alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### First National Bank of Cleburne v. Graham & Lewis et al.

(No. 5929.)

Appeal from Johnson County.

Bledsoe, Patton & Brown, counsel for appellant.

O. W. Jordan and W. H. Deal, counsel for appellees.

Opinion by

White, P. J.

§ 462. *Current wages defined; attorneys’ fees are*not, *ordinarily; case stated.*Appellant, having a judgment against appellees Graham & Lewis, garnished appellee W. H. Deal, who answered that he was indebted to Graham, one of the said firm of Graham & Lewfis, in the sum of $144.10, but claimed and pleaded that said indebtedness was exempt from garnishment because the same was an attorney’s fee due to said Graham for personal legal services as an attorney-at-law rendered by *562said Graham to said garnishee. This plea was sustained by the court, and judgment rendered discharging said garnishee. *Held:*The constitution declares, “no current wages for personal services shall ever he subject to garnishment.” [Art. 16, § 28.] And the statute declares, “no current wages for personal services shall be subject to garnishment; and when it appears upon the trial that the garnishee is indebted to the defendant for such current wages, the garnishee shall nevertheless be discharged a.s to such indebtedness.” [R. S. art. 218.] “Current” means “running,” “now passing or present in its progress.” “Wages” means “a compensation given to a hired person for his or her services.” [Webster’s Dictionary.] “ Current wages ” are such compensation for personal services as are to be paid periodically, or from time to time, as the services are rendered; as, where the services are to be paid for by the hour, day, week, month or year. The service rendered must be such as that the compensation therefor is measured by the time of the continuance of such service. [Jenks v. Dyer, 103 Mass. 235; Somers v. Keliher, 115 Mass. 165.] In the use of the word “current,” our constitutional and statutory provisions differ from such exemption in most of the states. [Freeman on Executions, § 234.] Significance must be given it as well as the word “ wáges.” It limits, restricts and qualifies the character of wages which are to be held exempt. An attorney’s fee for legal services1 rendered or to be rendered in a single case, or in the transaction of a single matter, or in the transaction of any amount of legal business in any manner, cannot be correctly termed or held to be “current wages,” where he has not been hired for his services by the day, week, month or year, to be paid at the expiration of the time for which he was hired, and not in proportion to the business done. The trial court erred in rendering judgment discharging the garnishee, and the judgment is reversed and here rendered for appellant.

April 24, 1889.

Reversed and rendered.
* 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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-20012 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ROBERTO RIOJAS, JR.; DAVID CANTU; PEDRO MORENO; RAMIRO RIOJAS; LUIS MORENO; LAZARO MORENO; IRELA YVETTE RIOJAS GONZALEZ; MELBA RIOJAS MORENO; ROSANNA RIOJAS GUERRERO; JOSE LUIS CANTU; EDUARDO MORENO; RENE GONZALEZ; CESAR MORENO, SR.; RENATO RIOJAS; a/k/a Renato Riojas-Sandoval, Defendants-Appellants.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-95-CR-142

- - - - - - - - - - July 11, 1997 Before JONES, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * David Cantu appeals from the district court’s order revoking the magistrate judge’s order of release pending trial. The district court’s decision rests on its conclusion that Cantu presents a danger to any other person or the community and noNo. 97-20012 - 2 - conditions will reasonably assure safety, and that Cantu presents a risk of flight and no conditions will reasonably assure Cantu’s appearance as required. See 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e) and (f). The district court’s conclusion is supported by the record. See United States v. Rueben , 974 F.2d 580, 586 (5th Cir. 1992). The district court’s detention order as to David Cantu is AFFIRMED.
IIB 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 1374 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 18, 2007 

Received 

JANUARY 22 (legislative day, JANUARY 3), 2008 

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

AN ACT 

To amend the Florida National Forest Land Management 

Act of 2003 to authorize the conveyance of an additional 

tract of National Forest System land under that Act, 

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, 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

HR 1374 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. CONVEYANCES UNDER FLORIDA NATIONAL 

2 FOREST LAND MANAGEMENT ACT OF 2003. 

3 (a) ADDITIONAL CONVEYANCE AUTHORIZED.—Sub4 section (b) of section 3 of the Florida National Forest 

5 Land Management Act of 2003 (Public Law 108–152; 

6 117 Stat. 1919) is amended— 

7 (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph 

8 (17); 

9 (2) by redesignating paragraph (18) as para10 graph (19); 

11 (3) by inserting after paragraph (17) the fol12 lowing new paragraph: 

13 ‘‘(18) tract W–1979, located in Leon County 

14 consisting of approximately 114 acres, within T. 1 

15 S., R. 1 W., sec.25; and’’; and 

16 (4) in paragraph (19), as so redesignated, by 

17 striking ‘‘(17)’’ and inserting ‘‘(18)’’. 

