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

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1678 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 1678

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 26, 2007

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
     To amend the Torture Victims Relief Act of 1998 to authorize 
appropriations to provide assistance for domestic and foreign programs 
  and centers for the treatment of victims of torture, 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 ``Torture Victims Relief 
Reauthorization Act of 2007''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR DOMESTIC TREATMENT CENTERS 
              FOR VICTIMS OF TORTURE.

    Section 5(b)(1) of the Torture Victims Relief Act of 1998 (22 
U.S.C. 2152 note) is amended to read as follows:
            ``(1) Authorization of appropriations.--Of the amounts 
        authorized to be appropriated for the Department of Health and 
        Human Services for fiscal years 2008 and 2009, there are 
        authorized to be appropriated to carry out subsection (a) 
        $25,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2008 and 2009.''.

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR FOREIGN TREATMENT CENTERS 
              FOR VICTIMS OF TORTURE.

    Section 4(b)(1) of the Torture Victims Relief Act of 1998 (22 
U.S.C. 2152 note) is amended to read as follows:
            ``(1) Authorization of appropriations.--Of the amounts 
        authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years 2008 and 2009 
        pursuant to chapter 1 of part I of the Foreign Assistance Act 
        of 1961, there are authorized to be appropriated to the 
        President to carry out section 130 of such Act $12,000,000 for 
        each of the fiscal years 2008 and 2009.''.

SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE UNITED STATES 
              CONTRIBUTION TO THE UNITED NATIONS VOLUNTARY FUND FOR 
              VICTIMS OF TORTURE.

    Of the amounts authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years 2008 
and 2009 pursuant to chapter 3 of part I of the Foreign Assistance Act 
of 1961, there are authorized to be appropriated to the President for a 
voluntary contribution to the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims 
of Torture $12,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2008 and 2009.

            Passed the House of Representatives April 25, 2007.

            Attest:

                                            LORRAINE C. MILLER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
#### Leonard Eyke, Treasurer of the City of Muskegon, v. Herman O. Lange, Cashier of the Merchants’ National Bank of Muskegon.

*Taxes*— BanJc-stocJc—Mandamus *to cashier.*

*Mandamus*will not lie to compel the cashier of a bank to pay the taxes assessed against its stockholders under the tax law of 1889, the remedy provided by the act for the collection of such taxes being clear and specific.

*Mandamus.*

Argued March 1, 1892.

Denied March 11, 1892.

Belator applied for *mandamus*to compel the cashier of a bank to pay taxes assessed against certain of its stockholders. The facts are stated in the opinion.

*DeLong & O’Hara,*for relator.

*Sessions, Soper & Bassett,*for respondent.

Per Curiam.

This is a petition filed for the purpose of compelling the respondent to pay the taxes assessed against the stockholders of the Merchants’ National Bank of Muskegon. The validity of the tax is contested and, if we should hold that *mandamus*is the proper remedy, then, under the issue raised by the pleadings, the' case must be sent down for trial.

Shares of bank-stock are personal property, and are assessed to the owners thereof. In this case the owners of 511 shares have paid their taxes, while the owners of 489 shares have not. The statute (Act No. 195, Laws of 1889, § 11) under which this tax was levied provides tha.t—

> “All shares in banks shall be assessed to their owners *593in the town where the hank is located: *Provided,*that shares owned by a person residing within the county where the bank is located shall be assessed in the town where he resides.”

Section 33 of the same act provides that, for the purpose of collecting the taxes remaining unpaid January 1, the township treasurer shall make demand upon the delinquents, and then contains the following:

> *“*In case of any tax assessed upon the shares of the capital stock of any bank, he shall call upon the cashier of such bank, and demand • payment thereof; and thereupon it shall be the duty of such cashier to pay the same, and charge the amount so paid against the shares of stock so taxed.”-

Section 3d of the act provides that the township treasurer shall seize the personal property of any delinquent tax-payer and sell it; and also if he is otherwise unable to collect the tax on personal property, he may sue the person to whom it is assessed, in the name of the township.

Here two ways are provided by which the collector may proceed to collect the tax. If the tax-payer refuses or neglects to pay, the collector must proceed by these methods. In the case of bank-stock, for convenience in collecting the public revenues the cashier of the bank is made the agent of the tax-payer. The remedy to proceed against him by these methods is clear and specific. If the tax collector may not proceed by the extraordinary writ of *mandamus*against the tax-payer directly, we see no reason for holding that he may proceed in this manner against the agent forced upon him by law, and not from his own choice.

