alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 190 (Tuesday, September 30, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 56859]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22949]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[FEMA-1792-DR]


Louisiana; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Louisiana (FEMA-1792-DR), dated September 13, 2008, 
and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: September 18, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Louisiana is hereby amended to include the following 
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by 
the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his 
declaration of September 13, 2008.

    Acadia, Beauregard, Calcasieu, Cameron, Iberia, Jefferson, 
Jefferson Davis, Lafourche, Plaquemines, Sabine, St. Mary, 
Terrebonne, Vermilion, and Vernon Parishes for emergency protective 
measures (Category B), including direct Federal assistance, under 
the Public Assistance program (already designated for Individual 
Assistance and debris removal [Category A], including direct Federal 
assistance, under the Public Assistance program).

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, 
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis 
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster 
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance 
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and 
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing 
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other 
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially 
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

R. David Paulison,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E8-22949 Filed 9-29-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Rasheen Richardson, Appellant.

[744 NYS2d 407]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Norma Ruiz, J.), rendered February 17, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 7 to 14 years, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the matter remanded for a new trial.

The trial court’s exclusion of defendant’s children, ages eight and nine, from the courtroom violated defendant’s right to a public trial, there being no support in the record for the contention that these children were being disruptive (see, *People v James,*229 AD2d 315, 316, *lv denied*88 NY2d 1021, citing *People v Gutierez,*86 NY2d 817; *see also, People v Gomez,*256 AD2d 589, *lv denied*93 NY2d 924; *People v Miller,*224 AD2d 639, *lv denied*88 NY2d 851). Defense counsel’s objection at trial to the exclusion of these nondisruptive children from the courtroom, although without specific reference to the right to a public trial, was sufficient to preserve the issue for appellate review *(see, People v Nieves,*90 NY2d 426, 431 n; *People v Spence,*239 AD2d 218, 219). While the trial court’s exclusion of defendant’s younger niece and nephew may have been justified, the foregoing makes it unnecessary for us to reach that is*335sue, as well as defendant’s claim that the prosecutor’s summation deprived him of a fair trial. Concur — Buckley, J.P., Sullivan, Lerner and Friedman, JJ.
#### CARUSO v. NEW ORLEANS PUBLIC SERVICE, Inc.

No. 14023.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

June 27, 1932.

Wm. H. Talbot, of New Orleans, for appellant.

*861Ivy G. Kittredge, of New Orleans, for ap-pellee.

WESTEREIELD, J.

Plaintiff: claims $3,336 as damages for physical injuries alleged to have been caused by a collision between a milk wagon drawn by two mules and driven by plaintiff and a street car operated by the defendant company. There was judgment below in favor of the defendant dismissing plaintiff’s suit, and plaintiff has appealed.

The accident occurred on the 25th day of August, 1930, at about 5 o’clock a. m., at the intersection of Freret and Robert streets.

The negligence imputed to the motorman in charge of the defendant’s street car consists in the allegation that he operated his car at a very high rate of speed and failed, to keep a proper lookout. Defendant denies that its employee was negligent in the respect claimed, and attributes the accident to the alleged fact that Caruso, plaintiff herein, drove his mules across the street car track at a fast trot, without stopping, looking, or listening, and at a time when its street car was so close as to make it impossible for the motorman to stop in time to prevent the collision.

Plaintiff, with the burden of proof resting upon him, produced only one witness, Louis T. Allen, whose testimony may be said to have corroborated his version of the accident. The testimony of this witness is unsatisfactory. He was employed near the scene of the accident at a gasoline filling station, and testified that, as he was in the act of picking up the hose for the purpose of putting gasoline in the tank of an automobile for a customer, he saw a street car about a block away, and that, when he put the nozzle in the tank, he heard the crash resulting from the impact of the two vehicles. This statement is either erroneous or grossly exaggerated, because, in the fraction of a second required to place the hose in the gasoline tank, the street car would be utterly incapable, even at its highest possible speed, of traversing an entire city block, about 300 feet according to the evidence. Consequently we attach no importance to this statement.

