alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Anderson, McLane & Co. *v.*Waters' Trustee, et al.

Trusts — Estate Created — Perpetuities—Word “Heirs” used, Synonomous With that of Children.

A grantor in creating a trust directed that the fund “be invested in business in the county of Jefferson, the profits to be applied to the payment of the necessary expenses first, and next to the maintenance of said Elizabeth and her heirs:” Held that the word “heirs” was used as synonomous to that of children.

Same.

Such a fund would not be subject to the debts of the husband, created not as trustee of the fund.

APPEAL EROM JEEEERSON CHANCERY COURT.

October 19, 1868.

*610
      *Bulloch and*Anderson, *for appellant.*

Dawson, Harney, *for appellee.*

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Williams:

It is palpable that tbe grantor in tbe deed of trust used tbe word heirs as synonomous to that of children,, as will be seen from the direction that the fund “be invested in business in the county of of Jefferson, the profits to be applied to the payment of the necessary expenses first and next to the *maintenance of said Elizabeth and her heirs.”*

Elizabeth Waters then had four children, it was the object of her father the grantor to secure this fund for their maintenance, not subject to the husband’s debts, nor to his marital rights.

The fund itself should not therefore be subjected to his previous creditors not as trustee, but this should not be a cover to shield his own property therefrom. We concur with the commissioner and court that there would be no profits after supporting Elizabeth and her children.

Judgment affirmed on appeal and cross-appeal.
**Exhibit 23.1**

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 

We have issued our report dated March 11,2009, with respect to the consolidated financial statements, schedule, and internal control over financial reporting (which report expressed an unqualified opinion) included in the Annual Report of eLoyalty Corporation and Subsidiaries on Form 10-Kfor the year ended December 27, 2008. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the Registration Statements of eLoyalty Corporation on Forms S-3 (File No. 333-100051 effective September 24, 2002) andForm S-8 (File Nos. 333-150671 effective May 6, 2008, 333-143114 effective May 21, 2007, 333-101031 effective November 6, 2002, 333-68530 effective February 25, 2002, 333-68540 effective February 25, 2002, 333-42284effective July 26, 2000, 333-96473 effective February 14, 2000, 333-30374 effective February 14, 2000 and 333-96473 effective February 9, 2000). 

/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP 

Chicago, Illinois 

March 11, 2009
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 Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Docket ID FEMA-2014-0003]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

FEMA gives notice that the countywide per capita impact indicator under the Public Assistance program for disasters declared on or after October 1, 2014, will be increased.

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         October 1, 2014, and applies to major disasters declared on or after October 1, 2014.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William Roche, Recovery Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3834.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

In assessing damages for area designations under 44 CFR 206.40(b), FEMA uses a county-wide per capita indicator to evaluate the impact of the disaster at the county level. FEMA will adjust the countywide per capita impact indicator under the Public Assistance program to reflect annual changes in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the Department of Labor.

FEMA gives notice of an increase in the countywide per capita impact indicator to $3.56 for all disasters declared on or after October 1, 2014.

FEMA bases the adjustment on an increase in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers of 1.7 percent for the 12-month period that ended in August 2014. The Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor released the information on September 17, 2014.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters))

W. Craig Fugate,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2014-24480 Filed 10-14-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Dede Dinius","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/darin-l-diniusnasa-gov\/","title":"ER-2 High-Altitude Airborne Science Aircraft","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"8uLrS6SvxD\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/armstrong\/er-2-aircraft\/\">ER-2 High-Altitude Airborne Science Aircraft<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/armstrong\/er-2-aircraft\/embed\/#?secret=8uLrS6SvxD\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“ER-2 High-Altitude Airborne Science Aircraft” — NASA\" data-secret=\"8uLrS6SvxD\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/er-2-plane.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
Exhibit 99.1

FIRST ALLIANCE MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 1999-3
OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

Pursuant to the terms of the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of September
1, 1999 among First Alliance Mortgage Company, as Seller and Servicer, and
Norwest Minnesota Bank, as Oversight Agent and Trustee, I have reviewed the
activities of the Servicer during the year ended December 31, 1999. I have also
reviewed its performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement and to the best
of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all its
obligations under the Agreement throughout such period.


By:  /S/ Anne Lane
   ------------------------------
Name:   Anne Lane
Title:  Vice President and Director of Loan Administration
#### Jesse C. Flynn *v.*Thos. Hart.

Fraudulent Conveyance — Rights of Creditors.

D. A. Davis purchased some land from one Calzer and received a title bond therefor, and shortly thereafter assigned said bond to his father-in-law, the appellant. Davis appeared to have been insolvent at the time of the purchase and the transfer of the bond, but continued to occupy the land, and made the payments due to Calyer as part of the purchase price for some time after the transfer of said bond to appellant. Held, that the assignment of the bond was fictitious and fraudulent as to creditors.

APPEAL FROM PULASKI CIRCUIT COURT.

June 12, 1868.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Williams :

*290James, *Moore, for appellant.*

*Vaulwinlde,*Fox, *for appellees.*

The continued occupancy of the land by D. A. Davis after his purchase from Oalyer, together with the payments made by him to his vendor after the date of his assignment of Calyer’s title bond to his father-in-law, Flynn, connected with his insolvent condition and total absence of any evidence of payment of the consideration set up by Flynn to him, and the inconsistency of Flynn’s answer in saying that Davis still owed about $180 when the bond was assigned to him in 1864, the real date of the assignment being February 3, 1865, and all the payments being made in December, 1864, January, 1865, and January, 1866, but the $250 paid at the time of the purchase by Davis from Oalyer and these all being made by Davis, leaves but little room to doubt that the whole arrangement between Davis and Flynn was fictitious and for the fraudulent purpose of preventing a sale of the land by Davis’ creditors.

Wherefore, the judgment is affirmed.
FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T APRI L11, 2011 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO N OT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 0 9- 15 71 2

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D. C. Dock etNo. 0 8- 00 02 2- CR-0 1- JEC- 1 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us ERICO DEOLIVEIRA, Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt fo r th e North ernDis tri ctof Ge or gi a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ (Ap ril 11 , 20 11 ) Befo re MAR TIN, FAY andBLACK, Cir cu itJu dg es . PER CURI AM:Eric o Deo li ve iraap pe al s h is sen te nc e o f 78 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t, i m

po se d aft er h e p le d g ui lt y

to lau nd eri ng of m on et ary in st ru m en ts , invi ol at io n o f 18 U.S.C. § 1 95 6( a)(3 )(B) an d (C ). Deol iv ei ra ar gu es on ap pe al th e d is tri ctco urt in co rrec tl y

cal cu la te d h is lo ss am ou ntby inc lu di ng $2 30 ,00 0 i n fu nd s b as edon hi s st at em en t t o aco nf

id en ti al in fo rm an t tha t h e h adpre vi ou sl y lau nd eredth at am ou nt . Deol iv ei ra al so arg ue s t he di st ric t co urt cl earl y erre d i n app lying th e U.S.S.G. § 2 S1 .1(b )(3 )(B) en ha nc em en t fo r us in g s op hi st ic at edm ean s t o l au nd er fu nd s, an d h is sen te nc e is subs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le . Afte r car efu l re vi ew of

th e rec or d a ndth e p art ie s’ bri efs , andha vi ng th e be ne fitof o ral arg um en t, we af firm Deol iv ei ra’s s en te nc e. The d is tri ctco urt d id no t cl earl y

err i n c al cu la ti ng Deol iv ei ra’s l os s amoun t, wh ic h was supp orte d b y co rro bo rat in g e vi de nc e, no r di d i t cl earl y err i n app lying th e so ph is ti cat edm ean s en ha nc em en t b as edonDeol iv ei ra’s u se of l ay eri ng . Fin al ly, th e d is tri ctco urt d id no t ab us e it s d is cret io n b y sen te nc in g Deo li ve irato a withi n- gu id el in es sen te nc e. AFFIRMED.

2
National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration

Mary W. Jackson Building NASA Headquarters 

Washington, DC 20546-0001

April 25, 2024 

Reply to Attn of: General Law Practice Group

TO: Distribution

FROM: Agency Counsel for Ethics

SUBJECT: Determination Regarding Attendance by NASA employees at the Maryland 

Space Business Roundtable (MSBR) STEM Gala on May 10, 2024 

On May 10, 2024, the Maryland Space Business Roundtable (MSBR), a nonprofit 

organization under 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, will host an annual dinner at the 

Bowie State University, starting at 5:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. The guest speaker is Congressman 

Glen Ivey. The MSBR will also be presenting awards for advancing science, technology, 

engineering and mathematics (STEM) education objectives. 

Approximately 200 people have been invited to attend. Attendees will have a diversity of 

views or interests and will include representatives from the legislative branch, state and local 

government officials, representatives from industry, employees of Federal agencies, 

academia, media and members of the public. The estimated cost of the event, including all 

food and beverages, is $85 per person. MSBR is in control of the organizing, planning and 

invitations for this event. Attendance at this event will allow NASA attendees to exchange 

information regarding various NASA programs. I find that the event meets the requirements 

of a “widely attended gathering” as defined in 5 C.F.R. § 2635.204(g)(2). 