18 (b) ADDITIONAL USE OF PROCEEDS.—Paragraph (2) 

19 of subsection (i) of such section (117 Stat. 1921) is 

20 amended— 

21 (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of subpara22 graph (A); 

23 (2) by striking the period at the end of sub24 paragraph (B) and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

25 (3) by adding at the end the following new sub26 paragraph: 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
3 

HR 1374 RFS 

1 ‘‘(C) acquisition, construction, or mainte2 nance of administrative improvements for units 

3 of the National Forest System in the State.’’. 

4 (c) LIMITATIONS ON USE OF PROCEEDS.—Sub5 section (i) of such section is further amended by adding 

6 at the end the following new paragraphs: 

7 ‘‘(3) GEOGRAPHICAL AND USE RESTRICTION

8 FOR CERTAIN CONVEYANCE.—Notwithstanding para9 graph (2), proceeds from the sale or exchange of the 

10 tract described in subsection (b)(18) shall be used 

11 exclusively for the purchase of inholdings in the 

12 Apalachicola National Forest. 

13 ‘‘(4) RESTRICTION ON USE OF PROCEEDS FOR

14 ADMINISTRATIVE IMPROVEMENTS.—Proceeds from 

15 any sale or exchange of land under this Act may be 

16 used for administrative improvements, as authorized 

17 by paragraph (2)(C), only if the land generating the 

18 proceeds was improved with infrastructure.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives December 17, 

2007. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
#### DR. LEO MINDEL v. TOWNSHIP OF FRANKLIN, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF TOWNSHIP OF FRANKLIN.

January 17, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
Exhibit 35.1	Servicing Compliance
Statement on General Electric Capital Corporation





GE EQUIPMENT TRANSPORTATION LLC, SERIES 2011-1	                    March 15,
2012

10 Riverview Drive

Danbury, CT 06810



Attention: 	Capital Markets Operations





Pursuant to Section 2.8 of the Servicing Agreement, dated as
of June 29, 2011 (the “Servicing Agreement”), between GE EQUIPMENT TRANSPORTATION LLC, SERIES 2011-1 and General Electric
Capital Corporation, as Servicer, the undersigned hereby certify that:



| | (i.) | a review of the activities of the Servicer during the previous fiscal year and of performance under the Servicing Agreement
has been made under the supervision of the undersigned; and
| | ---- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (ii.) | to the best knowledge of the undersigned, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the
Servicing Agreement throughout such period.
| | ----- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





GENERAL ELECTRIC CAPITAL CORPORATION

By: /s/ Thomas A. Davidson

Name: Thomas A. Davidson

Title: Attorney-In-Fact
News United States Air Force
 292 Airmen on November enlisted supplemental promotion listPublished Nov. 14, 2014
                **JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO-RANDOLPH, Texas (AFNS) --**
                The Air Force selected 292 enlisted Airmen for promotion via the supplemental promotion process, Air Force Personnel Center officials announced.
Airmen on the supplemental list tested outside of their required cycle because of an extended temporary duty assignment or deployment in support of a contingency, said promotion and testing representatives.
Selection is based on overall promotion scores derived from Weighted Airman Promotion System factors, including time-in-grade, time-in-service, enlisted performance reports, decorations, promotion fitness examination score and specialty knowledge test score (junior enlisted promotions) or the U.S. Air Force Supervisory Exam and board scores (selection to senior and chief master sergeant). 
To see the list, go to the Air Force Portal and select the promotion news link, or go to myPers, enter "Active Duty: Enlisted Promotions Home Page" in the search window, select the page and scroll down to the supplemental promotion section.
Promotion selections are tentative until the data verification process is complete; generally 10 days after the promotion release date.
For more information about promotions and other personnel issues, go to myPers.*(Information courtesy of Air Force Personnel Center Public Affairs)*enlisted promotion 



Supplemental promotion 



AFPC 



promotion
#### William Cameron v. Webb, Hynds & Co.

(No. 2862.)

Appeal from Collin County.

*(Transferred from Austin.)*

Alexander, Winter & Dickinson, counsel for appellant.

No counsel appeared for appellees.

Opinion by

Hurt, J.‘

§417. *Privilege to be sued in county of residence; contract to perform obligation in another county; case staled.*This Suit was instituted by appellees against appellant in the county court of Collin county to recover an alleged balance of $G09.95 on a contract relating to the sale of wheat. Appellant, being a resident of McLennan county, pleaded in due form his privilege to be sued in said county. Appellees replied to this plea, 1, that appellant had contracted in writing to pay for said wheat in Collin county; and 2, that appellant had practiced a fraud upon appellees in relation to said wheat in said Collin county. The jury found against appellant’s plea of privilege, and in favor of appellees for the indebtedness sued for, and judgment was rendered accordingly.

