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

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 86 (Tuesday, May 23, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H5379]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                   DESIGNATION OF SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following 
communication from the Speaker:

                                               Washington, DC,

                                                     May 23, 1995.
       I hereby designate the Honorable Jay Kim to act as Speaker 
     pro tempore on this day.
                                                    Newt Gingrich,
     Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                          ____________________
```
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 90 (Monday, June 5, 1995)]
[Daily Digest]
[Page D678]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                        House of Representatives

Chamber Action

  The House was not in session today. It will meet next at noon 
Tuesday, June 6.
```
News United States Air Force
 Vice chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff views Tinker capabilitiesPublished April 4, 2016
                        
                        By Greg L. Davis
                        
                        
                        72nd Air Base Wing Public Affairs
                **TINKER AIR FORCE BASE, Okla. (AFNS)  --**
                The vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff visited Tinker Air Force Base April 1 to learn more about the missions of the Air Force Sustainment Center and the contributions of associate units toward the nation's strategic nuclear deterrence.Lt. Gen. Lee K. Levy II, the AFSC commander, briefed Gen. Paul J. Selva, the vice chairman of the JCS, on the center's role in maintaining Air Force aircraft, engines and weapon systems. He also explained how his team is integral to sustaining the nuclear enterprise mission. Selva’s wife, Ricki, began a separate tour of Tinker's resiliency programs, supporting military members and their families, while Selva reviewed key elements of Tinker's massive maintenance complex.Selva saw the KC-135 Stratotanker and B-52H Stratofortress in various states of maintenance, repair and overhaul. He was updated on some of the specific challenges the AFSC and Oklahoma City Air Logistics Complex face in maintaining aging aircraft fleets. He also was shown why the KC-135 are subjected to longer stays in the facility due to age and how advanced diagnostic techniques are finding potential problems sooner. Earlier detection of problems adds repair time, but is critical to ensuring the overall safety and longevity of the fleet.This stop on the tour highlighted how the OC-ALC supports the nation's strategic nuclear deterrence through the programmed depot maintenance of Air Force bombers, tankers, commodities and engines. The complex also has an emerging mission developing aviation software.The tour then moved to see an industrial and planned military construction site that will add increased production capacity in the form of the KC-46A Pegasus tanker maintenance and support complex.Strategic Communications Wing One, a Navy unit operating E-6B Mercury and based at Tinker AFB, was also visited by Selva. E-6Bs provide critical communication links from national command authorities to the nuclear-capable submarine fleet, land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles, and nuclear-capable aircraft that make up the nuclear triad during wartime. Selva was given an in-depth tour of the aircraft itself while meeting with aircrew members and wing leadership.Selva's visit wrapped up as he thanked Tinker AFB leadership for the tour and information before preparing to be the guest speaker at a base's dining out.JCS 



VCJCS 



Tinker AFB 



AFSC 



AFMC 



visit 



tour
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appell ate case name: Jason Ramjattansingh v. The State of Texas

Appel late case number: 01

- 15

- 01089

- CR

Trial court case number: 2019635

Trial court: County Criminal Court of Law No. 8 of Harris County

Appellant Jason Ramjattansingh was convicted of Class A misdemeanor driving while

intoxicated. See T EX

. P ENAL C ODE §§ 49.04(a), (b), (d). Ramjattansingh appealed his conviction, and on August 10, 2017, we issued an opinion that reversed his Class A misdemeanor conviction, rendered a judgment of acquittal on that charge, and remanded for a new trial on the lesser

- inclu ded Class B misdemeanor offense of driving while intoxicated. Ramjattansingh v. State , 530 S.W.3d 259, 260 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] 2017), rev’ d , PD

- 0972

- 17, 2018 WL 2714677 (Tex. Crim. App. June 6, 2018)

. On June 6, 2018, the Court of Criminal Appea ls issued an opinion that reversed our judgment and remanded the case for furth er proceedings consistent with the Court’s holding. Ramjattansingh v. State , PD

- 0972

- 17, 2018 WL 2714677, at *8 (Tex. Crim. App. June 6, 2018).

We ORDER that any additional brie fing by either party must be filed with this Court within 21 days from the date of this order. We further ORDER that any response briefing by either party must be filed with this Court within 10 ten days after the initial 21

- day deadline.

