alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### G. & C. Pfeuffer v. G. W. Wilderman.

(No. 1984, Op. Book No. 3, p. 764.)

Appeal from Bexar County.

Opinion by

White, P. J.

§ 187.’ *Appeal; right of.*The right of appeal is- guarantied by the constitution, and the legislature cannot take it away by express provision, much less indirectly or by implication.

§ 188. *Appeal from county court; when jurisdiction of court of appeals attaches.*The jurisdiction of the court of appeals attaches when the appeal has been perfected by the filing of the appeal bond. After jurisdiction has thus *75attached, it cannot be divested by an. act of the legislature which takes away civil jurisdiction from the county court and transfers all civil cases to the district court. Such an act does not relate to or affect a case in the county court which had, prior to the passage of the act, been appealed to this court; but it was proper for the clerk of the county court to proceed to make out and send up to this court the transcripts in the case, without regard to the act.

Motion to dismiss appeal overruled.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-1138
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus BENJAMIN D. MEDLEY, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at R oanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-96-964-R) Submitted: May 14, 1998 Decided: May 26, 1998 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Benjamin D. Medley, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas A. Leggette, Frank Kenneth Friedman, Philip Wayne Parker, WOODS, ROGERS & HAZLEGROVE, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment to Plaintiff on its action for declaratory judgment. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Government Employees Ins. Co. v. Medley , No. CA-96- 964-R (W.D. Va. Jan. 14, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented inthe materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
News United States Air Force
 Surgeon general testifies before Senate on budget requestPublished April 11, 2014
                **WASHINGTON (AFNS) --**
                The medical capabilities honed from 13 years of war must continue to expand for future needs, the three military surgeon generals’ told Senate Appropriations Committee’s subcommittee on defense April 9.
Lt. Gen. (Dr.) Thomas Travis, the Air Force surgeon general, testified with Lt. Gen. Patricia Horoho, the Army surgeon general; and Vice Adm. (Dr.) Matthew Nathan, the Navy surgeon general, at a hearing on defense health programs. 
Despite the war winding down and the fiscal challenges that lie ahead, military medicine has a “clear responsibility” to make sure its medics are well trained and prepared for any future contingencies, the Air Force surgeon general said. 
In addition to psychiatric intervention and care for suicide prevention and various mental health issues, the services have made other gains in the medical arena. 
Air Force mental health providers also are readily available at duty locations to “provide early intervention and care for those experiencing occupational stress that affects their performance,” Travis said. 
Combat and stability operations, humanitarian assistance, and disaster relief must be sustained by well-trained personnel, Travis said. 
“(Medical professionals) must have robust opportunities to practice their skills (and we must) continue to pursue critical research and modernization initiatives in the future,” he said. 
According to Horoho, when the Army, Navy and Air Force began embedding behavioral health professionals at duty stations, for example, service members were able to access outpatient behavioral health care more often, and fewer subsequent acute crises occurred, the surgeon generals’ told Senate members. 
“As the way we fight war evolves, the way we provide medical support to operators is also evolving,” Travis said. “Not only will access and care be more customized for the mission, but so will prevention. Even in the face of budget challenges, we have to be as ready for the next war as we are at the end of the current war.”*(Courtesy of American Forces Press Service, content provided by Terri Moon Cronk of AFPS)*surgeon general 



medic 



medical Related Links
        LIEUTENANT GENERAL (DR.) THOMAS W. TRAVIS
                                Feb. 18, 2015
                                Lt. Gen. (Dr.) Thomas W. Travis is the Surgeon General of the Air Force, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C.
#### A. R. Johnson v. Elisha McDaniel.

(No. 1054, Op. Book No. 2, p. 228.)

Error from Burnet County.

Opinion by

Watts, J.

§ 1013. *Indorser; replied insolvency of makers insufficient cause for not suing in time.*The reputed insolvency of the makers of a negotiable instrument is not good cause for failing to institute suit against the indorser before the first term of the court after the right of action has accrued, within the meaning of the statute. [R. S. 262.]

§ 1013. *Same; insolvency; notorious and actual, difference between; question of fact for jury; evidence.*The statute provides, however, that where the makers are “notoriously insolvent,” suit can he brought against the *567indorser without suing the makers; and it is well settled that if the makers are *“*notoriously insolvent ” the indorser is primarily liable, and may be sued at any time before the cause of action is barred. But there is a distinction between actual and notorious insolvency. There is a difference in the meaning of the terms, the latter being the stronger term. A man may be *actually*insolvent, and yet not be *notoriously*so; the latter, however, cannot exist without the concurrence of the former. To constitute notorious insolvency the actual insolvency must exist to that extent that it manifests itself to the public. The question of insolvency is one of fact to be submitted to the jury, and in this case it was held to be error to reject the testimony of one of the makers of the note, which tended to prove that he was solvent at the date of the maturity of the note.