The contract in relation to the sale and purchase of the wheat was made by telegrams and letters, and was in substance as follows: Appellees proposed to appellant, “We will sell you ten cars of wheat F. O. B. at McKinney, Collin county, at sixty-five cents.” To which appellant replied: “ I will take ten cars F; O. B. at sixty-five cents.” *Held:*Such contract is not a contract in writing to pay for the wheat in Collin county, within the meaning of the statute. [R. S. art. 1198, subd. 5.J *491The letters F. O. B., used in said contract, signify “Free On Board ” the cars at McKinney, Collin county, Texas. Such is the commercial meaning of these letters when used in a commercial transaction. They do not mean a promise to pay for the property bought in the county of the shipment. In this case it was attempted to prove that by a custom of merchants said letters meant that the payment for the goods must be made at the place of shipment. If this evidence was admissible, it failed to establish such a custom; and furthermore, the facts of this case show clearly that in this instance said letters conveyed no such meaning. The plea of privilege should have been sustained as against this answer thereto.

December 5, 1888.

§ 118. *Same; exception in case of fraud.*The attempt to sustain the jurisdiction of the court upon the ground of fraud is unwarranted. The provision of the statute which gives jurisdiction in case of fraud is not applicable in this case. [R. S. art. 1198.] It is only when the principal cause of action is a fraudulent act, or when the main object of the suit is to set aside a fraudulent transaction, that a suit may be maintained in the county of the fraud. Such is not the character of this suit, and the fraud, if any ;was practiced, did not enter into the cause of action. The court erred in submitting to the jury the issue of fraud with respect to the plea of privilege, as such issue was not properly in the case.

Reversed and remanded.
583 A.2d 345

#### FRANK RACIOPPI v. ROBERT HELSTOSKI.

March 26, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
CERTIFICATE                                                             --------
  NO. ____                                                               SHARES

                          OCWEN ASSET INVESTMENT CORP.


                                  COMMON STOCK
                                ($.01 Par Value)



         THIS CERTIFIES that _________________________ is the registered owner
of _______________ shares of the Common Stock, par value $.01 per share, of
Ocwen Asset Investment Corp. transferable only on the books of the Corporation
by the holder hereof in person or by attorney-in-fact upon surrender of this
Certificate properly endorsed.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Corporation has caused this Certificate to
be signed by its duly authorized officers and to be sealed with the Seal of the
Corporation this ____ day of _________,__________.


____________________________         [SEAL]        _____________________________
        President                                           Secretary

<PAGE>

The securities represented by this Certificate have not been registered under
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the securities laws of any state
(collectively the "Acts"). As a result, these securities may not be transferred
except pursuant to either registration under the Acts or an exemption therefrom.

         For Value Received, ___________ hereby sell, assign and transfer unto
________________________________________________________________________ Shares
of the Capital Stock represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby
irrevocably constitute and appoint ___________________________________ to
transfer the said Stock on the books of the within named Corporation with full
power of substitution in the premises.

         Dated __________________, 19____




                                      __________________________________________


         In presence of

____________________________________________
ANNUAL REPORT
Chevy Chase Auto Receivables Trust 1997-1
$ 209,433,212 6.50% Auto Receivables Backed Certificates
For the Year Ended December 31, 1997




         PRINCIPAL    INTEREST      NET       NET        30 +      DELQ.
            DIST        DIST       LOSSES    LOSS %     DELQ.        %
        ____________ ___________ ___________ ________ ____________ _______
 Jan-97           0           0           0    0.00%            0    0.00%
 Feb-97           0           0           0    0.00%            0    0.00%
 Mar-97           0           0           0    0.00%            0    0.00%
 Apr-97   6,002,796   1,134,430           0    0.00%    3,819,539    1.88%
 May-97   5,392,940   1,101,915       1,923    0.01%    5,280,352    2.67%
 Jun-97   4,856,238   1,072,703      47,773    0.30%    8,209,953    4.25%
 Jul-97   5,778,138   1,046,398     171,932    1.10%    9,016,003    4.81%
 Aug-97   5,741,349   1,015,100     472,703    3.12%    9,878,922    5.43%
 Sep-97   5,883,961     984,001     516,050    3.52%   10,723,822    6.09%
 Oct-97   5,997,970     952,130     769,107    5.41%   11,090,540    6.50%
 Nov-97   6,209,324     919,641     667,718    4.87%   11,296,032    6.86%
 Dec-97   5,893,391     886,007     923,426    6.96%   11,101,895    6.97%
        ____________ ___________ ___________
 Totals  51,756,106   9,112,325   3,570,631