It is so ORDERED

.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Harvey Brown

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: July 26, 2018
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 87 (Wednesday, May 24, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H5485]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                             VINE AND WINE

  (Mrs. SEASTRAND asked and was given permission to address the House 
for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
  Mrs. SEASTRAND. Mr. Speaker, over the last 30 years, the Federal 
Government has become far too generous with the taxpayer's money. 
Washington bureaucrats not satisfied with wasting money on domestic 
programs find new and inventive ways to waste it in other countries.
  Here are a few examples of what I am talking about: The International 
Institute for the Unification of Private Law, the International Office 
of Vine and Wine, the Permanent International Association of Road 
Congresses, the Colombo Plan Council for Technical Cooperation, and the 
International Natural Rubber Study Organization.
  All of these programs have two things in common: They are funded by 
the American taxpayer and they need desperately to be unfunded by the 
American taxpayer.
  Mr. Speaker, we realize that the Federal Government cannot continue 
spending money as if there were no tomorrow, and we can no longer 
afford overseas extravagance. It is time to streamline bureaucracy and 
eliminate the proliferation of silly named programs that have no real 
purpose and no real need to exist. The American Overseas Interests Act 
will reduce our monetary aid commitments overseas to one percent of the 
Federal budget, much more in line with what the American people want us 
to do in this Congress.

                          ____________________
```
No. 11,852.

#### Smith *v.*Lane.

*Contbact.*— Principal *and Agent.*— Commissions.—The appellant and the appellee entered into a written contract on the 7th day of July, 1880, wherein the former agreed to pay the latter three per cent, commission for selling real estate; subsequently a verbal contract was made, wherein it was agreed that the appellee should enter the service of the appellant at a compensation of one dollar and twenty-five cents per day, but there was evidence showing that the written contract was not modified or abrogated ; and that the compensation stipulated in the verbal contract was for managing appellant’s general business.

*Held,*that the verbal contract did not necessarily supersede the original written agreement, and prevent the agent from recovering commissions for services performed under it.

From the Lake Circuit Court.

*G. Burson*and *R. L. Mattingly,*for appellant.

*J. C. Nye,*for appellee.

Elliott, J.

The parties entered into a written agreement on the 7th day of July, 1880, wherein the appellant agreed to pay the appellee a commission of three per cent, for selling real estate of which she was the owner; subsequently a verbal contract was entered into between them, wherein it was agreed that the appellee should enter the service of the appellant at a compensation of one dollar and twenty-five cents per day. The witness who testified as to the verbal agreement also tes*450tilled that the written contract was exhibited to him at the time the verbal agreement was stated to him by the parties; ahd the'same witness also testified that the appellee did superintend and manage the appellant’s business. Another witness testified that the appellee did transact business for Mrs. Smith, lending money, superintending the erection of buildings, the construction of ditches, and the like. Several other' witnesses testified that he had conducted business with them for her, and during the course of her testimony she admitted that he did conduct such business for her. None of the witnesses, directly or indirectly, state that the written contract was ever modified or abrogated; on the contrary, the only reasonable inference from the evidence is that it was always regarded by the parties as in full force. We do not think it can be said as matter of law that the verbal contract superseded the written. Our conclusion is that the commission was intended as a compensation for specific services in selling real estate; while the agreement to pay the stipulated sum per day was intended as a compensation for services rendered in conducting and managing appellant’s general business. The fact that Mr. Lane undertook to manage her general business, did not deprive him of a right to the commissions earned under his written contract, for the services therein provided for were not embraced in the verbal agreement.

Filed April 22, 1885.

There is evidence supporting the verdict upon all material points, as well as to the right to recover, as to the amount of the recovery, and settled rules forbid us to disturb it.

Judgment affirmed.
CERTIFICATIONS

I, V. Terence Franzke, Chief Financial Officer of Financial Ventures,
Inc., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Financial
Ventures, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material
fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this annual report, fairly
present in all material respects the financial condition, results
of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for,
the periods presented in this annual report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls
and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-
14) for the registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure
that material information relating to the registrant, including
its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which
this annual report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the
filing date of this annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on
our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's
ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data
and have identified for the registrant's auditors any material
weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management
or other employees who have a significant role in the
registrant's internal controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have
indicated in this annual report whether there were significant
changes in internal controls or in other factors that could
significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of
our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date:  August 23, 2007

/s/ V. Terence Franzke
-------------------
V. Terence Franzke
Chief Financial Officer


<PAGE>
#### Wendy FUNK, Wife of and David Funk v. Richard J. CLEMENT, M.D., et al.

No. 2011-CC-2489.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 1, 2011.

In re Louisiana Patient’s Compensation Fund; Louisiana Patient’s Compensation Fund Oversight Board; — Defendant(s); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 95-138; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 11-00808.

Stay denied; writ denied.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 84 (Friday, May 19, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S7021]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                    AUTHORITY FOR COMMITTEES TO MEET

                     committee on foreign relations

  Mr. PACKWOOD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session 
of the Senate on Friday, May 19, 1995, at 11 a.m.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

             Subcommittee on education, arts and humanities

  Mr. PACKWOOD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
Subcommittee on Education, Arts and Humanities of the Committee on 
Labor and Human Resources be authorized to meet for a hearing on the 
role of business in vocational education, during the session of the 
Senate on Friday, May 19, 1995, at 9:30 a.m.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  

                          ____________________
```
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-02-00617-CR