On the other hand, the defendant, in addition to its motorman and conductor, offered the testimony of a Miss Shonekas, who was in the car into which Allen was pouring gasoline at the 'time of the accident. This witness testified that she heard the mules trotting out Robert street in the direction of the river, saw them cross the track at the intersection of Robert and Freret streets, and s'aw the collision between the street car and the mule-driven milk wagon.

The best that can be said of plaintiff’s case is that it is made equally probable with defendant’s, but this is not enough, since, in order to recover, plaintiff should establish the defendant’s negligence by a preponderance of testimony, and this he has failed to do. The trial judge was of this opinion, and we think he was correct. ,1⁄8

For the reasons assigned, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 21
                                                                      ----------


                           DISPLAY TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
                                  SUBSIDIARIES

                             AS OF OCTOBER 10, 2000


DISPLAY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (f/k/a La-Man Corporation) (Nevada)

   Ad Art Electronic Sign Corporation (Florida)

         DTEK Canada, Inc. (Florida)

             DTEK Signs ULC (Nova Scotia unlimited liability co.)

                  Hamilton Digital Designs Ltd. (Canadian limited liability co.)

             E.S.C. of Nevada, Inc. (Nevada)

   Certified Maintenance Service, Inc. (Florida)

   Don Bell Industries, Inc. (Florida)

             Don Bell Industries of Nevada, Inc. (Nevada)

   J.M. Stewart Corporation (Florida)

   J.M. Stewart Industries, Inc. (Florida)

   J.M. Stewart Manufacturing, Inc. (Florida)

   La-Man Corporation (Nevada)

   Lockwood Sign Group, Inc. (Florida)

   Vision Trust Marketing, Inc. (Florida)
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

ROY G. CLARKE, 

Appellant,

v.

THE FROST NATIONAL BANK,

Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-23-00310-CV

Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 3

of Bexar County, Texas

(TC# 318797)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was error in the 

judgment. We therefore reverse the trial court’s Order Granting Motion to Revive Dormant 

Judgment, and Order that it be denied without prejudice. We further order that Appellee recover 

from Appellant all costs of appeal, for which let execution issue. This decision shall be certified 

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 26TH DAY OF JUNE 2024.

LISA J. SOTO, Justice

Before Alley, C.J., Palafox and Soto, JJ.
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



         We  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in the  registration
statements of Conseco, Inc. (File Nos. 33-57079,  33-56901,  33-57931, 33-40556,
33-58710,  33-58712,  333-10297,  333-18037,  333-18581,  333-19783,  333-23251,
333-27803,  333-28305, 333-32615,  333-32617 and 333-32621) of  our report dated
March 23,  1998,  on our audits of the  consolidated  financial  statements  and
financial statement schedules of Conseco, Inc. as of December 31, 1997 and 1996,
and for the years  ended  December  31,  1997,  1996 and 1995,  which  report is
included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.



                                               /S/COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.
                                               -----------------------------
                                               Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.



Indianapolis, Indiana
March 23, 1998
#### BAXTER v. ROSS.

Supreme Court of Florida.

January Term 1954.

Dismissed without opinion.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02389-WYD-MJW

JOHN STAUFFER,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

KAREN E. HAYES, D.O.;

A WOMAN’S PLACE OF FORT COLLINS, P.L.L.P.;

PETER DUSBABEK;

TODD VRIESMAN;

MONTGOMERY, KOLODNY, AMATUZIO & DUSBABEK, L.L.P.;

J. BRADFORD MARCH III; and

MARCH, OLIVE & PHARRIS, L.L.P.,

Defendant(s).

MINUTE ORDER 

Entered by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe

It is hereby ORDERED that defendants J. Bradford March, III and March Olive & 

Pharris, LLP’s Re-Submitted Unopposed Motion for Leave to Appear Without

Submitting Scheduling Order [Docket No. 37], filed with the court January 23, 2012, is

GRANTED. 

