alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          38,662
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    101,959
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          18,662
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            18,626
<LOANS>                                        598,623
<ALLOWANCE>                                      8,388
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 789,353
<DEPOSITS>                                     676,108
<SHORT-TERM>                                    16,015
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             10,617
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        18,555
<OTHER-SE>                                      68,058
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 789,353
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 55,561
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                8,183
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                63,744
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              24,243
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              24,545
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           39,199
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,929
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 (86)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 33,078
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 13,739
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       9,633
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,633
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.72
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.72
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    5.55
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,538
<LOANS-PAST>                                       901
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                 1,195
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 16,348
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 7,589
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,390
<RECOVERIES>                                       260
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                8,388
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        


</TABLE>
#### The State, ex rel. Dye, *v.*Alvis, Warden.

(No. 4266

— Decided July 5, 1949.)

*Mr. Lawrence H. Dye, in propria persona.*

*Mr. Herbert 8. Duffy,*attorney general, and *Mr. Walter R. Hill,*for respondent.

Wiseman, J.

This is a proceeding in habeas corpus.

The petitioner was indicted on two counts for issuing two separate checks with intent to defraud, in violation of Section 710-176, General Code. The petitioner pleaded guilty and on November 23, 1945, he was sentenced to be imprisoned in the Ohio state penitentiary until legally discharged. The sentence did not specifically provide whether the sentences on the two counts were to run concurrently or cumulatively.

The rule in Ohio is that where the record is silent us to whether two or more sentences are to be served *138cumulatively the presumption obtains that the sentencing court intended the __ prisoner should serve the full aggregate of all sentences. *Anderson, Sheriff,*v. *Brown,*117 Ohio St., 393, 159 N. E., 372; *Williams*v. *State,*18 Ohio St., 46; 12 Ohio Jurisprudence, 701, Section 683.

Under Section 710-176, General Code, the maximum period of imprisonment is three years. Since the sentences run consecutively the term of imprisonment has not exjñred.

But the petitioner contends that the sentence is defective in that it does not appear that the petitioner was sentenced on both counts. A general sentence is authorized by Section 2166, General Code. In the absence of affirmative proof to the contrary we are re-required to indulge the presumption in favor of the validity of the judgment and the regularity and legality of the proceeding. 2 (Rev.) Ohio Jurisprudence, 1015, Section 565. A sentence on two or more counts is not defective because the sentence is general. See *Bailey*v. *State,*4 Ohio St., 440, 444. Furthermore, a defect in the sentence is not jurisdictional. Where there is a defect in the sentence of a court of competent jurisdiction habeas corpus does not lie to review it; the proper remedy is by appeal in the original action. *State, ex rel. Conners,*v. *DeMuth, Supt.,*96 Ohio St., 519, 118 N. E., 98; *In re Allen,*91 Ohio St., 315, 110 N. E., 535; *Ex parte Van Hagan,*25 Ohio St., 426; *Ex parte Shaw,*7 Ohio St., 81, 70 Am. Dec., 55; 20 Ohio Jurisprudence, 425, 445, Section 6, 23.

The petition is denied.

*Petition denied.*

Miller, P. J., and Hornbeck, J., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 462 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 462

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to temporarily exclude long-
        term capital gain from the gross income of individuals.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 29, 2003

 Mr. Isakson introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to temporarily exclude long-
        term capital gain from the gross income of individuals.

    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 ``Capital Reinvestment Act of 2003''.

SEC. 2. TEMPORARY EXCLUSION OF LONG-TERM CAPITAL GAIN FOR NONCORPORATE 
              TAXPAYERS.

    (a) In General.--Part I of subchapter P of chapter 1 of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to treatment of capital gains) 
is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

``SEC. 1203. TEMPORARY EXCLUSION OF LONG-TERM CAPITAL GAIN.

    ``(a) In General.--In the case of a taxpayer other than a 
corporation, gross income shall not include any gain which is not 
otherwise treated as ordinary income and which, but for this section, 
would be long-term capital gain.
    ``(b) Application of Section.--This section shall apply to taxable 
years beginning in 2002, 2003, or 2004.
    ``(c) Coordination With Section 1202.--Section 1202 shall not apply 
to taxable years to which this section applies.''
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for such part I is 
amended by adding at the end the following new item:

                              ``Sec. 1203. Temporary exclusion of long-
                                        term capital gain.''
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2002.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          17,254
<SECURITIES>                                   183,713
<RECEIVABLES>                                   47,947
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (2,418)
<INVENTORY>                                      9,812
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               273,558
<PP&E>                                          15,526
<DEPRECIATION>                                (10,155)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 303,299
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           46,373
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           650
<OTHER-SE>                                     256,276
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   303,299
<SALES>                                         35,199
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               112,002
<CGS>                                           33,898
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   33,898
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   258
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 39,191
<INCOME-TAX>                                    15,480
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             23,711
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    23,711
<EPS-BASIC>                                      $0.38
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    $0.37


</TABLE>
10304.

#### Walker *v.*Rawls.

Decided October 9, 1919.

Certiorari; from Fulton superior court—-Judge Pendleton. December 27, 1918.