We do not think *mandamus*the proper remedy; and the writ will be denied.
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATIONS



The undersigned, as the chief financial officer of Valley Financial Corporation, certify that the Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005, which
accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Valley Financial Corporation at the dates and for the periods indicated. The foregoing certification is made solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code and is
subject to the knowledge and willfulness qualifications contained in Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350(c).



Dated: August 15, 2005



/s/ Kimberly B. SnyderChief Financial Officer
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Velbert REED.

No. 2010-KP-0345.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 19, 2010.

In re Reed, Velbert M.; —Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedí*399al Writs, Parish of Ouachita, 4th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 92-F1156; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 45,248-KW.

Denied.
<PAGE>

                                   EXHIBIT 3.8

                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                       OF
                 OMNICOMM SYSTEMS, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION.

         The undersigned corporation

         DOES HEREBY CERTIFY:

FIRST: That the holders of a majority of the issued and outstanding shares of
common stock of OmniComm Systems, Inc., in accordance with Chapter 8, Subchapter
VII, Section 228 of the laws of the State of Delaware have consented to amend
the Certificate of Incorporation.

SECOND: That the amendment(s) or change(s) in the Certificate of Incorporation
of OmniComm Systems, Inc. are as follows:

         Fourth article is changed to read: The total number of common shares of
         stock which the corporation shall have the authority to issue is one
         hundred fifty million (150,000,000). All such shares are to have a par
         value of $0.001. The total number of preferred shares of stock which
         the corporation shall have the authority to issue is ten million
         (10,000,000). All such shares are to have a par value of $0.001. The
         board of directors of the OmniComm Systems, Inc. shall have the
         authority to divide the preferred stock into as many series as it shall
         from time to time determine. The board of directors shall determine the
         number of shares comprising each series of preferred stock, which
         number may, unless otherwise provided by the board of directors in
         creating such series, be increased from time to time by action of the
         board of directors. Each series of preferred stock shall be so
         designated as to distinguish such series from the shares of each other
         series. All series of preferred stock shall be of equal rank and have
         the same powers, preferences and rights, and shall be subject to the
         same qualifications, limitations and restrictions, without distinction
         between the shares of different series thereof; provided, however, that
         there may be variations among different series of preferred stock as to
         dividend rates, prices, terms, conditions of redemption, if any,
         liquidation rights, and terms and conditions of conversion, if any,
         which variations may be fixed and determined by the board of directors
         in their discretion.

THIRD: This amendment shall be effective on August 2, 2002 for accounting
purposes only.

                                         Dated: September 3, 2002

                                         OmniComm Systems, Inc.



                                         By: /s/ Cornelis Wit
                                            -----------------------------------
                                         Cornelis Wit
                                         Director and Chief Executive Officer



Attested By: /s/ Randall G. Smith
            -----------------------
Randall G. Smith, Secretary
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7172 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7172

To make technical amendments to chapter 3084 of title 54, United States 
   Code, to correct references to the African American Civil Rights 
                    Network, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 27, 2018

   Mr. Clay introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To make technical amendments to chapter 3084 of title 54, United States 
   Code, to correct references to the African American Civil Rights 
                    Network, 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. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO REFERENCES TO THE AFRICAN AMERICAN 
              CIVIL RIGHTS NETWORK.

