alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
18

A.13. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- Small and Mid-sized Farm Lenders, by Risk Rating, APercent except as notedLoan characteristic All Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not rateVolume of loans (thousands of dollars) 304,073 39,043 114,287 83,290 23,966 418 8,54Number of loans 9,826 1,341 2,489 3,262 1,050 42 37Weighted average maturity (months)1 26.96 12.31 29.76 28.46 41.79 11.89 17.1

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 10.46 9.72 8.31 7.14 17.07 .87 8.3

Weighted average risk rating3 2.36 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 n.a

Weighted average interest rate4 7.00 6.65 6.79 7.19 7.68 7.23 7.2

 Standard error5 .14 .42 .21 .10 .49 n.a. .3

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 7.64 6.87 7.60 7.64 9.16 7.23 7.7 25th percentile 6.09 6.00 6.09 6.17 6.75 7.23 7.5 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 6.34 6.86 5.64 7.57 n.a. 7.23 4.8 Other livestock 6.51 6.78 n.a. 6.46 7.72 n.a. n.a Other current operating expenses7 7.23 6.42 7.27 7.46 7.78 n.a. 7.7

 Farm machinery and equipment 7.17 6.85 7.01 6.82 7.96 n.a. 7.2 Farm real estate 6.61 n.a. 6.96 7.21 6.73 n.a. n.a Other8 7.56 7.56 7.68 7.00 8.59 n.a. n.a

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 56.07 40.07 76.94 56.86 49.13 100.00 31.3 Under commitment 57.97 45.53 77.97 55.88 42.27 n.a. 51.0 Callable 17.86 8.21 19.22 19.07 21.53 n.a. 13.3 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 6.81 14.51 8.32 4.87 n.a. 100.00 12.2 Other livestock 21.66 20.26 32.86 17.49 6.41 n.a. n.a Other current operating expenses7 50.82 51.97 43.49 57.17 59.99 n.a. 71.9

 Farm machinery and equipment 10.77 8.77 6.80 9.22 14.98 n.a. 15.8 Farm real estate 4.58 n.a. 1.20 5.50 14.82 n.a. n.a Other8 5.35 4.49 7.32 5.74 3.80 n.a. n.a

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 17.19 11.96 10.81 20.84 37.53 100.00 4.6 Other 80.45 88.04 87.78 75.84 n.a. n.a. n.a Note. Most small and mid-sized farm lenders that reported loans to farmers had less than $25 million in farm loans. For explanation of footnotes, see table A.8. n.a. Not available.
Exhibit 21.1



LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES



The following is a list of the direct and indirect subsidiaries of First Oak Brook Bancshares, Inc. as of December 31, 2002:



|Subsidiary                              |  | Jurisdiction ofIncorporation or Organization
|--------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------
|                                       
|Oak Brook Bank                          |  | Illinois                                    
|                                       
|FOBB Statutory Trust I                  |  | Connecticut                                 
|                                       
|FOBB Statutory Trust II                 |  | Connecticut                                 
|                                       
|Oak Real Estate Development Corporation |  | Illinois                                    
|                                       
|West Erie, LLC                          |  | Illinois
IV 

House Calendar No. 164 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 849 

[Report No. 110–475] 

Providing for the consideration of the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 

2761) to extend the Terrorism Insurance Program of the Department 

of the Treasury, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 6, 2007 

Mr. ARCURI, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; 

which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for the consideration of the Senate amendment 

to the bill (H.R. 2761) to extend the Terrorism Insurance Program of the Department of the Treasury, and 

for other purposes. 

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it 

2 shall be in order to take from the Speaker’s table the bill 

3 (H.R. 2761) to extend the Terrorism Insurance Program 

4 of the Department of the Treasury, and for other pur5 poses, with the Senate amendment thereto, and to con6 sider in the House, without intervention of any point of 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 849 RH 

1 order except those arising under clause 10 of rule XXI, 

2 a motion offered by the chairman of the Committee on 

3 Financial Services or his designee that the House concur 

4 in the Senate amendment with the amendment printed in 

5 the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 

6 resolution. The Senate amendment and the motion shall 

7 be considered as read. The motion shall be debatable for 

8 one hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman 

9 and ranking minority member of the Committee on Finan10 cial Services. The previous question shall be considered as 

11 ordered on the motion to its adoption without intervening 

12 motion or demand for division of the question. 