  **  The date represents the month of the Distribution date, the informat
      is from activity of the previous month.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 93 (Thursday, June 8, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1190-E1191]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                  NAVAL WAR COLLEGE PRESIDENT RETIRES

                                 ______

                            HON. IKE SKELTON

                              of missouri

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, June 7, 1995
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, today I wish to honor Rear Adm. Joseph 
Charles Strasser for his faithful and dedicated service to the U.S. 
Navy. In June 1995, Rear Admiral Strasser will retire from the Navy. 
For the past 5 years, Admiral Strasser has headed the Naval War 
College, bringing outstanding instruction in strategy and military 
affairs to officers of our country.
  Strasser was commissioned into the U.S. Navy in June 1963, after 
graduating from the Naval Academy. His initial assignment was as an 
exchange officer with the Argentine Navy. In July 1968, he began 
studying at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts 
University. There he earned a master's degree in international 
relations, a master's degree in international law and diplomacy, and a 
Doctor of Philosophy in political science. He went on to attend the 
command and staff course at the U.S. Naval War College in Newport, RI.
  In January 1987, he was selected for promotion to rear admiral and In 
August of the following year he became the commander of 
[[Page E1191]] Crusier-Destroyer Group Three. He was also the commander 
of Battle Group Foxtrot, and set sail on the U.S.S. Enterprise for her 
around-the-world cruise. On July 17, 1990, Rear Admiral Strasser became 
the 45th president of the Naval War College.
  Rear Admiral Strasser has been awarded many decorations including the 
Defense Distinguished Service Medal, Defense Superior Service Medal, 
Legion of Merit, Meritorious Service Medal, Navy Commendation Medal, 
Navy Achievement Medal, Combat Action Ribbon, Meritorious Unit 
Commendation, and various campaign and service ribbons. I know that 
this body joins me in wishing the best of luck to him as he becomes the 
CEO for Pennsylvania State-Dubois Campus. My congratulations and best 
wishes to Rear Admiral Strasser, his wife Barbara, and their four 
children.

                          ____________________
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Election Commission

# AGENCY:

Federal Election Commission. 

# DATE AND TIME:

Tuesday, September 21, 2010, at 10 a.m. 

# PLACE:

999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC. 

# STATUS:

This meeting will be closed to the public. 

## Items To Be Discussed 

Compliance matters pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g. 

Audits conducted pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g, 438(b), and Title 26, U.S.C. 

Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or arbitration. 

Internal personnel rules and procedures or matters affecting a particular employee. 

# PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION:

Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: (202) 694-1220. 

Shawn Woodhead Werth, 

Secretary and Clerk of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2010-23779 Filed 9-22-10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6715-01-M
#### A. L. West v. A. R. White & Bro.

(No. 6692.)

Appeal from Dallas County.

Gillespie & Copers, counsel for appellant.

No counsel appeared for appellees.

Opinion by

Willson, J.

*191June 7, 1890.

§ 130. *Appeal bond; time of filing of.*Appellees recovered judgment against appellant in justice’s court on September 28, 1889, for $65.45 and costs. Appellant filed a motion for new trial October 1,1889. This motion does not appear to have been acted upon. October 18, 1889, appellant filed an appeal bond in justice’s court, and the cause went to the county court, when the appeal was dismissed upon motion of appellees, upon the ground that the appeal bond was not filed within the time required by law. It was error to dismiss the appeal. The appeal bond was filed within the time required by law, that is, within ten days after the last day on which the motion for new trial could have been acted upon. [3 Civil Cas. Ct. App., § 105.] The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded to the county court for trial *de novo.*

Reversed and remanded.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1342 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1342

  To suspend the visa waiver program until certain entry-exit control 
             requirements are met, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 6, 2007

 Mr. Gingrey introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To suspend the visa waiver program until certain entry-exit control 
             requirements are met, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Secure Entry Act''.

SEC. 2. SUSPENSION OF VISA WAIVER PROGRAM.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
visa waiver program established under section 217 of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1187) is hereby suspended until such time 
as the Secretary of Homeland Security determines and certifies to 
Congress that--
            (1) the automated entry-exit control system authorized 
        under section 110 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and 
        Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1221 note) is 
        fully implemented and functional;
            (2) all United States ports of entry have functional 
        biometric machine readers; and
            (3) all nonimmigrants, including Border Crossing Card 
        holders, are processed through the automated entry-exit control 
        system.
    (b) Repeal.--Subparagraph (B) of section 217(a)(3) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(3)) is hereby 
repealed.
                                 <all>
```