*Moore & Pomeroy, J. C. Savage,*for plaintiff in error.

*Horace Bussell,*contra.

Bloodwobth, J.

The judge of the superior court did not err in overruling the certiorari and affirming the judgment of the court below.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Broyles, G. J., and Luke, J., concur.*
#### Carroll *v.*Waddell.

Opinion delivered December 16, 1929.

*Oscar Barnett,*for appellant.

*D. E. Waddell*and *D. M. Halbert,*for appellee.

McHaney, J.

Appellee Waddell sued appellant and obtained a writ of garnishment before judgment on the Farmers’ *&*Merchants’ Bank of Malvern in the justice court of appellee Caldwell, in which suit appellee Halbert acted as Waddell’s attorney. There was a judgment rendered against appellant in said suit, from which no appeal was prosecuted. Instead of appealing the case on account of .feeling himself aggrieved because of such judgment, he brought suit in the circuit court against Waddell, the justice of the peace, 'Caldwell, and the attorney, Halbert, charging that a false affidavit was made to obtain the writ of garnishment or attachment against the bank, and that it was willfully, Wrongfully .and maliciously sued out. Other matters were set out -in the complaint, but we deem it unnecessary to state them. The circuit court sustained a demurrer to the complaint, hence this appeal.

The court was correct. Appellant’s remedy, if he was dissatisfied with the judgment of the justice of the peace, was to appeal to the circuit court. By failing to perfect an appeal and try the case out *de novo*in the *668•circuit court, he must be held to have acquiesced in such judgment. Here the justice had jurisdiction of the subject-matter and the parties, and it is well settled that the judgment of a justice of the peace within his jurisdiction is as conclusive as the .judgment of a superior court, and is ordinarily impervious to collateral attack. A justice of the peace has the same right to determine every question that arises in a cause pending in his court as does a superior court, under like circumstances; and, if he commits error on his conclusions of law, the judgments of his court are no more open to attack collaterally than those of the circuit court. *Carolan*v. *Carolan,*47 Ark. 511, 2 S. W. 105; *Webster*v. *Darnel,*47 Ark. 131, 14 S. W. 550; *O. P. Dixon Ptg. & Sta. Co.*v. *Plank,*144 Ark. 485, 223 S. W. 36. This proceeding constituted a collateral attack on the judgment of the justice of the peace, and could not be maintained. .No error was committed in refusing to permit appellant to amend, as no cause of action could have been stated.

We find no error, and the judgment is accordingly affirmed.
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.5
 
                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
 
     We consent to the inclusion in this Registration Statement on Form S-4 of
Remington Oil and Gas Corporation (formerly Box Energy Corporation) of our
report dated March 5, 1996, except for the thirteenth paragraph of Note 1 as to
which the date is March 27, 1998, on our audit of the financial statements of
Remington Oil and Gas Corporation for the year ended December 31, 1995. We also
consent to the reference to our firm under the caption "Experts."
 
                                            PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
 
Dallas, Texas
August 14, 1998
Description

Problem

The motivation behind this invention is to 

generate a method to rapidly triage patients in 

the aftermath of a mass casualty radiation 

exposure event. Currently, blood tests or 

conventional electron spin resonance 

measurements of extracted tooth enamel are the 

only known avenues to derive a personal 

retrospective radiation dose. Existing systems 

and processes that attempt to use retrospective 

physical dosimetry fail to provide a practical 

device or system meeting the stringent 

requirements necessary for field deployment, 

pre-or post-massive catastrophic nuclear or 

radiological mass casualty events.

Invention

This invention allows citizens to assess 

themselves (at the 2 Gy ± 0.5 Gy exposure level) 

using a dosimeter embedded in commercial and 

non-commercial identification cards. Patients 

can then seek appropriate action without the 

need for first responder and/ or public health 

official intervention.

The technology involves the integration of a nonresonant electron spin resonance probe into an 

identification card. This probe is complemented 

by an optimized electron spin resonance 

spectrometer designed specifically for the 

detection of specific radiation-sensitive material 

spectra. This optimized design drastically 

reduces the physical weight and footprint of the 

electron spin resonance spectrometer and 

facilitates incorporation in a highly deployable 

package. 

Contact

Technology Partnerships Office (TPO) 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology Gaithersburg, MD 20899 

TPO@NIST.GOV

Benefits

Commercial Application

This technology also provides:

•long-term surveillance and monitoring 

of first responders, healthcare workers, 

and persons in the area of radiation 

incidents

•critical data for medical research to 

determine the effectiveness, timing, 

dosing, and administration of medical 

countermeasures

Competitive Advantage 

This novel technology will have a disruptive 

impact on multiple applications currently 

utilizing conventional electron spin 

resonance. The novelty is primarily based 

on the miniaturization of the measurement 

system, no requirement for a resonant 

(cavity) detector, decreased power 

requirements, and utilization of permanent 

magnets (instead of electromagnets). The 

highly sensitive measurements, in a 

handheld application, far surpass any 

currently existing technology and thereby 

allow the use of minute materials that allow

for applications of high urgency that include 

public safety and security.

