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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated condensed financial statements for the nine-months ended February
29, 2000 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-29-2000
<CASH>                                         738,983
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,556,087
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    588,375
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,211,286
<PP&E>                                       1,114,639
<DEPRECIATION>                               (616,633)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,118,785
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,553,454
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        54,603
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,254,411
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,118,785
<SALES>                                      9,153,713
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,153,713
<CGS>                                        2,157,634
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,157,634
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             6,323,137
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,207
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                667,735
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            667,735
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   667,735
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .01


</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William CRUZ-GARCIA, aka “William Cruz”, aka “William Vera-Cruz”, aka “Jose Lopez”, Defendant-Appellant.

Docket No. 00-1775.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

May 10, 2001.

Kent B. Sprotbery, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Albany, NY; Alexander Bunin, Federal Public Defender for the Northern District of New York and Vermont, on the brief, for appellant.

Barbara D. Cottrell, United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of New York, Albany, NY; Daniel J. French, United States Attorney and Tina E. Sciocchetti, Assistant United States Attorney, on the brief, for appellee.

Present JACOBS, PARKER and KATZMANN, Circuit Judges.

*SUMMARY ORDER*

Defendant William Cruz-Garcia appeals from a judgment of conviction entered in the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (Kahn, J.) following his plea of guilty to unlawfully reentering the United States without the permission of the United States Attorney General after having been deported following conviction of an aggravated felony, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Cruz-Garcia appeals on the ground that a prior felony conviction is an element of the offense of reentry following deportation after a felony conviction, and not merely a sentence enhancement factor contained in § 1326(b), and that the indictment must therefore include the element of a prior felony conviction under *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000).

Cruz-Garcia expressly concedes that this issue has been resolved against him by the United States Supreme Court in *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998) (holding that § 1326(b) does not set out a separate offense but rather is a penalty provision with respect to a violation of § 1326(a) and merely increases the authorized prison term), and that we recently upheld the continued viability of *Almendarez-Torres*in the wake of *Apprendi, see United States v. Latorre-Benavides,*241 F.3d 262, 263-64 (2d Cir.2001) (per curiam) (“[W]e affirm [defendant’s § 1326(b)] conviction on the basis of *Almendarez-Torres v. United States.”).*Nonetheless, he raises this issue here to preserve it for further review in the Supreme Court.

The issue Cruz raises is squarely controlled by *Almendarez-Torres*and *Latorre-Benavides,*and it is foreclosed. Accordingly, we affirm.
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                      20,196,371
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         100,000
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                227,928,329
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                    823,988,639
<ALLOWANCE>                                 11,845,643
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           1,084,667,363
<DEPOSITS>                                 873,885,658
<SHORT-TERM>                               101,766,450
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                         14,391,246
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,177,619
<OTHER-SE>                                  93,446,390
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>           1,084,667,363
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             49,639,422
<INTEREST-INVEST>                           10,812,386
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                59,954
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            60,511,762
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                          30,760,036
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          35,657,560
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                       24,854,202
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                1,375,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                               (407)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                             12,104,146
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             13,103,088
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                  13,103,088
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 8,770,088
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.20
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.36
<LOANS-NON>                                    662,023
<LOANS-PAST>                                   221,832
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                            10,448,496
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      294
<RECOVERIES>                                    22,441
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                           11,845,643
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                        11,125,455
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        720,188


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          19,703
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   27,101
<ALLOWANCES>                                     8,759
<INVENTORY>                                      3,376
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                41,421
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  47,179
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          523,519
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,651
<OTHER-SE>                                   (477,990)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    47,179
<SALES>                                          2,585
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,585
<CGS>                                            2,006
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,006
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               304,229
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 4,759
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,765
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (305,466)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (305,466)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (305,466)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.19)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          18,751
<SECURITIES>                                    11,332
<RECEIVABLES>                                   20,546
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,535
<INVENTORY>                                      2,033
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                66,019
<PP&E>                                          26,397
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,587
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 122,149
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           18,319
<BONDS>                                        121,216
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           252
<OTHER-SE>                                    (17,638)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   122,149
<SALES>                                         10,086
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                33,416
<CGS>                                            7,906
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   25,176
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                27,831
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,409
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,892
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (25,656)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (25,656)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (25,656)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.03)
        

