. 521(a) (providing that the Attorney General shall be 

notified of an appellate court matter which “draws in question the constitutionality of any 

statute”).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Joseph Vaillancourt

v.

New Hampshire Department of

Corrections, Commissioner

Case No. 06-fp-472

O R D E R

Petitioner’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (document

no. 2) is granted.

This file has been assigned civil number 06-cv-472-PB.

SO ORDERED.

_______________________________

. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: January 4, 2007

cc: Joseph Vaillancourt, pro se

Case 1:06-cv-00472-PB Document 4 Filed 01/04/2007 Page 1 of 1

Vaillancourt v. NH Department of Corrections, Commissioner Doc. 4

Dockets.Justia.com
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Darren Starr

v.

Timothy Coulombe, et al.

No. 06-fp-487

O R D E R

Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted,

but pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, as amended, the filing fee must

be paid as follows: the sum of $23.60 is due no later than

February 8, 2007. In addition, 20% of each preceding month’s

income credited to plaintiff’s account to be remitted by the New

Hampshire State Prison when the amount in the account exceeds

$10.00 until the sum of $350.00 has been paid. Failure to pay

the fee as ordered will result in dismissal of the action without

prejudice. In all other respects plaintiff’s request for in

forma pauperis has been granted.

This case has been assigned civil number 06-cv-487-PB.

SO ORDERED.

Date: January 4, 2007

,James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

cc: Darren Starr, pro se

Bonnie S. Reed, Financial Administrator

New Hampshire State Prison, Inmate Accounts

Case 1:06-cv-00487-SM Document 3 Filed 01/04/2007 Page 1 of 1

Starr et al v. Coulombe et al Doc. 3

Dockets.Justia.com
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

MSI Energy, LLC, and

Peter O. Crowell,

Plaintiffs

v. Civil No. 07-cv-308-SM

BancBoston Leasing Services, Inc.,

Defendant

O R D E R

As I have a financial interest in Bank of America, recusal

is mandatory. See, 28 U.S.C. § 455(b)(4). 

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

October 9, 2007

cc: Andru H. Volinsky, Esq.

Thomas J. Pappas, Esq.

Case 1:07-cv-00308-PB Document 5 Filed 10/09/07 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

David Jerome Clough, Jr.

v. Civil No. 08-cv-114-JL

NH State Prison, Warden

O R D E R

I herewith approve the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge

Muirhead dated June 12, 2008, no objection having been filed.

SO ORDERED.

August 12, 2008 _________________________________

Joseph N. Laplante

United States District Judge

cc: David Jerome Clough, Jr., Pro se

Case 1:08-cv-00114-JL Document 6 Filed 08/12/08 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1729 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1729

     To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and 
  Facilities Act to increase the ceiling on the Federal share of the 
   costs of phase I of the Orange County, California, Regional Water 
                          Reclamation Project.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 3, 2001

 Ms. Sanchez introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                         Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and 
  Facilities Act to increase the ceiling on the Federal share of the 
   costs of phase I of the Orange County, California, Regional Water 
                          Reclamation Project.

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

SECTION 1. INCREASE IN CEILING ON FEDERAL SHARE OF WATER RECLAMATION 
              PROJECT.

    Section 1631(d) of the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study 
and Facilities Act (43 U.S.C. 390h-13(d)) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1) by striking ``paragraph (2)'' and 
        inserting ``paragraphs (2) and (3)''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(3) The Federal share of the costs of the project authorized by 
section 1624 shall not exceed $80,000,000.''.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Joseph M. Le Doux

v. Civil No. 06-cv-268-PB

Superintendent, Rockingham County 

House of Corrections, et al

O R D E R

The plaintiff having failed to comply with the Court’s Order dated July 27, 2006, the case

is dismissed for lack of prosecution.

SO ORDERED.

March 30, 2007 /s/ Paul Barbadoro 

 Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

cc: Joseph M. Le Doux, pro se

John P. Sherman, Esq.

Case 1:06-cv-00268-PB Document 18 Filed 03/30/07 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

**********************************

*

Pamela Taber-McCarthy *

*

 Petitioner *

*

 v. * Case Number 1:08-cv-96-PB

*

Ricky C. McCarthy *

*

 Respondent *

*

**********************************

PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE REPLY TO

RESPONDENT’S OBJECTION TO MOTION FOR REMAND

The petitioner, Pamela Taber-McCarthy, hereby moves for leave to file a 

reply to Respondent’s Objection to Petitioner’s Motion for Remand. The grounds 

for this motion are set forth below.

1. Respondent’s Amended Petition for Removal appeared to identify 

“pleadings with the State Court seeking a further order with regards to the 

wording of the QDRO,” id. at ¶5, as the basis for removal to this Court. 

See 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b).

2. Respondent now appears to be arguing that it was not the pleading filed on 

November 16, 2007 that was the basis for removal, but rather that 

Petitioner’s counsel “made an informal change in her position on March 13, 

2008, and formal change of her position on March 14, 2008, in the brief 

Case 1:08-cv-00096-PB Document 9 Filed 04/06/08 Page 1 of 3
2

hearing before the state court marital master.” Respondent’s Objection to 

Petitioner’s Motion for Remand at ¶12.

3. Additionally, the relief requested by Respondent originally appeared to 

involve “a further order with regard to the wording of the QDRO.” 

Respondent’s Amended Petition for Removal at ¶5. 

4. Now, however, Respondent appears to be seeking an advisory opinion from 

this Court regarding QDRO law. Respondent’s Objection to Petitioner’s 

Motion for Remand at ¶20 (“the federal court is not being asked to issue the 

QDRO. Rather, the court is being asked to interpret/apply federal law to a 

QDRO to determine whether or not the plan administrator is obligated to 

pay interest to the alternative payee.”)

5. Petitioner seeks leave to reply to these changes in Respondent’s position.

6. Petitioner’s reply is filed as an exhibit to this motion. See Local Rule 

7.1(e)(2).

WHEREFORE, the petitioner, Pamela Taber-McCarthy, respectfully 

requests that the Court:

A. Grant this motion; and 

B. Grant such other and further relief as justice and equity require.

Case 1:08-cv-00096-PB Document 9 Filed 04/06/08 Page 2 of 3
3

Respectfully submitted,

Pamela Taber-McCarthy,

By her Attorney

MOSCA LAW OFFICE

/s/ Edward C. Mosca 

27 Webster Street

Manchester, NH 03104

(603) 628-3695

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on April 6, 2008 I served the foregoing by ECF on 

Kevin Bucholz, Esquire. Counsel of record for Respondent, and by handdelivering a copy to Law Office of Kathleen Sternenberg, 27 Webster Street, 

Manchester, NH 03104, counsel for Petitioner.

/s/ Edward C. Mosca 

Edward C. Mosca

Case 1:08-cv-00096-PB Document 9 Filed 04/06/08 Page 3 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Criminal No. 06-37-01-PB

Jason McDermott

O R D E R

The defendant, through counsel, has moved to continue the

September 6, 2006 trial in the above case, citing the need for

additional time to finalize plea negotiations. The government

does not object to a continuance of the trial date.

Accordingly, for the above reason and to allow the parties

additional time to properly prepare for trial, the court will

continue the trial from September 6, 2006 to October 3, 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-00037-PB Document 20 Filed 08/29/06 Page 1 of 2
2

The August 29, 2006 final pretrial conference is continued

to September 27, 2006 at 3:45 p.m.

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

August 29, 2006

cc: David H. Bownes, Esq.

Joseph Laplante, AUSA

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:06-cr-00037-PB Document 20 Filed 08/29/06 Page 2 of 2