Rhett Webster Pease, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 5 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

NO. 586435, HONORABLE GISELA D. TRIANA, JUDGE PRESIDING

Rhett Webster Pease filed a Anotice of interlocutory appeal@ seeking a determination by this 

Court as to Awhether or not the county court [at law] has any jurisdiction in this matter,@ a prosecution for 

resisting arrest. The notice states that the specific issue Pease seeks to address by this interlocutory appeal 

is Awhether or not de-facto officers can charge defendant with resisting arrest without warrant supported by 

affidavit.@

Courts of appeals do not have jurisdiction to consider interlocutory appeals unless that 

jurisdiction has been expressly granted by law. Apolinar v. State, 820 S.W.2d 792, 794 (Tex. Crim. 

App. 1991). There is no statutory provision granting a right to appeal the matter at issue here before a final 

judgment has been rendered.
2

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

 

David Puryear, Justice

Before Chief Justice Aboussie, Justices Patterson and Puryear

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction

Filed: October 17, 2002

Do Not Publish
#### CROCKETT *v.*WOFFORD *et al.*

A petition alleging that the defendant has threatened to enter upon the plaintiff's lot of which they are in possession, destroy their fence, seize a ten-foot strip of land in dispute, and put thereon a business stand and sign-boards, whereby they would suffer irreparable injury; that such trespass would cause a breach of the peace; and that they are remediless unless the defendant is enjoined from carrying out his threats, is not subject to- general demurrer.

No. 6278.

July 12, 1928.

Equitable petition. Before Judge Howard. Fulton superior court. September 16, 1927.

*William F. Slaton,*for plaintiff in error.

*Augustine Sams,*contra.

Russell, C. J.

After amendment, the petition of A. G. and Mrs. W. F. Wofford against J. E. Crockett set forth substantially the following allegations: Petitioners are the owners of a described lot offland in Fulton County, Georgia, and are in possession thereof. Defendant has threatened to enter upon that lot and destroy a wire fence which petitioners had put up for the protection of their property. He has threatened to seize a ten-foot strip of land in dispute and to put improvements upon it, in trespass of petitioners’ rights, which improvements will be in the nature of a “wiener-stand” and sign-boards. If defendant'is permitted to carry out his threatened acts, petitioners will suffer irreparable injury and damage, and such trespass will constitute a breach of the peace. They are remediless unless the defendant is enjoined from carrying out his threats as just stated. After a hearing the court overruled a general demurrer to the petition, and the defendant excepted. Although equity will not interfere to restrain a trespass, unless the injury would be irreparable in damages or there exist other circumstances which in the discretion.of the court render the interposition of this writ necessary and proper under the facts stated in the pleadings, in this case the court did not err in overruling the de*631murrer to the plaintiffs’ petition. The facts of this case distinguish it altogether from those in *Paramore*v. *Persons,*57 *Ga.*473, where the single object was to enjoin the defendant from entering into the possession of the land; and from *Griner v. Culpepper,*164 *Ga.*858 (139 S. E. 666). It is apparent from the allegations that the damages which would be suffered by the petitioners would be irreparable and not capable of accurate computation, and that the proposed trespass would constitute a breach of the peace.

*Judgment affvrmed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Afkinson and Hill, JJ., disqualified.*
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.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management

          - 43 CFR Part 3000

### CFR Correction

                    In Title 43 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1000 to End, revised as of October 1, 2009, on page 331, in                           ( print page 58331)                        § 3000.12, move paragraph (b) to below the table on page 332.                

[FR Doc. 2010-24034 Filed 9-23-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT JUNE 30, 1997 (UNAUDITED) AND THE CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 (UNAUDITED) AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                              29
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,561
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (445)
<INVENTORY>                                     18,978
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                36,282
<PP&E>                                          17,624
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (5,245)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  50,954
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,077
<BONDS>                                          3,328
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            59
<OTHER-SE>                                      32,855
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    50,954
<SALES>                                         61,988
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                64,132
<CGS>                                           42,775
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   45,674
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0<F1>
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 270
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,140
<INCOME-TAX>                                       422
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                718
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       718
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .12
<FN>
<F1>PROVISION FOR DOUBTFUL ACCOUNTS AND INVENTORY PROVISION INCLUDED IN TOTAL
COSTS.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 19-0655

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

ROBERT GONZALEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and 

good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including June 19, 2020, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 13 2020

05/13/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0655
#### Yaakov VANN, Appellant, v. Margot GREENBERG, Appellee.

No. 4D09-4213.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Jan. 19, 2011.

Rehearing Denied March 1, 2011.

Yaakov Vann, Boca Raton, pro se.

No appearance for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

*Affirmed. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee,*377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979).

GROSS, C. J., MAY and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur.