alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
9163.

#### Roberts *v.*Converse, administratrix.

Bkovxes, P. J.

1. This was a suit upon promissory notes. The defendant admitted a prima facie ease in the plaintiff, and assumed the burden of proof, and in his answer set up that the notes were infected with usury, and set forth in detail the facts which he alleged showed the usury. Substantially the questions presented to the jury were whether the original amount of the indebtedness was $450, and whether the *8defendant was charged 12 per cent, interest on that amount,—the principal and interest being added together and divided into sixteen installments,—or whether there was. other indebtedness of the defendant to the plaintiff’s testate which, added to the $450, made the real consideration of the notes sued on. The burden was upon the defendant to sustain his plea of usury; and the evidence which he presented upon this subject, while authorizing a finding upon this issue in his favor, did not demand such a finding. The jury’s finding, in effect, that he had not carried this burden was authorized by the evidence.

Decided March 12, 1918.

Complaint; from Lowndes superior court—Judge Thomas. August 4, *1917.*

*J. P.*Knight, *Dan R. Bruce,*for plaintiff in error..

*E. P. 8. Denmark,*contra.

2. Under the facts of the case the sourt did not err in refusing' to give the requested instructions, as complained of in the first ground of the amendment to the motion for a new trial.

3. All of the remaining grounds of the amendment to the motion for a new trial virtually raise, in various ways, the same question, viz., whether the court correctly charged the law of usury and properly instructed the jury as to its applicability to the facts of the case. In this respect the charge was correct, clear, and sufficiently full, and no omission or language complained of was erroneous when considered in the light of the charge as a whole.

4. The verdict was authorized by .the evidence, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Bloodworih and Harwell, JJ., concur.*
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-2018

LISA A. MARTIN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner of Social

Security,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District

Judge. (3:05-cv-00476-REP)

Submitted: March 21, 2007 Decided: April 19, 2007

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lisa A. Martin, Appellant Pro Se. Tara Louise Casey, OFFICE OF THE

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Lisa A. Martin appeals the district court’s order

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and upholding

the Commissioner’s finding that Martin is not disabled. We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Martin v.

Barnhart, No. 3:05-cv-00476-REP (E.D. Va. Aug. 3, 2005). We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
IB

Union Calendar No. 66

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 985

[Report No. 105–111]

To provide for the expansion of the Eagles Nest Wilderness within Arapaho

and White River National Forests, Colorado, to include the lands known

as the Slate Creek Addition upon the acquisition of the lands by the

United States.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 6, 1997

Mr. MCINNIS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Resources

JUNE 3, 1997

Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole

House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed

[Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic]

[For text of introduced bill, see copy of bill as introduced on March 6, 1997]

A BILL

To provide for the expansion of the Eagles Nest Wilderness

within Arapaho and White River National Forests, Colorado, to include the lands known as the Slate Creek

Addition upon the acquisition of the lands by the United

States.
2

•HR 985 RH

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

3 SECTION 1. SLATE CREEK ADDITION TO EAGLES NEST WIL4 DERNESS, ARAPAHO AND WHITE RIVER NA5 TIONAL FORESTS, COLORADO.

6 (a) SLATE CREEK ADDITION.—If the parcel of land

7 described in subsection (b) is conveyed to the United States

8 on or before December 31, 2000, the parcel shall be included

9 in, and managed as part of, the Eagles Nest Wilderness des10 ignated by Public Law 94–352 (90 Stat. 870; 16 U.S.C.

11 1132 note). Upon conveyance of the parcel, the boundary

12 of the Eagles Nest Wilderness is adjusted to include the par13 cel.

14 (b) DESCRIPTION OF ADDITION.—The parcel referred

15 to in subsection (a) is generally depicted on a map entitled

16 ‘‘Slate Creek Addition-Eagles Nest Wilderness’’, dated Feb17 ruary 1997, which shall be available for public inspection

18 in the office of the Forest Supervisor of the White River

19 National Forest in the State of Colorado. The parcel com20 prises approximately 160 acres in Summit County, Colo21 rado, adjacent to the Eagles Nest Wilderness.