13 SEC. 2. During consideration of the motion to concur 

14 pursuant to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation 

15 of the previous question, the Chair may postpone further 

16 consideration of the motion to such time as may be des17 ignated by the Speaker. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
House Calendar No. 164 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 849 

[Report No. 110

–475] 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for the consideration of the Senate 

of the Treasury, and for other purposes. Terrorism Insurance Program of the Department amendment to the bill (H.R. 2761) to extend the 

DECEMBER 6, 2007 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Walter D. Wick

v. Civil No. 08-cv-00180-JL

Mark Schols

O R D E R

The Preliminary Pretrial Conference was held in chambers on

August 4, 2008.

The Discovery Plan (document no. 20) is approved as

submitted, with the following changes:

• Track assignment -- one year;

• Completion of discovery -- January 16, 2009;

• Joinder of parties -- October 15, 2008;

• Third party actions -- October 15, 2008;

• Amendment of pleadings -- October 15, 2008;

• Dispositive motion schedule

- Motion to Dismiss by October 1, 2008,

- Motion for Summary Judgments by November 15, 2008.

Based on the conversation between counsel and the court at

the conference, the following counts are stricken:

Case 1:08-cv-00180-JL Document 22 Filed 08/04/08 Page 1 of 2
2

• the plaintiff’s counts I, II, and III

• the following affirmative defenses: lack of standing,

acquiescence, waiver, and estoppel.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph N. Laplante

United States District Judge

Dated: August 4, 2008

cc: Steven E. Grill, Esq.

Gordon J. MacDonald, Esq.

Henry E. Kinser, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00180-JL Document 22 Filed 08/04/08 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 10.1



 Exhibit 10.1 
  
 AMENDMENT TO THE 
 PULASKI FINANCIAL CORP. 
 2002 STOCK OPTION PLAN 
  
 WHEREAS, the shareholders of Pulaski Financial Corp. (the “Company”) adopted the Pulaski Financial Corp.
2002 Stock Option Plan (the “Option Plan”) on January 16, 2002; 
  
 WHEREAS, on November 19, 2003, the Board of Directors of the Company amended the Option Plan to increase the number of shares of stock reserved for the issuance of stock options by 150,000 shares; and

  
 WHEREAS, the foregoing amendment to the Option Plan was
presented to and approved by shareholders at the annual meeting in order that such plan and options awarded thereunder will qualify for certain favorable tax treatment and/or exemptive treatment from the short-swing profit recapture provisions of
Section 16 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and to comply with the criteria for listing of the Company’s common stock on the Nasdaq National Market. 
  
 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, effective as of the date of the approval of the amendment to the Option Plan by the
Company’s shareholders, the Option Plan shall be amended as follows: 
  
 The first sentence of Section 8(a) of the Option Plan shall be amended to read: 
  
 Five hundred thousand (500,000) shares, subject to adjustment under paragraph (b) below, are available for purchase upon the exercise of Options granted
under this Plan. 
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the shareholders
of the Company has adopted this Amendment to the Pulaski Financial Corp. 2002 Stock Option Plan. 
  

							
	 ATTEST:
	 	 	 	 PULASKI FINANCIAL CORP.