Accurate and rapid initial sorting can lead 

to efficient triage, screening, administration 

of medical countermeasures, evacuation, 

decontamination, supportive care, and 

personal protective actions. Early and 

medically precise therapy can save 

countless lives and minimize the severity of 

acute radiation illnesses.

Non-Resonant Electron Spin 

Resonant Probe and Associated 

Hardware Patent 11,294,075

Ref No. 17-017
EXHIBIT 23
                                                                      ----------

                             CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
                          CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

DRYCLEAN USA, Inc.
Miami, Florida

We  hereby  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in  the  Registration
Statements on Form S-8,  (File No.  333-37574,  333-37576 and  333-37582) of our
report dated August 30, 2001, relating to the consolidated  financial statements
of DRYCLEAN USA, Inc.,  appearing in the Company's  Annual Report on Form 10-KSB
for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2001.


Miami, Florida                                                 BDO Seidman, LLP
September 28, 2001
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4398 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4398

To amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to provide 
that the calculation of the duty imposed on imported cherries that are 
provisionally preserved does not include the weight of the preservative 
                       materials of the cherries.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 19, 2004

  Mr. Honda (for himself, Ms. Eshoo, and Mr. Cardoza) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to provide 
that the calculation of the duty imposed on imported cherries that are 
provisionally preserved does not include the weight of the preservative 
                       materials of the cherries.

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

SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF CALCULATION OF DUTY IMPOSED ON IMPORTED 
              CHERRIES THAT ARE PROVISIONALLY PRESERVED.

    (a) Amendments.--Subheading 0812.10.00 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States is amended--
            (1) in the general subcolumn of the column 1 rate of duty, 
        by inserting ``on drained weight'' after ``13.4 cents/kg''; and
            (2) in the special subcolumn of the column 1 rate of duty, 
        by inserting ``on drained weight'' after ``2.6 cents/kg'' and 
        ``11.7 cents/kg'' .
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall be 
effective for the period beginning on the date of the enactment of this 
Act and ending on the date on which the specific rate of duty involved 
is reduced to free.
                                 <all>
```
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4551

To establish 4 memorials to the Space Shuttle Columbia in the State of 

Texas. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 14, 2004

Mr. TURNER of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Resources 

A BILL

To establish 4 memorials to the Space Shuttle Columbia 

in the State of Texas.

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 ‘‘Columbia Space Shut5 tle Memorials Act of 2004’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

7 In this Act: 

8 (1) MEMORIAL.—The term ‘‘memorial’’ means 

9 each of the memorials to the Space Shuttle Colum10 bia established by section 3(a). 
2

•HR 4551 IH 

1 (2) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means 

2 the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Di3 rector of the National Park Service. 

4 SEC. 3. MEMORIALS TO THE SPACE SHUTTLE COLUMBIA. 

5 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There are established as 

6 units of the National Park System 4 memorials to the 

7 Space Shuttle Columbia to be located on the 4 parcels of 

8 land in the State described in subsection (b) on which 

9 large debris from the Space Shuttle Columbia was recov10 ered. 

11 (b) DESCRIPTION OF LAND.—The parcels of land re12 ferred to in subsection (a) are—

13 (1) the parcel of land owned by the Fredonia 

14 Corporation, located at the southeast corner of the 

15 intersection of E. Hospital Street and N. Fredonia 

16 Street, Nacogdoches, Texas; 

17 (2) the parcel of land owned by Temple Inland 

18 Inc., 10 acres of a 61–acre tract bounded by State 

19 Highway 83 and Bayou Bend Road, Hemphill, 

20 Texas; 

21 (3) the parcel of land owned by the city of 

22 Lufkin, Texas, located at City Hall Park, 301 

23 Charlton Street, Lufkin, Texas: and 
3

•HR 4551 IH 

1 (4) the parcel of land owned by San Augustine 

2 County, Texas, located at 1109 Oaklawn Street, San 

3 Augustine, Texas. 

4 (c) ADMINISTRATION.—The memorials shall be ad5 ministered by the Secretary. 

6 (d) ADDITIONAL SITES.—The Secretary may rec7 ommend to Congress additional sites in the State of Texas 

8 related to the Space Shuttle Columbia for establishment 

9 as memorials to the Space Shuttle Columbia. 

10 SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

11 There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out 

12 this Act $5,000,000, to remain available until expended.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM TANDY
BRANDS ACCESSORIES, INC.'S DECEMBER 31, 1996 FORM 10-Q (RESTATED AS REQUIRED BY
REGULATION S-K ITEM 601(c)(2)(iii).) AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-Q FILINGS. DOLLARS ARE IN THOUSANDS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                             551
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,623
<ALLOWANCES>                                       877
<INVENTORY>                                     32,797
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                50,789
<PP&E>                                           9,745
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,759
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  65,805
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,723
<BONDS>                                         15,800
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,447
<OTHER-SE>                                      35,567
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    65,805
<SALES>                                         53,540
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                53,540
<CGS>                                           33,721
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   33,721
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   874
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 641
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,361
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,598
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,763
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,763
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .51
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .51
        

</TABLE>