alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Henderson Halcom *v.*Eli Hall.

Depositions — Distance from Courthouse — Exception.

Where depositions are read without exceptions, on the trial of the case below, this court will presume that the witnesses resided more than thirty miles from the courthouse.

APPEAL FROM MADISON CIRCUIT COURT.

June 7, 1866.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Williams:

There were no exceptions to the depositions of appellants'filed before the trial was begun; these depositions had been read without objections on a former trial.

The suit was pending in the Perry Circuit Court when the depositions were taken, and it may be presumed from their having been read in that court without objections that the witness resided more than thirty miles from the Perry courthouse.

The amendment of January Id, 1858, to section 611, Civil Code, authorized the taking of the depositions of a witness, to be read in chief on trial of such where the witness resides thirty miles from the place *where the court sets*in which *the action is pending.*It may well be questioned whether the change of venue to another county though its courthouse might be within thirty miles of the residence of the witness could render incompetent a deposition competent when taken, but be this as it may, the only evidence heard on the objections to the depositions raises the presumption that the witness resided more than thirty miles from the court then trying the cause; besides after once permitting these deposi*405tions to bo read without objections it was a rigid practice to require proof that the witness resided over thirty miles from the then place of trial when the trial had been entered upon without any exceptions being filed to the depositions.

Because of this error the judgment is reversed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<CIK> 0000892449
<NAME> FIRST COMMUNITY FINANCIAL GROUP
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          16,560
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             108
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 3,900
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     32,407
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                             677
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                               714
<LOANS>                                        213,903
<ALLOWANCE>                                      2,472
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 291,888
<DEPOSITS>                                     252,972
<SHORT-TERM>                                     2,850
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,967
<LONG-TERM>                                      2,669
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,439
<OTHER-SE>                                      25,991
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 291,888
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  9,785
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,010
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    74
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                10,869
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               3,448
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,557
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            7,312
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      240
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  7,175
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,132
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       2,132
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,443
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .68
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .64
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    9.13
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,315
<LOANS-PAST>                                       128
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,290
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       82
<RECOVERIES>                                        24
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                2,472
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             2,472
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

 

I, Patrick W.Hurley, Chief Financial Officer of Sport-Haley, Inc., certify that:

 

1.     I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of Sport-Haley, Inc.;

 

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

 

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

 

4.     The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a)   Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

(b)   Evaluated the effectivenessof the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

(c)   Disclosed in this report anychange in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.     The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):

 

(a)   All significant deficienciesand material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

(b)   Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 
| Date:  November 19, 2003 |
|-------------------------------|
|                          |
|                          |
| /s/ PATRICK  W. HURLEY        |   |
| Patrick W.  Hurley            |
| Chief  Financial Officer      |

 

----
#### SAMANTHA LINEBAUGH, BY AND THROUGH HER GUARDIAN AD LITEM AND NATURAL MOTHER, ANNA LINEBAUGH, AND ANNA LINEBAUGH, IN HER OWN RIGHT, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. HAYWORTH HYNDMAN AND SHERRY THOMPSON, DEFENDANTS, AND ADAM HONEGSTEIN AND MARYLA HONEGSTEIN, JOINTLY, SEVERALLY AND IN THE ALTERNATIVE, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

Argued May 4, 1987

Decided May 19, 1987.

*John L. Slimm*argued the cause for appellants *{Slimm, Dash & Goldberg,*attorneys; *Marc B. Zingarini,*of counsel; *Lauren H. Kane,*on the brief).

*Michael L. Testa*argued the cause for respondents *(Basile, Testa & Testa,*attorneys; *Richard M. Pescatore,*on the brief).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the Appellate Division, reported at 213 *N.J.Super.*117 (1986).

*For affirmance*—Chief Justice WILENTZ, and Justices CLIFFORD, HANDLER, POLLOCK, O’HERN, GARIBALDI and STEIN—7.

*For reversal*—None.
II 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1671

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

10701 Abercorn Street in Savannah, Georgia, as the ‘‘J.C. Lewis Post 

Office Building’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 29, 2003

Mr. MILLER (for himself and Mr. CHAMBLISS) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs 

A BILL

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 10701 Abercorn Street in Savannah, Georgia, 

as the ‘‘J.C. Lewis Post Office Building’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. J.C. LEWIS POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 10701 Abercorn Street in Savan6 nah, Georgia, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘J.C. 

7 Lewis Post Office Building’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 
2

•S 1671 IS 

1 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

2 be deemed to be a reference to the J.C. Lewis Post Office 

3 Building.

Æ
#### Samuel Peter and D. M. Harber *v.*James Ferrell.

Corporation — Denial of Existence — Estoppel.

A party executing a note to a corporation is' estopped to deny that such a corporation existed as was described in the note.

Election of President.

Where the book containing the proceedings of a corporation shows that the president was elected it must be assumed that notice of the election was given in absence of proof to the contrary.

President May Assign Note.

The president of a corporation having a note had the right to assign it in discharge of a liability of the company. His assignment passed the legal title to the note.

APPEAL EROM WASHINGTON CIRCUIT COURT.

October *4,*1866.

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Peters :

The ruling of the court in granting appellee a new trial might have been erroneous, but even if it was it was waived by a failure of appellants to accept thereto.

It is alleged in the petition that note was executed to the president and directors of the Maxville *&*Willisburg Turnpike Road *256Company, meaning thereby that it was intended for the Maxville, Willisburg & Buckfork Turnpike Road Company. That is not controverted in the answer, and if it were, appellee would be ■estopped by his note from denying that the Turnpike Road Company, such as is described in the note, existed.

*Hardin &*McSlooy, *for appellants.*

*JR. J. Brown, for appellee.*

Nor do we think that the word president, added after the name of Uriah Shewmaker, is to be regarded as a mere *descriptio persona.*The note, on its face, is made payable to the *president*and directors of the company therein described, and the adjunct must be construed to refer to the president of the company named in the note; no other construction would be either logical or legitimate.

On the trial the book, containing the proceedings of the corporation, was produced, from which it appears that Shewmaker was elected president of the company, and in the absence of proof to the contrary we must assume that notice of the time and place of the election was given, and that the same conformed to the requirements of the act of incorporation, and although but five seem to have voted, they may have owned the greater part of the stock of said company; but be that as it may, there is no evidence conducing to show that the election of Shewmaker was not in conformity to the charter, and being the president of the company and having the note, he had the authority to assign it, in discharge of the liabilities of said company, which was done as appears by the assignment and is not controverted. His assignment passed the legal title of the paper to the assignees, and no other parties than those on the record were necessary. It is alleged in the petition that by the initials “ D. M.,” in the assignment, were meant *D. M. Harter,*and it is not denied in the answer. The court, Judge Hardin not sitting in the case, cannot concur with the circuit judge in the instruction to the jury to find as in case of a *nonsuit.*Wherefore, the judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded, with directions to grant a new trial, and for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith.
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Donald W.Jewell, Interim Chief Executive Officer of Sport-Haley, Inc., certify that:

 

1.     I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of Sport-Haley, Inc.;

 

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

 

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

 

4.     The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a)   Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

(b)   Evaluated the effectivenessof the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

(c)   Disclosed in this report anychange in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.     The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):

 

(a)   All significant deficienciesand material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

(b)   Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

Date:  November 19, 2004

 

 
| /s/ DONALD  W. JEWELL            |   |
|----------------------------------|--------|
| Donald W.  Jewell                |
| Interim  Chief Executive Officer |
| *(Principal  Executive Officer)* |

 

1

----
Space Exploration Technologies Corp. Commercial Crew Development Round 2 (CCDev2) Space Act 

Agreement

NNK11MS04S

SpaceX CCDev2 Space Act Agreement
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 210 (Monday, November 1, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67091-67092]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27492]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, 
nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than November 26, 2010.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (E. Ann Worthy, Vice President) 
2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:
    1. Community Bancorp LLC, Houston, Texas; to become a bank holding

[[Page 67092]]

company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of Cadence 
Financial Corporation, Starkville, Mississippi, and thereby indirectly 
acquire voting shares of Cadence Bank, N.A., Starkville, Mississippi.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, October 27, 
2010.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2010-27492 Filed 10-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1942 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

  1st Session
                                S. 1942

 To require the President to submit to Congress a quarterly report on 
the projected total cost of United States operations in Iraq, including 
  military operations and reconstruction efforts, through fiscal year 
                                 2008.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           November 24, 2003

  Mr. Corzine introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
              referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To require the President to submit to Congress a quarterly report on 
the projected total cost of United States operations in Iraq, including 
  military operations and reconstruction efforts, through fiscal year 
                                 2008.

    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 ``Future Iraq Costs Act''.

SEC. 2. REPORT ON PROJECTED TOTAL COST OF UNITED STATES OPERATIONS IN 
              IRAQ.

    (a) Quarterly Report.--Not later than 30 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, and every 90 days thereafter, the President 
shall submit to each Member of Congress a report on the projected total 
cost of United States operations in Iraq, including military operations 
and reconstruction efforts, through fiscal year 2008.
    (b) Explanation of Changes in Projected Cost.--The President shall 
include in each report submitted under subsection (a) after the initial 
report under that subsection an explanation for any change in the total 
projected total cost of United States operations in Iraq from the 
projected total cost of such operations stated in the preceding report.
    (c) Termination of Reporting Requirement in Fiscal Year 2008.--No 
report is required under this section after December 31, 2007.
                                 <all>
```
#### David BROAD et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION et al.,  Defendants-Appellees.

No. 77-2963.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

June 9, 1980.

Rod Phelan, John Andrew Martin, Dallas, Tex., Hugo L. Black, Jr., Thomas H. Seymour, Kenny, Nachwaiter & Seymour, Miami, Fla., for plaintiffs-appellants.

Ernest E. Figari, Jr., David P. Seikel, Dallas, Tex., for Rockwell International Corp., Collins Radio Co., Anderson, Bate-man, Booth, Willard F. Rockwell, Jr., Rood-house, Beall, Cattoi, Fulgham, Martin, Erickson, Drick and Raff.

William F. Carroll, William B. West, III, Dallas, Tex., John F. Egan, New York City, for U. S. Trust Co. of New York.

Donald I. Strauber, Terry Thompson, Edwin Scott, New York City, for Rockwell International Corp.

James K. Manning, Brown, Wood, Ivey, Mitchell & Petty, New York City, amicus curiae for Brown, Wood, Ivey, Mitchell & Petty.

William J. Fitzpatrick, Atty., New York City, amicus curiae for Securities Industry Assoc.

Stanley T. Kaleczyc, National Chamber Litigation Center, Inc., Washington, D. C., amicus curiae for Chamber of Commerce of U. S. A.

Leonard Joseph, Dewey, Ballentine, Bushby, Palmer & Wood, New York City, amicus curiae for Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrett, Inc., et al.

*397William H. Smith, American Bankers Assoc., Washington, D. C., amicus curiae for American Bankers Assoc.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

(Opinion March 24, 1980, 5 Cir., 1980, 614 F.2d 418).

Before COLEMAN, Chief Judge, BROWN, AINSWORTH, GODBOLD, CHARLES CLARK, RONEY, GEE, TJO-FLAT, HILL, FAY, RUBIN, VANCE, KRAVITCH, FRANK M. JOHNSON, Jr., GARZA, HENDERSON, REAVLEY, POL-ITZ, HATCHETT, ANDERSON, RANDALL, TATE, SAM D. JOHNSON, and THOMAS A. CLARK, Circuit Judges.

BY THE COURT:

A member of the Court in active service having requested a poll on the application for rehearing en banc and a majority of the judges in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing en banc,

IT IS ORDERED that the cause shall be reheard by the Court en banc with oral argument on a date hereafter to be fixed. The Clerk will specify a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.
National Aeronautics and

 Space Administration

www.nasa.gov NP-2020-04-460-KSC

The Importance of Teamwork

Name:________________________________________

Date:______________

NASA is working with two companies to take astronauts to the International Space Station from America once again!

Even though these companies are different, they work with NASA as a team to meet a common goal for space 

exploration. Can you think of a time when you worked as a team in class or outside of school to meet a goal? 

Why is it important to be able to work as a team?

Want to learn more about teamwork?

Check out NASA’s “Expeditionary Skills for Life: Preparing for the Voyage” with NASA astronaut Victor Glover 

at https://www.nasa.gov/audience/foreducators/stem-on-station/expeditionary-skills-for-life.html

Directions: Read the following paragraph about NASA’s 

Commercial Crew Program and respond to the questions in 

complete sentences.

COMMERCIAL CREW PROGRAM: WHAT’S IT ALL ABOUT?

Educational Product

Educators & Students Grades K-5