				
	 /s/    Christine A. Munro

	 	 	 	 By:
	 	 /s/    William A. Donius


	 	 	 	 	 	 	 For the Entire Board of Directors
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions   under delegated authority  Applications and reports:Boston |New York |Philadelphia |Cleveland |Richmond |AtlantaChicago |St. Louis |Minneapolis |Kansas City |Dallas |San FranciscoDistrict: 11Federal Reserve Bank of: DallasFilings received during the week ending November 3, 2012FilerFiling TypeFiling ProposalEnd of Comment PeriodCIRCLE I BANK GROUP, INC.                                                                                               * 3A1Circle I Bank Group, Inc., Amarillo, Texas, to become a bank holding company through merger, acquiring 100 percent of the outstanding shares of Western Bancshares, Inc., Coahoma, Texas, and indirectly acquire 100 percent of the outstanding shares of Western Bank, Coahoma, Texas.Newspaper: 11/20/2012Federal Register: 11/19/2012COMMUNITY TRUST BANK                                                                                                    * BranchCommunity Trust Bank, Choudrant, Louisiana, to establish a branch to be located at 203 Promenade Boulevard, Flowood, Mississippi 39232.Newspaper: 10/31/2012Federal Register: Not applicableHCSB, A STATE BANKING ASSOCIATION                                                                                       * 18C
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Kevin Langston, Appellant.

[806 NYS2d 886]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gerges, J.), rendered July 15, 2003, convicting him of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the People’s contention, the defendant’s argument that the evidence was legally insufficient to convict him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree is preserved for appellate review *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Gray,*86 NY2d 10, 20-21 [1995]; *People v Baez,*13 AD3d 463, 464 [2004]; *People v Soto,*8 AD3d 683, 684 [2004]). However, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree beyond a reasonable doubt *(see*Penal Law § 265.03 [2]). The People also established by legally sufficient evidence that the defendant was *624guilty of assault in the first degree. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. H. Miller, J.P., Crane, Skelos and Dillon, JJ., concur.
107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1499

AN ACT

To amend the District of Columbia College Access

Act of 1999 to permit individuals who graduatedfrom a secondary school prior to 1998 and individuals who enroll in an institution of higher education more than 3 years after graduating froma secondary school to participate in the tuitionassistance programs under such Act, and forother purposes.

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1499

AN ACT

To amend the District of Columbia College Access Act of

1999 to permit individuals who graduated from a secondary school prior to 1998 and individuals who enroll

in an institution of higher education more than 3 years

after graduating from a secondary school to participate

in the tuition assistance programs under such Act, and

for other purposes.
2

•HR 1499 EH

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘District of Columbia

5 College Access Act Technical Corrections Act of 2001’’.

6 SEC. 2. REVISIONS TO ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR

7 TUITION ASSISTANCE UNDER DISTRICT OF

8 COLUMBIA COLLEGE ACCESS ACT.

9 (a) PERMITTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS TO PARTICI10 PATE IN TUITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.—

11 (1) INDIVIDUALS GRADUATING FROM SEC12 ONDARY SCHOOL PRIOR TO 1998.—Section

13 3(c)(2)(B) of the District of Columbia College Ac14 cess Act of 1999 (Public Law 106–98; 113 Stat.

15 1325) is amended by striking ‘‘on or after January

16 1, 1998’’.

17 (2) INDIVIDUALS ENROLLING MORE THAN 3

18 YEARS AFTER GRADUATING FROM SECONDARY

19 SCHOOL.—Section 3(c)(2) of such Act (Public Law

20 106–98; 113 Stat. 1325) is amended by striking

21 subparagraph (C).

22 (b) PROHIBITING PARTICIPATION OF FOREIGN NA23 TIONALS.—Section 3(c)(2) of such Act (Public Law 106–

24 98; 113 Stat. 1325), as amended by subsection (a)(2), is
3

•HR 1499 EH

1 amended by inserting after subparagraph (B) the fol2 lowing:

3 ‘‘(C) meets the citizenship and immigra4 tion status requirements described in section

5 484(a)(5) of the Higher Education Act of 1965

6 (20 U.S.C. 1091(a)(5));’’.

7 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

8 The amendments made by this Act shall take effect

9 on the date of the enactment of this Act.

Passed the House of Representatives July 30, 2001.

Attest:

Clerk.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED INTERIM CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF PRIME SUCCESSION, INC.
AND SUBSIDIARIES, FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
<CURRENCY>  U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           4,832
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   34,398
<ALLOWANCES>                                     6,438
<INVENTORY>                                     50,262
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                23,077
<PP&E>                                          78,038
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (8,121)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 384,357
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           16,411
<BONDS>                                        213,962
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     112,444
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   384,357
<SALES>                                         69,078
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                69,078
<CGS>                                           45,835
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   45,835
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,337
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,028
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,206
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,301)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (82)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,383)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,383)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### Ross MANNING, doing business as Ross Manning Carnivals, National Surety Corporation, and All Florida Surety Company, appellants, v. Arthur L. CLARK and Joe Baker, appellees.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division B.

June 29, 1954.

Anderson & Nadeau, Miami, for appellants.

Daniel Sepler, Boyce F. Ezell, Jr., Miami, for appellees.

DREW, Justice.

This is the fourth appeal in this case. For the previous appeals see Manning v. Clark, Fla., 71 So.2d 508; Manning v. Clark, Fla., 62 So.2d 352; Manning v. Clark, Fla., 56 So.2d 521.

The third appeal, Fla., 71 So.2d 508 was taken from a final judgment against Manning alone entered on May 14, 1953. On January 4, 1954, while that appeal was pending, the lower Court entered in the cause an amended judgment upon the same cause of action and for the same amount of the judgment entered May 14, 1953. This amended judgment was entered not only against Manning but also against National Surety Corporation and All Florida Surety Company, sureties on the bond posted in the original Chancery action. From this amended judgment this appeal was taken by Manning as well as both the surety companies.

Aside from the question of the authority of the lower Court to enter the amended judgment, this amended judgment is obviously erroneous as to appellants for the reasons stated in the opinion on the third appeal filed March 16, 1954. Manning v. Clark, Fla., 71 So.2d 508.

The judgment appealed from must be and is vacated and set aside.

Reversed.

ROBERTS, C. J., and THOMAS and HOBSiON, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2195 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2195

             To suspend temporarily the duty on formamide.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 14, 2001

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
             To suspend temporarily the duty on formamide.

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

SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON FORMAMIDE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

      

``    9902.30.23    formamide (CAS    Free              No change         No change         On or before 12/
                     No. 75-12-7)                                                            31/2004          ''
                     (provided for                                                                             .
                     in subheading
                     2924.10.10)....

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           43404
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    24808
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      41822
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                110034
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  132534
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1317706
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           147
<OTHER-SE>                                     1815013
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    132534
<SALES>                                         156445
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                156445
<CGS>                                           152089
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   152089
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               2380499
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   257
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                2742
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (2376143)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (2376400)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.17)


</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of Isabelle T. Flight, Appellant, for the Appointment of a Guardian for Edward D. Flight, an Alleged Incapacitated Person, Respondent. Monroe Community Hospital et al., Respondents.

[744 NYS2d 920]

Appeal from an order and judgment (one document) of Supreme Court, Monroe County (Galloway, J.), entered December 18, 2001, which appointed Robert Flight as guardian for Edward D. Flight.

It is hereby ordered that the order and judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, Robert Flight is appointed as respondent’s guardian pending the outcome of the hearing and the matter is remitted to Supreme Court, Monroe County, for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Petitioner commenced this proceeding under article 81 of the Mental Hygiene Law seeking appointment of a guardian to provide for the personal needs and property management of respondent. Supreme Court properly determined under the circumstances that petitioner was not entitled to discontinue the proceeding pursuant to CPLR 3217 (a) (1) *(see Matter of Spadafora,*54 Misc 2d 123, 125, *affd*29 AD2d 742; *see generally*7 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac 3217.05). The court erred, however, in appointing a guardian for respondent without conducting a hearing *(see*Mental Hygiene Law § 81.11 [a]; *Matter of Hoffman,*288 AD2d 892, 893; *Matter of Ruth TT.,*267 AD2d 553, 554-555). We therefore reverse the order and judgment and remit the matter to Supreme Court, Monroe County, to conduct a hearing on the petition and make the requisite findings *(see*§ 81.15), including findings with respect to the choice of guardian *(see Matter of Pasner,*215 AD2d 763). We appoint Robert Flight as respondent’s guardian pending the outcome of the hearing *(see Hoffman,*288 AD2d at 893). Present — Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Hurlbutt, Scudder and Burns, JJ.