It is FURTHER ORDERED parties shall appear for the Scheduling Conference

January 27, 2012 at 9:00 a.m. without having filed a proposed Scheduling Order.

Date: January 24, 2012

Case 1:11-cv-02389-WYD-MJW Document 40 Filed 01/24/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS RESTATED SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM ANUHCO, INC. CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 1995, AND CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1995,
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000719271
<NAME> ANUHCO, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                            6617
<SECURITIES>                                     27366
<RECEIVABLES>                                    17002
<ALLOWANCES>                                       760
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 68533
<PP&E>                                           33947
<DEPRECIATION>                                   17724
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   88426
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             7603
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            76
<OTHER-SE>                                       80204
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     88426
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 97444
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    94592
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  76
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   4930
<INCOME-TAX>                                      2120
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               2810
<DISCONTINUED>                                    3576
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      6386
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .86
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .86
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the quarterly report of 24Holdings Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Kirk M. Warshaw, Chief Financial Officer
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| |     |                                                                                                                                                      
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (1) | The Report fully complies
 with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
 Act of 1934, as amended; and                  
| |     |                                                                                                                                                      
| | (2) | The information contained
 in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
 condition and result of operations of the Company.

|                                  | 
|--------------------------------- | 
|Dated: October 26, 2009           | 
|                                  | 
|/s/ Kirk M. Warshaw               | 
|--------------------------------- | 
|Kirk M. Warshaw                   | 
|Chief Financial Officer           | 

A signed
original of this certification has been provided to the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.

---
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      Exhibit 11

                       COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                (dollars in thousands, except per share dollars)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                       Fiscal Years          
                                             --------------------------------
                                                1997       1996       1995   
                                             ---------- ---------- ----------
    <S>                                       <C>        <C>        <C>
    Weighted average common shares
      outstanding during the year                5,344      5,389      5,389

    Effect of dilutive stock options, net
      of shares assumed repurchased at
      average market price                         -           10        -  
                                              --------   --------   --------

    Weighted average common shares and
      common share equivalents                   5,344      5,399      5,389
                                              ========   ========   ========

    Net Income (Loss)                         $   (860)  $  3,704   $(19,380)
                                              ========   ========   ======== 

    Earnings (Loss) per share                 $   (.16)  $    .69   $  (3.60)
                                              ========   ========   ======== 

</TABLE>

The difference between primary earnings (loss) per share and fully diluted
earnings (loss) per share is not significant for the periods presented.





                                       73
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Peter D'Amelio

V .

NH Attorney General . et al .

Civil No . 08-cv-518-JD

ORDE R

I herewith approve the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge

Muirhead dated April 8, 2009, no objection having been filed.

SO ORDERED.

Apri129, 2009 /s/.Ioseph A. DiClerico. Jr.

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

cc: H. Paul Carroll, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00518-JD Document 5 Filed 04/29/09 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-40404

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JESUS VALDEZ, also known as Chewy, also known as Chuy,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:16-CR-800-1

Before DAVIS, JONES, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Jesus Valdez has moved for leave to 

withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 

U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).

Valdez’s motion to file an out of time response is GRANTED. We have 

reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected 

therein, as well as Valdez’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

May 14, 2019

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 18-40404 Document: 00514956317 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/14/2019
No. 18-40404

2

that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is 

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 

See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 18-40404 Document: 00514956317 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/14/2019
August 9, 2012



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

JEFFREY GREENBLUM , Appellant

NO. 14

- 12

- 00563

- CV V.

SQUIRE, SANDERS & DE MPSEY LLP , Appellee

________________________________ Today the Court heard its own motion to dismiss the appeal from the judgment signed by the court below on May 9, 2012. Having considered the motion and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED

. We order appellant, Jeffrey Greenblum, to pay all costs incurred in this appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

Criminal Case No. 11-cr-00362-WYD 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

1. DALE JOHNSON, 

2. DONALD BEVERLY, 

3. RONALD BENJAMIN, 

4. JIMMY HUTCHINSON, 

5. VINCENT JACKSON, 

6. JERROLD MINNEY, and 

7. SCOTT GOLDBERG, 

Defendants. 