I further determine that there is an Agency interest in having NASA personnel attend the 

event because it will provide an opportunity for the invited persons to exchange ideas and 

views pertaining to NASA’s policies, programs and operations. NASA employees, including 

NASA employees in non-career positions who are required to sign the ethics pledge under 

Executive Order 13989, who do not have a significant role in a matter affecting the interests 

of the sponsor may accept an invitation for free attendance to the event. In those 

circumstances, I find that the Agency’s interest in attendance outweighs any concern that the 

individual may be, or may appear to be, improperly influenced in the performance of their 

duties. 

However, NASA employees who have a significant role in any pending matter affecting the 

interests of the MSBR, such as procurement duties, program management, or negotiating or 

administering a Space Act Agreement, should seek a separate determination from their local 

ethics counselor as to whether they may accept the invitation. 
2

There will be fundraising in the form of a silent auction and a raffle the evening of the event. 

NASA attendees are reminded that participation in these fundraising events is strictly personal 

and voluntary. 

Adam F. Greenstone
#### DIAMOND JIM, INC. v. THE UNITED FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY.

May 8, 1984.

Cross-petition for certification denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Brian Sloan,

Plaintiff,

v.

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. and C. R. 

Bard, Inc., et al.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-17-03592-PHX-DGC

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for:

Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.

Date: October 18, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Attorney's signature

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed name and bar number

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6000

Telephone number

(404 322-6050

FAX number

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8213 Filed 10/18/17 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Noah Guidry,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-17-03711-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Jackson Allen & Williams, LLP

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff)

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you.

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case.

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service.

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 10/13/2017, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail 

to do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent.

Date: October 18, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party

C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral

Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of parties waiving service of 

summons

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed Name

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6155

Telephone number

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8324 Filed 10/20/17 Page 1 of 2
2

“Good cause” does not include a belief that the lawsuit is groundless, or that it has been brought in an improper venue, or that the court has 

no jurisdiction over this matter or over the defendant or the defendant’s property. 

If the waiver is signed and returned, you can still make these and all other defenses and objections, but you cannot object to the absence of 

a summons or of service. 

If you waive service, then you must, within the time specified on the waiver form, serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 on the 

plaintiff and file a copy with the court. By signing and returning the waiver form, you are allowed more time to respond than if a summons had been 

served.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8324 Filed 10/20/17 Page 2 of 2
Oyster Creek Group, Inc.
(A DEVELOPMENT STAGE COMPANY)
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS

                           For the years ended          August 19, 1999
                           June 30,                           (Inception) to
                            2003       2002                 June 30, 2003

Revenue                   -             -                            -

General and
administrative
expenses              460           5,550                   9,785
Total expenses      460           5,550                   9,785

Net (loss)             (460)         (5,550)                 (9,785)

Weighted average
number of
common shares
outstanding -
basic and
fully diluted       4,500,000     4,500,000

Net (loss)
per share -
basic and
fully diluted          (0.00)            (0.00)

The accompanying notes are an intregal part of these financial statements.

Page 1
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1969 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1969

 To amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act to add pears and cherries to 
the list of fruits and vegetables subject to regulation in a marketing 
  order by grade, size, quality, or maturity, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           November 25, 2003

 Mrs. Murray (for herself, Ms. Cantwell, and Mr. Smith) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                  Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act to add pears and cherries to 
the list of fruits and vegetables subject to regulation in a marketing 
  order by grade, size, quality, or maturity, 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. PEAR AND CHERRY MARKETING ORDERS.

    Section 8e(a) of the Agricultural Adjustment Act (7 U.S.C. 608e-
1(a)), reenacted with amendments by the Agricultural Marketing 
Agreement Act of 1937, is amended in the first sentence by inserting 
after ``apples,'' the following: ``pears, cherries,''.
                                 <all>
```
#### IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR THE COMMITMENT OF D.S.

April 10, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Pediatric Services of America, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Daniel J. Kohl, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge: 

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

Date: May 9, 2007
**EXHIBIT 99.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Marc Pilkington, the Chief Executive Officer of Cell Bio-Systems, Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1) the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

(2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Dated:   January 23, 2004

/s/ Marc Pilkington  --------------------------  Marc Pilkington  President

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, John Wright, the Chief Financial Officer of Cell Bio-Systems, Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1) the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

(2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Dated:   January 23, 2004

/s/ John Wright  --------------------------  John Wright  Chief Financial Officer