March 3, 1881.

Reversed and remanded.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 97 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. J. RES. 97

    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
                      relating to parental rights.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 26, 2008

   Mr. Hoekstra introduced the following joint resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
                      relating to parental rights.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled   (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States 
within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

                              ``Article --

    ``Section 1. The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing and 
education of their children is a fundamental right.
    ``Section 2. Neither the United States nor any State shall infringe 
upon this right without demonstrating that its governmental interest as 
applied to the person is of the highest order and not otherwise served.
    ``Section 3. No treaty may be adopted nor shall any source of 
international law be employed to supersede, modify, interpret, or apply 
to the rights guaranteed by this article.''.
                                 <all>
```
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A16D0077. WILLIE SUGGS et al. v. NAJARIAN HOLDINGS, LLC.

This dispossessory proceeding commenced in magistrate court. Following an

unfavorable ruling, Willie and Jonita Suggs appealed to superior court. The superior

court entered an order and writ of possession in favor of Najarian Holdings, but it

reserved the remaining issues for trial, directing the calendar clerk to place the case

on a trial calendar within two months. As issues between the Suggses and Najarian

Holdings remain pending before the trial court, no final judgment has been entered

in this case and the interlocutory appeal procedures set forth in OCGA § 5-6-34 (b)

were required to appeal the trial court’s order. Willie and Jonita Suggs’s failure to

comply with the interlocutory appeal procedures deprives this Court of jurisdiction

to consider this appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is ordered DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

11/02/2015

November 02, 2015
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
REGISTRANT'S  FORM 10-QSB FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED JANUARY 31, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1999
<CASH>                                          47,216
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  398,108
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (10,000)
<INVENTORY>                                    308,261
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               743,585
<PP&E>                                         237,627
<DEPRECIATION>                               (224,753)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,782,911
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          205,017
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                    24,608,603
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                (18,260,498)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,782,911
<SALES>                                        242,806
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               247,272
<CGS>                                           81,997
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  436,797
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                31,236
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,426
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (220,761)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (220,761)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (220,761)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.07)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 4.2

                                 Amendment No. 1


     Amendment No. 1, dated as of December 15, 2003, to the Amended and Restated
Rights Agreement, dated as of January 8, 2002 (the "Rights Agreement"),  between
Wyeth, a Delaware  Corporation (the  "Corporation") and The Bank of New York, as
Rights Agent (the "Rights Agent").

     WHEREAS,  the Corporation has duly authorized the execution and delivery of
this Amendment and has done all things  necessary to make this Amendment a valid
agreement of the Corporation. This Amendment is entered into pursuant to Section
27 of the Rights Agreement.

     NOW, THEREFORE,  in consideration of the premises and the mutual agreements
set forth herein, the parties hereby agree as follows:

     1. Amendment to the Definition of "Final Expiration Date". Section 1 of the
Rights  Agreement  is  hereby  amended  to delete  "October  7,  2009"  from the
definition of "Final Expiration Date" and insert in lieu thereof:  "December 15,
2003".

     2. Effective  Date. This Amendment shall be effective upon execution by the
undersigned.

     3.   Counterparts.   This   Amendment  may  be  executed  in  one  or  more
counterparts, and by the different parties hereto in separate counterparts, each
of which when executed  shall be deemed to be an original but all of which taken
together shall constitute one and the same agreement.

     IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the  undersigned  have  caused this  Amendment  to be
executed  as of the  date  first  written  above by  their  respective  officers
thereunto duly authorized.

Attest:                                  WYETH


_____________________                    By:   ______________________
                                         Name:
                                         Title:




Attest:                                  THE BANK OF NEW YORK, as Rights Agent



_____________________                     By:   ______________________
                                          Name:
                                          Title:
II 

Calendar No. 117 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1003 

[Report No. 110–55] 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 14, 2007 

Received 

MARCH 19, 2007 

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations 

APRIL 12, 2007 

Reported by Mr. BIDEN, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To amend the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring 

Act of 1998 to reauthorize the United States Advisory 

Commission on Public Diplomacy. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION OF UNITED STATES ADVI4 SORY COMMISSION ON PUBLIC DIPLOMACY. 

5 Section 1334 of the Foreign Affairs Reform and Re6 structuring Act of 1998 (22 U.S.C. 6553) is amended by 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•HR 1003 RS

1 striking ‘‘October 1, 2006’’ and inserting ‘‘October 1, 

2 2009’’. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

Calendar No. 117 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1003 

[Report No. 110

–55] 

AN ACT 

To amend the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restrucmacy. States Advisory Commission on Public Diplo- turing Act of 1998 to reauthorize the United 

APRIL 12, 2007 

Reported without amendment 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         187,024
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,656,828
<ALLOWANCES>                                    40,000
<INVENTORY>                                  8,088,793
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,984,443
<PP&E>                                      13,032,097
<DEPRECIATION>                               7,436,747
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              17,828,656
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       10,931,117
<BONDS>                                        500,525
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,322
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,452,696
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                17,828,656
<SALES>                                     21,311,535
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            22,831,305
<CGS>                                       20,222,420
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               22,191,764
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             609,863
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 29,678
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             29,678
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    29,678
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .01
        

</TABLE>
No. 87-1095.

#### Director, Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor *v.*Broyles et al.

C. A. 4th Cir. [Certiorari granted, *ante,*p. 987.] Motion of the Solicitor General to dispense with printing the joint appendix granted.
#### YELLOW DUCK NURSERY, INC., v. DEPARTMENT OF INSTITUTIONS AND AGENCIES OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY.

April 18, 1978.

Petition for certification denied. (See 155 *N. J. Super.*56).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF AMERICAN BUSINESS FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.
AND SUBSIDIARIES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND THE SIX MONTHS THEN ENDED AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                        4,333,367 
<SECURITIES>                                          0 
<RECEIVABLES>                                90,501,538 
<ALLOWANCES>                                  1,205,620 
<INVENTORY>                                           0 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            100,858,676 
<PP&E>                                        9,039,516 
<DEPRECIATION>                                3,395,262 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              197,020,334 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       101,799,606 
<BONDS>                                               0 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0 
<PREFERRED>                                           0 
<COMMON>                                          3,523 
<OTHER-SE>                                   36,095,763 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                197,020,334 
<SALES>                                               0 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             23,437,745 
<CGS>                                                 0 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                16,307,698 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      0 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                981,603 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            4,936,301 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               7,130,047 
<INCOME-TAX>                                  2,424,216 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           4,705,831 
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0 
<CHANGES>                                             0 
<NET-INCOME>                                  4,705,831 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      1.34 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      1.28 
                                                       


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 87 (Wednesday, May 24, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H5502]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                       MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT

  A message in writing from the President of the United States was 
communicated to the House by Mr. Edwin Thomas, one of his secretaries.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Committee will resume its sitting.

                          ____________________
```
News United States Air Force
 Air Force Cryptologic Office establishes new information dominance initiativePublished April 8, 2022
                        