Union Calendar No. 66

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 985

[Report No. 105–111]

A BILL

To provide for the expansion of the Eagles Nest

quisition of the lands by the United States.known as the Slate Creek Addition upon the actional Forests, Colorado, to include the landsWilderness within Arapaho and White River NaJUNE 3, 1997

Reported with an amendment, committed to the Commitordered to be printed tee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, and
IV

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 252

Urging the President to make clear to the People’s Republic of China the

commitment of the American people to security and democracy on the

Republic of China on Taiwan.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 29, 1997

Mr. ROHRABACHER (for himself, Mr. SOLOMON, Mr. COX of California, Mr.

SMITH of New Jersey, and Mr. ROYCE) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on International Relations

RESOLUTION

Urging the President to make clear to the People’s Republic

of China the commitment of the American people to

security and democracy on the Republic of China on

Taiwan.

Whereas the American people have long enjoyed strong ties

with the people of Taiwan;

Whereas the people of Taiwan have triumphed in establishing

a stable and secure democracy with free press, free elections, vibrant trade unions, and open trading practices;

Whereas the American people, through the Taiwan Relations

Act, made clear the firm commitment of the United

States to Taiwan’s continued security;
2

•HRES 252 IH

Whereas it is the stated policy of the United States Government to acknowledge the view of the Chinese people on

both sides of the Taiwan Strait that there is but one

China;

Whereas reunification with mainland China cannot occur

until the people of China attain economic freedom and

political democracy with attendant human rights;

Whereas United States economic ties with Taiwan continue

to grow in importance: Taiwan is the eighth largest trading partner of the United States, in contrast to the People’s Republic of China with which the United States suffers a nearly $40,000,000,000 trade deficit due to the

relatively closed and inaccessible market of the People’s

Republic of China;

Whereas the Congress of the United States has stated its

support for prompt accession to the World Trade Organization by Taiwan; and

Whereas the President of the United States is scheduled to

meet with the leadership of the People’s Republic of

China in Washington in late October 1997: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Congress encourages the President

2 to make clear to the leadership of the People’s Republic

3 of China the firm commitment of the American people to

4 security and democracy for the people of Taiwan and that

5 the United States fully expects that the resolution of secu6 rity issues on both sides of the Taiwan Strait will be re7 solved by peaceful means.

Æ
Case Tiue: LAUFER v. vFtA.tDHAM coRP Case Number: 1:20+v{#-:il3"r8r"-[?:?X-,

An appenanoe is hereby fibd by the urdersigned a afiomey br:

Attomey name (type or pint): l%t""* € - L<---r( n

Firm: L.d o€F€ ,? fl^tn=rF 6' L-e,..'istreet address: 6>rt o \4 O'rd^'v^l t'"[ ft^:t'-St

city/s tatetzip: flx:zk"/ Ttv 6o a2 1

Bar tD Number: )U+61 L 0

(See item 3 in insbuctions)

ErmilAddress: *ob.tt- [*St' Q L^+' *^]*\ ' tjr*

Are you acting as lead counse! in this case?

Are )ou acting as local counsel in this case?

Are you a member of the m,rrts trialba{?

lf &ls case reaches tial, will yan act as the tiral aftomey? fl Ves El *o

lf this is a criminal case, check your stiatus. n Retained Counsel

Appointed Counsel

If appointed counsel, are you

Federal Defender

[CJA Panel Attorney

ln order to appear before this Court an attomey must eiher be a member in good standirp of this Cotrfs

general bar or be granted leave to qW pro he vi@ 6 prwided for by locd ruhs 83.12 through 83.14.

I decbre under penalty of periury fitat the furegoing b tue and conect. Under 28 U.S.C.S1746, thb

statement under pedury has the same force and efbct as a swom statement made under oath.

Executed uh b4Z;79

U.S. District Gourt for the ilorthern District Of lllinois

Attorney Appearanee Form

FI LED

JUN 232rJ20w

P\a,[..J=^Rf,

t] Yes trNo

trYes trNo

ffiYes t] No

(UE€"ffinic signature if the appearan@ fwnr is fihd etecf;ronically.)