    (a) Chapter Amendments.--Chapter 3084 of title 54, United States 
Code, is amended by striking ``U.S. Civil Rights Network'' each place 
it appears and inserting ``African American Civil Rights Network'' 
(using identical font as used in the text being replaced).
    (b) Amendments to List of Items.--The list of items of title 54, 
United States Code, is amended by striking ``U.S. Civil Rights 
Network'' each place it appears and inserting ``African American Civil 
Rights Network'' (using identical font as used in the text being 
replaced).
    (c) References.--Any reference in any law (other than in this Act), 
regulation, document, record, map, or other paper of the United States 
to the ``U.S. Civil Rights Network'' shall be considered to be a 
reference to the ``African American Civil Rights Network''.
                                 <all>
```
exv10w1






Exhibit 10.1









December 31, 2008




Don P. Rodney

P.O. Box 97

Grand Cayman KY1-1301

Cayman Islands





			
	Re:	 	Extension of Expatriate Employment Agreement between Hercules Offshore, Inc. and Don P.
Rodney




Dear Mr. Rodney:




     Please refer to the Expatriate Employment Agreement between Hercules Offshore, Inc. (the
“Company”) and Don P. Rodney dated November 1, 2006, setting forth the terms of your employment as
President of the Hercules International Holdings group of international companies based in the
Cayman Islands (the “Contract”). Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the
meanings assigned to them in the Contract.



     Section 2 of the Contract provides that the Term of the Contract shall be two (2) years
commencing on November 1, 2006. This letter will memorialize the Parties’ agreement to extend the
term of the Contract for an additional year.



     NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree, for good and sufficient consideration, the sufficiency of
which is hereby acknowledged, to modify and amend the Contract as follows:




	1.	 	Extension of Term: The Term of the Contract is hereby extended for an additional
one-year period commencing effective as of November 1, 2008.
	 
	2.	 	Reporting Person. The person to whom you shall report as designated in Section 1 of
the Contract shall be changed from Steve Manz to Lisa W. Rodriguez.
	 
	3.	 	Secondment. Pursuant to a separate agreement between the Company (or one of its
designated subsidiaries) and Hercules International Offshore, Ltd. (“International”), the
Company (or one of its designated subsidiaries) shall second you to International for a term
equal to the duration of this Agreement.
	 
	4.	 	Full Force and Effect. Except as modified herein, the Contract shall continue in
full force and effect according to its terms and conditions. This Letter, when accepted by
you, will become part of the Contract. In the event of any conflict or ambiguity between the
terms and provisions of this Letter and the terms and provisions of the Contract, the terms
and provisions of this Letter shall control.
	 
	5.	 	Entire Agreement. This Letter and the Contract contain the entire agreement between
the Company and you with respect to the subject matter of the Contract, and there are no
agreements, understandings, representations or warranties between the Company you other than
those expressly referred to herein and in the Contract.




 









 







Don P. Rodney

December 31, 2008

Page 2 of 2




     If you are in agreement with respect to the terms addressed above, please indicate your
acceptance and approval below.




Sincerely,




/s/ James W. Noe                  

James W. Noe

Senior Vice President, General Counsel, Chief

Compliance Officer and Secretary




Acknowledged and agreed to:




By:      /s/ Don P. Rodney     

               Don P. Rodney
#### Harry A. CICERO, Jr. v. Sunny Aull LeBLANC.

No. 2010-C-1627.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Aug. 4, 2010.

*379In re Cicero Jr., Harry A.-,' — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Terrebonne, 32nd Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 145,384; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2010 CU 0505.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant.
______________________________________ 

 

 

_______________________________________ 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

January 25, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

133394 Robert P. Young, Jr. 

133396 Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 133400-133406 & (74) 

DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION, 

Petitioner-Appellee, 

v SC: 133394 

 COA: 267565 

Oakland CC: 05-064732-AA 

STATE TAX COMMISSION and 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL 

QUALITY,
 

Respondents-Appellees,

and 

CITY OF AUBURN HILLS,

 Respondent-Appellant. 

FORD MOTOR COMPANY, 

Petitioner-Appellee, 

v SC: 133396 

 COA: 262500 

Wayne CC: 04-430612-AA,

STATE TAX COMMISSION and 04-430613-AA, 04-430614-AA

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL 

QUALITY,

 Respondents-Appellees,

and 

CITY OF DEARBORN,

 Intervening Respondent-Appellant. 

FORD MOTOR COMPANY, 

Petitioner-Appellee, 

v SC: 133400-02 

 COA: 262487, 262488, 262500 

Wayne CC: 04-430612-AA,

STATE TAX COMMISSION and 04-430613-AA, 04-430614-AA 
 

 

 

 

 

2 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL 

QUALITY, 

and 

Respondents-Appellants, 

CITY OF DEARBORN,

 Intervening Respondent-Appellee. 

_______________________________________ 

DETROIT DIESEL CORPORATION,

Petitioner-Appellee,

Cross-Appellant, 

v SC: 133403 

 COA: 263188

STATE TAX COMMISSION and 

 Wayne CC: 04-430915-AA 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL 

QUALITY, 

and 

Respondents-Appellants, 

Cross-Appellees, 

CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF REDFORD, 

 Intervening Respondent-Appellee, 

Cross-Appellee. 

_______________________________________ 

FORD MOTOR COMPANY, 

Petitioner-Appellee, 

v SC: 133404 

 COA: 264154

STATE TAX COMMISSION and 

 Wayne CC: 05-507760-AA 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL 

QUALITY, 

Respondents-Appellants. 

_______________________________________ 

DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION, 

Petitioner-Appellee, 

v SC: 133405 

 COA: 265686

 Washtenaw CC: 2005-000250-AA 

STATE TAX COMMISSION and 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL 

QUALITY, 

and 

Respondents-Appellants, 

TOWNSHIP OF SYLVAN, 

Respondent-Appellee. 

_______________________________________ 
 _________________________________________ 

 

 

3 

DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION, 

Petitioner-Appellee, 

v SC: 133406 

 COA: 267565 

Oakland CC: 05-064732-AA 

STATE TAX COMMISSION and 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL 

QUALITY, 

and 

Respondents-Appellants, 

CITY OF AUBURN HILLS,

Respondent-Appellee. 

_______________________________________ 

On order of the Chief Justice, the joint motion for extension of the time for filing 

by appellants and cross-appellants and for a corresponding extension for appellees and 

cross-appellees is considered and it is GRANTED. 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

January 25, 2008 

 Clerk
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7237 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to ensure that the final pay and 

certificate of discharge or release for a reserve member of the Armed 

Forces is ready upon discharge or release of that member from active 

status. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 10, 2018 

Mr. KELLY of Mississippi (for himself and Mr. WALZ) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to ensure that the 

final pay and certificate of discharge or release for a 

reserve member of the Armed Forces is ready upon discharge or release of that member from active status. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Reserve Component 

5 DD–214 Act of 2018’’. 


tkelley on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7237 IH

1 SEC. 2. FINAL PAY AND CERTIFICATE OF DISCHARGE OR 

2 RELEASE FOR RESERVE MEMBERS OF THE 

3 ARMED FORCES UPON DISCHARGE OR RE4 LEASE FROM ACTIVE STATUS. 

5 Section 1168 of title 10, United States Code, is 

6 amended— 

7 (1) in the heading, by inserting ‘‘or active 

8 status’’ after ‘‘active duty’’; and 

9 (2) in subsection (a)— 

10 (A) by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ before ‘‘A member’’; 

11 (B) by striking ‘‘an armed force’’ and in12 serting ‘‘the armed forces (including the reserve 

13 components)’’; 

14 (C) by inserting ‘‘or active status’’ after 

15 ‘‘active duty’’ the first place it appears; 

16 (D) by striking ‘‘his discharge certificate 

17 or certificate of release from active duty, re18 spectively,’’ and inserting ‘‘the appropriate cer19 tificate’’; 

20 (E) by striking ‘‘his final pay or a substan21 tial part of that pay,’’ and inserting ‘‘the final 

22 pay of the member (or a substantial part of 

23 that pay)’’; 

24 (F) by striking ‘‘him or his next of kin or 

25 legal representative’’ and inserting ‘‘the memVerDate Sep 11 2014 20:05 Dec 13, 2018 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H7237.IH H7237

tkelley on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 7237 IH

1 ber (or the next of kin or legal representative 

2 of the member)’’; and 

3 (G) by adding at the end the following new 

4 paragraph (2): 

5 ‘‘(2) In paragraph (1), the term ‘appropriate certifi6 cate’ means the following: 

7 ‘‘(A) In the case of a member being discharged, 

8 a discharge certificate. 

9 ‘‘(B) In the case of a member being released 

10 from active duty, a certificate of release from active 

11 duty. 

12 ‘‘(C) In the case of a member being released 

13 from active status, a certificate of release from ac14 tive status.’’. 

Æ 


tkelley on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with BILLS
#### Patrick RUSSO, Janice Russo, Individually and on Behalf of Their Minor Child Patrick R. Russo and Ashley Russo and Russell Russo v. Dr. Steven KRAUS. In re Medical Review Panel Claim of Janice Russo.

No. 2010-C-2463.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 28, 2011.

*877
      *ORDER*

Writ granted. In light of the defendants’ stipulation to the latency of Janice Russo’s disease and this Court’s prior findings concerning the existence of a medical malpractice insurance crisis in the 1970s, the Court of Appeal erred in reversing the District Court’s judgment and remanding this matter for a *Sibley v. Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State University,*477 So.2d 1094 (La.1985), hearing on these issues. *See Crier v. Whitecloud,*496 So.2d 305, 308-09 (La.1986); *see also, Branch v. Willis-Knighton Medical Center,*92-3086, pp. 9-10 (La.4/28/94), 636 So.2d 211, 215, overruled on other grounds in *David v. Our Lady of the Lake Hospital,*02-2675 (La.07/02/03), 849 So.2d 38. Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeal is hereby reversed, and the judgment of the District Court is hereby reinstated.

JOHNSON and WEIMER, JJ., would deny.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PERIOD-TYPE>                           9  MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                            SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                  190,476
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                           179,476
<ALLOWANCES>                            0
<INVENTORY>                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        369,943
<PP&E>                                  4,865,262
<DEPRECIATION>                          2,575,864
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          2,289,398
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   740,821
<BONDS>                                 0
<COMMON>                                86,990
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                             2,875
<OTHER-SE>                              1,624,515
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            2,671,393
<SALES>                                 139,592
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        203,186
<CGS>                                   218,080
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           638,040
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      54,253
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         (489,107)
<INCOME-TAX>                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                     (489,107)
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                            (489,107)
<EPS-BASIC>                           (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                           (.06)

</TABLE>