                        By Capt. Francis Castillo
                        
                        
                        Air Force Cryptologic Office
                **FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, Md. (AFNS) --**
                The Air Force Cryptologic Office recently established the first Converged Air Force Enterprise Mission framework to harness total enterprise capacity and deliver information dominance now and for decades to come.
As one of the new initiatives within the cryptologic component of the **16th Air Force** (Air Forces Cyber), CAFEM is steering the enterprise away from the platform-centered intelligence analysis standard to a sensor agnostic and problem-centric architecture. The concept is focused on modernizing the decades-old intelligence production framework and providing combatant commands, commanders and intelligence partners with the necessary agility of analysis.
CAFEM leverages the full potential within the cryptologic enterprise by connecting analysts working similar mission sets regardless of geographic location, unit of assignment or Air Force component. The approach insulates missions against fluctuations in manning that might otherwise impede production. It provides a steady-state analytical and reporting capacity against identified missions. At its core, CAFEM is an intuitive methodology designed to center cryptologic Airmen on real-time collaboration and information exchange.
The collaborative ecosystem CAFEM provides is a major benefit to analysts. Here, the most junior and most senior Airmen participate in the same virtual space analyzing problem-sets, which provides a common learning experience for all participants. Centralized participation in CAFEM production also creates a link to cultivate a reporting standard that exceeds current norms and better meets customer requirements.
The initial design focused specifically on Air Force cryptologic missions and requirements; however, it is scalable to encompass the entirety of the Air Force intelligence community and even joint service or national intelligence production.
As CAFEM becomes the standard for cryptologic analysis and production, it has the flexibility to evolve and grow to harness total capacity against any target-set.FS 



USAF 



AF 



Air Force 



16th Air Force 



Air Forces Cyber 



ACC 



Air Force Cryptologic Office 



intelligence 



cryptologic analysis 



Converged Air Force Enterprise Mission 



information dominance 



Air Combat Command