Attomey siignaturHi

Case: 1:20-cv-03526 Document #: 6 Filed: 06/23/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:16
#### Eldridge *v.*Folwell and Another.

A warrant of attorney to confess judgment cannot lie expressly revoked,

A warrant of attorney authorised the confession of judgment at a certain term, for a certain sum, in an action of debt; and the judgment was confessed accordingly. *Held,*that the judgment was not erroneous, merely because the nature of the debt was not particularly described in the warrant.

The defendant’s appearance to the action by attorney, prevents him from making any objection relative to the process.

*208ERROR *to*the *Cass*Circuit Court.

*J. Rariden,*for the plaintiff

*C. W. Ewing,*for the defendants.

Blackford, J.

Oil the 23d of October, 1832, the second day of the *October*term, a declaration was filed by *T. 8/ 11. Folwell*against Eldridge, in the *Cass*Circuit Court, in an action of debt. The cause of action described in the declaration, is a note given by *Eldridge*to *T. 8/ R. Folwell*for 382 dollars, dated the 14th of July, 1832, and payable the 20th of *October*following, with interest from the date. On the day on which the declaration was filed, two attorneys, by virtue of a warrant of attorney, entered *Eldridge’s*appearance to the action, and confessed a judgment for 387 dollars and 73 cents.

On the day the judgment was confessed, and previously to the confession, *Eldridge*delivered to the Court, and to the attorneys to whom the warrant was directed, a formal revocation of the warrant, dated the 22d of *October,*1832.

The objections made by *Eldridge*to the judgment, in this case, are — 1st, that the warrant of attorney was revoked; 2dly, that it was insufficient; 3dly, that there was no writ.

There is nothing in the first objection. The rule is well-established, that a warrant of attorney to confess a judgment cannot be expressly revoked. *Odes*v. *Woodward,*2 Ld. Raymond, 849, 850.—2 Arch. Pr. 21.—2 Kent’s Comm. 646.

The second objection is untenable. The warrant authorises certain attorneys to confess a judgment for *Eldridge*in favour of *T. 8/ R. Folwell,*at the *October*term, 1832, for a certain sum, in an action of debt. The judgment was accordingly confessed at the proper term, for the correct amount, and in the proper kind of action. It is true, the nature of the debt is not particularly described in the warrant; nor was it necessary that it should be. There is nothing in the record to show us, that the judgment was not confessed for the proper cause of action.

The third objection is equally groundless. The defendant’s appearance to the action, by his attorneys, prevents him from making any objection relative to the process.

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is affirmed with costs.
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Bobby Carl Lennox aka Bobby Carl Leanox, Appellant

No. 06

- 19

- 00164

- CR v. The State of Texas, Appellee Appeal from the 6th District Court of Lamar County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 28256 ). Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Morriss, Justice Burgess and Justice Stevens participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find reversible error in the three judgment s of the court below

. Because we have concluded that each of the three judgments incorrectly identifies the statute and the degree of the offense regarding the respective charges of which Lennox was found guilty, we modify each such judgment (1) by deleting the phrase “STATE JAIL
FELONY PUNISHED AS A SECOND DEGREE F ELONY” under the heading “Degree of Offense” and replacing it with the phrase “CLASS B MISDEMEANOR, ENHANCED” and (2) by deleting the statutory section numbers “32.21(d) and 12.425” under the heading “Statute for Offense” and replacing them with Section 32 .21(e

- 1) and Section 12.43(b)(2) of the Texas Penal Code. As to Count One, we modify the trial court’s judgment and the bill of costs by deleting $ 390.00 of court