ORDER 

This matter is before the Court upon a review of the file. To ensure that all 

pre-trial phases of the case are complete before the commencement of the jury trial, it is 

ORDERED that all pretrial motions shall be filed by Friday, December 2, 2011,

and responses to these motions shall be filed by Monday, December 12, 2011. It is 

FURTHER ORDERED that counsel shall request hearing on all pending motions, 

if necessary, and final trial preparation conference at a future date. It is 

FURTHER ORDERED that a 12-day jury trial is set for Monday, January 9, 

2012 at 9:00 a.m. in courtroom A-1002.
-2-

Dated: November 3, 2011 

BY THE COURT: 

s/ Wiley Y. Daniel 

WILEY Y. DANIEL 

CHIEF U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02447-RPM

NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA,

as Subrogee of Landow Aviation Limited Partnership and

LANDOW AVIATION I, INC., LANDOW AVIATION I, INC.,

Plaintiffs,

EAGLESPAN STEEL STRUCTURES, LLC and

INDEPENDENT TESTING & INSPECTION SERVICES, INC.,

Defendants.

____________________________________________________________________________________

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS

____________________________________________________________________________________

After review of plaintiffs’ Motion to Stay Proceedings, filed October 28, 2011 [4], it is

ORDERED that the motion is granted and this civil action is stayed until further order by the

Court.

Dated: December 20 , 2011

BY THE COURT:

s/Richard P. Matsch

_________________________________

Richard P. Matsch, Senior District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02447-RPM Document 9 Filed 12/20/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
IIB

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2131

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 11, 2001

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

AN ACT

To reauthorize the Tropical Forest Conservation Act of 1998

through fiscal year 2004, and for other purposes.

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

HR 2131 RFS

1 SECTION 1. ELIGIBILITY FOR BENEFITS.

2 Section 805(a)(2) of the Tropical Forest Conserva3 tion Act of 1998 (22 U.S.C. 2431c(a)(2)) is amended by

4 striking ‘‘major’’.

5 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS TO SUPPORT

6 REDUCTION OF DEBT UNDER THE FOREIGN

7 ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961 AND TITLE I OF THE

8 AGRICULTURAL TRADE DEVELOPMENT AND

9 ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1954.

10 (a) REAUTHORIZATION.—Section 806 of the Tropical

11 Forest Conservation Act of 1998 (22 U.S.C. 2431d) is

12 amended by adding at the end the following new sub13 section:

14 ‘‘(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR FIS15 CAL YEARS AFTER FISCAL YEAR 2001.—For the cost (as

16 defined in section 502(5) of the Federal Credit Reform

17 Act of 1990) for the reduction of any debt pursuant to

18 this section or section 807, there are authorized to be ap19 propriated to the President the following:

20 ‘‘(1) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2002.

21 ‘‘(2) $75,000,000 for fiscal year 2003.

22 ‘‘(3) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2004.’’.

23 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section

24 808(a)(1)(D) of the Tropical Forest Conservation Act of

25 1998 (22 U.S.C. 2431f(a)(1)(D)) is amended by striking

26 ‘‘to appropriated under sections 806(a)(2) and 807(a)(2)’’
3

HR 2131 RFS

1 and inserting ‘‘to be appropriated under sections

2 806(a)(2), 807(a)(2), and 806(d)’’.

3 SEC. 3. CHAIRPERSON OF THE ENTERPRISE FOR THE

4 AMERICAS BOARD.

5 Section 811(b)(2) of the Tropical Forest Conserva6 tion Act of 1998 (22 U.S.C. 2431i(b)(2)) is amended by

7 striking ‘‘from among the representatives appointed under

8 section 610(b)(1)(A) of such Act or paragraph (1)(A) of

9 this subsection’’ and inserting ‘‘and shall be the represent10 ative from the Department of State appointed under sec11 tion 610(b)(1)(A) of such Act’’.

Passed the House of Representatives July 10, 2001.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.