</TABLE>
NVL-03.31.2015-10K-EX10.48 RetentionLetter Palmieri





July 1, 2014
Marco Palmieri


EXHIBIT 10.48
Dear Marco,


Your contributions to Novelis are very important. In recognition of this, the Company has put in place an enhancement to the existing LTI program. This “Bridge” plan was developed to supplement the LTIP while the new Novelis portion of the Plan matures. This program will provide you with a cash incentive in addition to your other compensation such as your base salary, annual bonus opportunity and long-term incentive opportunity.


The Bridge plan is in place for FY2015 and will be reviewed annually. 


You will receive three payments in the total amount of     $100,000 


First Payment in December 2014    $50,000
  Second Payment in December 2015    $25,000
Third Payment in December 2016    $25,000


Because this opportunity is designed to enhance our LTIP as a retention incentive, in the event that you voluntarily terminate your employment prior to December 31, 2016, or are terminated for cause, you will be required to repay any payments made under the Bridge plan in the previous 12 months, less applicable taxes, and any you will not be entitled to any other payments thereafter. If you are terminated involuntarily without cause, any unpaid cash installments will be immediately cancelled but you will not be required to repay any cash payments you have received.


Your acceptance of any payments under this award shall constitute your acceptance of the terms and conditions set forth above.


I am very pleased that we are able to offer you this opportunity and I look forward to you continuing to be a key member of the team as we focus on building an even more successful Novelis.


Sincerely, 






Phil Martens
President and Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000835928
<NAME> AP HOLDINGS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          41,497
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   22,798
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (471)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                66,737
<PP&E>                                          67,506
<DEPRECIATION>                                  44,028
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 210,566
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           51,982
<BONDS>                                        189,714
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     26,736
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                    (77,662)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   210,566
<SALES>                                         77,792
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                77,792
<CGS>                                           61,907
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   61,907
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                26,432
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,995
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (16,007)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        60
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (16,067)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (2,816)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (18,883)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6666
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus LEMUEL KINNEY, Defendant - Appellant, and ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED, Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CR-94-57-A, CA-95-1697-AM) Submitted: October 8, 1996 Decided: October 22, 1996 Before HAMILTON, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lemuel Kinney, Appellant Pro Se. Natalia Combs Greene, William T.Henderson, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Lemuel Kinney appeals from the di strict court's order dismissing his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1994), as amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No.104-132, 110 Stat. 114. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Kinney , Nos. CR-94-57-A; CA-95-1697-AM (E.D. Va. Mar. 27, 1996). Kinney's motion to supplement the record on appeal is denied. 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
F OR P UBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI # I REP ORTS AND PACIF IC REP ORTER

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS O F THE STATE OF HAWAI # I

---o0o--- MAKILA LAND CO., LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant, vs. HEIRS OR ASSIGNS OF APAA (k), et al., Defendants-Appellees
CAAP-17-0000803
A PPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT

(CIVIL NO. 02-1-0107(2)) AUGUST 25, 2020 FUJISE, PRESIDING JUDGE, LEONARD AND CHAN, JJ.

ORDER OF CORRECTION (By: Leonard, J.) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Opinion of the court, filed on April 6, 2020, is hereby corrected as follows:

At page 2, line 2 from bottom replace "Samual" with "Samuel" so that the sentence now reads as follows:

precinct[.]" Mary Kawena Pukui & Samuel H. Elbert, Hawaiian Dictionary 28 Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-17-0000803 25-AUG-2020 01:38 PMF OR P UBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI # I REP ORTS AND PACIF IC REP ORTER At page 24, line 6 from top replace "Keawa" with "Keawe" so that the sentence now reads as follows:

Keawe Haia, Jr., passed away without any living At page 28, line 7 from top replace "the" with "that" so that the sentence now reads as follows:

Specifically, Makila Land asserted that Kapu did not present At page 28, line 9 from top replace "Keawa" with "Keawe" so that the sentence now reads as follows:

Keawe Haia, Jr., or Haia Kekai exercised ownership in any way, At page 43, line 11 from top insert the word "to" after the word "relating" so that the sentence now reads as follows:

evidence to establish the relevance of probate documents relating to The clerk of the court is directed to incorporate the foregoing change in the original opinion and take all necessary steps to notify the publishing agencies of this change.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, August 25, 2020. /s/ Katherine G. Leonard Associate Judge

2
Exhibit 23.1  CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM  We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements
Nos. 333-133898, 333-121705, 333-119808, and 333-112932 on Form S-8,
Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement No. 333-150244 on Form S-3,
and Amendment No. 2 to Registration Statement No. 333-153203 on Form S-3
of our report dated March 30, 2009, relating to the consolidated financial
statements and financial statement schedule of Maui Land & Pineapple
Company, Inc. and subsidiaries (which report expresses an unqualified
opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to changes in accounting
for assessing the continuing investment requirements for sales of condominiums,
uncertainties in income taxes, and pension and postretirement benefits),  and the effectiveness of Maui Land &
Pineapple Company, Inc. and subsidiaries internal control over financial
reporting appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Maui Land &
Pineapple Company, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2008.   /s/
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP  Honolulu,
Hawaii
March 30, 2009
#### Lang *v.*Cox.

APPEAL from the Marion Common Pleas.

*J. W. Gordon, W. March,*and *H. A. Brouse,*for appellant.

*J. T. Dye*and *A. C. Harris,*for appellee.

Pettit, C. J.

This suit was brought by Cox against Maria Dorsch, James Lang, and Joseph B. Dessar. *Judgment*was rendered against Lang and Dessar in favor of Cox. Lang only appeals, and has assigned errors, giving no notice to his co-defendant, Dessar, as required by 2 G. & H. 270, sec. 551. .

The appeal is dismissed, at the costs of the appellant.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 142 

To repeal the restriction on the use of funds by the Internal Revenue Service 

to bring transparency to the political activity of certain nonprofit organizations. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 9, 2023 

Mr. CROW (for himself, Mr. SARBANES, Mr. MCGOVERN, Ms. NORTON, Ms. 

BARRAGA ́N, Mr. CONNOLLY, and Ms. TOKUDA) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To repeal the restriction on the use of funds by the Internal 

Revenue Service to bring transparency to the political 

activity of certain nonprofit organizations. 

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 ‘‘End Dark Money Act’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 142 IH

1 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF RESTRICTION OF USE OF FUNDS BY IN2 TERNAL REVENUE SERVICE TO BRING 

3 TRANSPARENCY TO POLITICAL ACTIVITY OF 

4 CERTAIN NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS. 

5 Section 123 of the Financial Services and General 

6 Government Appropriations Act, 2023 (division E of Pub7 lic Law 117–328) shall have no force or effect during fis8 cal year 2023. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
#### Rebecca Lindsay et al. *v.*Duke B. Hedger.

Insane Persons — Furnishing Support to Idiot — Compensation.

One who contributes- to the support of an idiot without any contract or arrangement with the committee therefor, can not recover for the aid furnished, especially where the person so furnishing the aid was fully compensated by the use of the ward’s property.

APPEAL PROM CAMPBELL CIRCUIT COURT.

March 25, 1874.

Opinion by

Judge Pryor:

Neither the allegations of the petition, if true, or the facts established by the testimony, authorize a recovery by the appellee in this case. The power and duty of the committee of an idiot, lunatic, *618etc., is in all respects the same as those of a guardian for an infant, except as to education. Gen. Stat. 535. One of the principal objects in appointing a committee is that he may superintend and control the estate of the idiot, and make such contracts for support and maintenance as the income or character of the estate of his ward -will justify. In this case, it is not pretended that any contract was made by the committee, or that he was even advised with by the appellee as to the interests of the imbecile in any way. The proof conduces to show that the girl lived with her mother until her death, and that, so far as the appellee may have contributed to her support, he was more than compensated for the services rendered her by the profits derived from the use of her property. The petition presenting no cause of action, upon the return of the case the court below will dismiss the proceedings. Judgment reversed and cause remanded.

*A. Duvall, for appellants.*

*Jno. S. Ducker, for appellee.*