- appointed attorney fees , however characterized. We affirm those portions of all three judgm ents, as modified, finding Lennox guilty of the respective offenses. Because we find error in the punishment portion of the judgments, we reverse the portion of the judgments imposing punishment, and we remand the causes to the trial c ourt for new punishm ent hearings. We note that the appellant, Bobby Carl Lennox aka Bobby Carl Leanox, has adequately indicated his inability to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED FEBRUARY 20, 2020 BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III CHIEF JUSTICE ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
Case: 1:20-cr-00299 Document #: 4 Filed: 06/17/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:6
IV

House Calendar No. 102

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 257

[Report No. 105–288]

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 901) to preserve the sovereignty

of the United States over public lands and acquired lands owned by

the United States, and to preserve State sovereignty and private property

rights in non-Federal lands surrounding those public lands and acquired

lands.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 1, 1997

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered

to be printed

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 901) to preserve

the sovereignty of the United States over public lands

and acquired lands owned by the United States, and

to preserve State sovereignty and private property rights

in non-Federal lands surrounding those public lands and

acquired lands.

1 Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution

2 it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R.

3 901) to preserve the sovereignty of the United States over
2

HRES 257 RH

1 public lands and acquired lands owned by the United

2 States, and to preserve State sovereignty and private prop3 erty rights in non-Federal lands surrounding those public

4 lands and acquired lands. The bill shall be considered as

5 read for amendment. The amendment in the nature of a

6 substitute recommended by the Committee on Resources

7 now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted. The

8 previous question shall be considered as ordered on the

9 bill, as amended, and any further amendment thereto to

10 final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one

11 hour of debate on the bill, as amended, which shall be

12 equally divided and controlled by the chairman and rank13 ing minority member of the Committee on Resources; (2)

14 one further motion to amend by Representative Miller of

15 California or his designee, which shall be considered as

16 read and shall be separately debatable for sixty minutes

17 equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an

18 opponent; and (3) one motion to recommit with or without

19 instructions.

20 SEC. 2. House Resolution 243 is laid on the table.

House Calendar No. 102

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 257

[Report No. 105–288]

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 901)

quired lands.eral lands surrounding those public lands and acereignty and private property rights in non-Fedthe United States, and to preserve State sovover public lands and acquired lands owned byto preserve the sovereignty of the United States

OCTOBER 1, 1997

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
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 State

          - [Public Notice: 8946]

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,                         *et seq.*; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note,                         *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000 (and, as                               ( print page 67531)                            appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003), I hereby determine that the objects to be included in the exhibition “Picturing Mary: Woman, Mother, Idea,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan agreements with the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the National Museum of Women in the Arts, Washington, DC, from on or about December 5, 2014, until on or about April 12, 2015, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these Determinations be published in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For further information, including a list of the exhibit objects, contact Julie Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6467). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

Dated: November 4, 2014.

Kelly Keiderling,

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2014-26901 Filed 11-12-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

YEN CHAM YUNG

No. 20 CR 231

Rebecca R. Pallmeyer

Chief Judge 

ORDER

Upon the Government’s Motion, under Title 18, United States Code, 

Section 3161(h)(7)(A) & (B), for an extension of time in which to return an indictment 

in the above-captioned case, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the time within which to file an indictment 

against the defendant be extended from July 17, 2020, to and including September 

17, 2020. Specifically, this Court finds that the ends of justice served by the extension 

outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial because: 

(i) this is a complex case such that it would be unreasonable to expect the 

government effectively to prepare the evidence for presentation to the Grand Jury in 

a shorter time period; 

(ii) this is a case in which arrest preceded indictment and the arrest 

occurred at a time such that it would be unreasonable to expect return and filing of 

the indictment within a shorter time period and because the facts upon which the 

grand jury must base its determination are complex; and 
(iii) the failure to grant such an extension would deny the government the 

reasonable time necessary for effective preparation of the evidence for presentation 

to the Grand Jury, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.

ENTERED:

 

REBECCA R. PALLMEYER

Chief Judge

DATED: July 13, 2020
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 328 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                     November 13, 1997.
    Resolved, That the following named Member be, and he is hereby, elected to 
the following standing committee of the House of Representatives:
    Committee on Appropriations: Mr. Robert ``Bud'' Cramer of Alabama.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```