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

<ARTICLE>                                            9

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  9-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         3,354,921
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         6,017,666
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    592,646
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         592,646
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           592,646
<LOANS>                                        78,814,480
<ALLOWANCE>                                    1,403,874
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 98,949,702
<DEPOSITS>                                     90,737,813
<SHORT-TERM>                                   0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            1,104,808
<LONG-TERM>                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       591,544
<OTHER-SE>                                     6,515,537
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 98,949,702
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                5,920,810
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              36,533
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               238,418
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               6,195,761
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             2,937,749
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             2,937,749
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          3,258,012
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  374,921
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                3,818,068
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                908,820
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     908,820
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   560,805
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .98
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .85
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                 9.96
<LOANS-NON>                                    822,465
<LOANS-PAST>                                   2,161,035
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               1,090,730
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  72,894
<RECOVERIES>                                   11,207
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              1,403,874
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           1,403,874
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                            0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        141,546
        


</TABLE>
#### E. J. Overby *v.*Edna Curry, et al.

Real Estate — Adverse Possession — Husband and Wife.

Where the wife acquires title and possession of real estate, the fact that she was married did not vest the husband with any possession that could ripen into title in himself adverse to the claim of the wife.

APPEAL PROM CALDWELL CIRCUIT COURT.

December 16, 1874.

*Calvert & Morrow, for appellant.*

*Richard Syles, for appellees.*

Opinion by

Judge Pryor :

The lots in controversy were in the possession of Holmes, through whom the appellee, Edna Curry, claims to have derived title, as early as the year 1851. The ground enclosed by Holmes, included lots 34, 35, 46 and 47, a part of lot No. 46 belonging to one Lindsey, who after the death of Holmes conveyed to. Mrs. Curry. These lots in controversy, 34 and 35 being enclosed with the lots in the possession of Plolmes, and in his actual possession at his death, were known as one lot, and called by some the Holmes lot. Such lot, however, was plainly marked and designated on the plat of the town. Holmes, at his death, devised this lot, describing the property it adjoined, to Mrs., Curry, who at the time was in the possession and claimed to own, hold and possess in the same manner, and has been in the continued possession since the device. She claims to hold under Holmes; and tó adjudge that it was in the husband’s possession, would be to make him an adverse claimant against his own wife. If the husband had taken the possession in his own right, by entering upon the lot under a claim of title in himself, then the possession could not be said to have been in the wife; but in this case the wife acquired the title and entered into the possession under it; and the fact that she was a married woman did not vest the husband with any possession that could ripen into a title in himself adverse to the claim of the wife. The husband, in this case, never asserted any title in himself, or any other possession than that acquired by the title in his wife, and this possession only strengthened her title. *Young, et al., v. Adams,*14 B. Mon. 102; *Kirk v. Nichols’s Heirs,*2 J. J. Marsh. 469.

The judgment dismissing appellant’s petition was proper. Judgment *affirmed.*Opinion modified by erasing three lines on first page of original opinion.
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 242 (Wednesday, December 17, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75227-75228]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-29598]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8977]


Overseas Schools Advisory Council Notice of Meeting

    The Overseas Schools Advisory Council, Department of State, will 
hold its Annual Committee Meeting on Thursday, January 22, 2015, at 
9:30 a.m. in Conference Room 1105, Department of State Building, 2201 C 
Street NW., Washington, DC. The meeting is open to the public and will 
last until approximately 12:00 p.m.
    The Overseas Schools Advisory Council works closely with the U.S. 
business community in improving those American-sponsored schools 
overseas that are assisted by the Department of State and attended by 
dependents of U.S. Government employees, and the children of employees 
of U.S. corporations and foundations abroad.
    This meeting will deal with issues related to the work and the 
support provided by the Overseas Schools Advisory Council to the 
American-sponsored overseas schools. There will be a report and 
discussion about the status of the Council-sponsored project to expand 
the World Virtual School. The Regional Education Officers in the Office 
of Overseas Schools will make a presentations on the activities and 
initiatives in the American-sponsored overseas schools.
    Members of the public may attend the meeting and join in the 
discussion, subject to the instructions of the Chair. Admittance of 
public members will be

[[Page 75228]]

limited to the seating available. Access to the State Department is 
controlled, and individual building passes are required for all 
attendees. Persons who plan to attend should advise the office of Dr. 
Keith D. Miller, Department of State, Office of Overseas Schools, 
telephone 202-261-8200, prior to January 15, 2015. Each visitor will be 
asked to provide his/her date of birth and either driver's license or 
passport number at the time of registration and attendance, and must 
carry a valid photo ID to the meeting.
    Personal data is requested pursuant to Public Law 99-399 (Omnibus 
Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986), as amended; Public 
Law 107-56 (USA PATRIOT Act); and Executive Order 13356. The purpose of 
the collection is to validate the identity of individuals who enter 
Department facilities. The data will be entered into the Visitor Access 
Control System (VACS-D) database. Please see the Security Records 
System of Records Notice (State-36) at http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/103419.pdf for additional information.
    Any requests for reasonable accommodation should be made at the 
time of registration. All such requests will be considered, however, 
requests made after January 20th might not be possible to fill. All 
attendees must use the C Street entrance to the building.

    Dated: December 9, 2014.
Keith D. Miller,
Executive Secretary, Overseas Schools Advisory Council.
[FR Doc. 2014-29598 Filed 12-16-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-24-P
WEST VIRGINIA 

§47-1-7. Requirements for unit pricing. 

The uniform unit pricing regulation as adopted by the national conference on weights and measures and 

published in national institute of standards and technology handbook 130, "Uniform Laws and Regulations" 

and supplements thereto and revisions thereof, shall apply to unit pricing in the state, except insofar as 

modified or rejected by legislative rule
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-1022

GEORGE ELVIS MOYER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

SMURFIT-STONE CONTAINER CORPORATION,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, District

Judge. (CA-00-581-1)

Submitted: April 18, 2003 Decided: May 6, 2003

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

George Elvis Moyer, Appellant Pro Se. Fred Thurman Hamlet, Sr.,

Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

George Elvis Moyer appeals the district court’s order granting

summary judgment to the Defendant in this Title VII action alleging

race discrimination. We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by

the district court. See Moyer v. Smurfit-Stone Container Corp.,

No. CA-00-581-1 (M.D.N.C. filed Nov. 21, 2002, entered Nov. 22,

2002). 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
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the
Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-106113, 333-75994, 333-61694, 333-116619, 333-116618, and 333-135235) of HealthExtras, Inc. of our report, dated February 27, 2008, relating to the consolidated financial statements, financial
statement schedule, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of HealthExtras, Inc., which appears in this Form 10-K.



|                              
|------------------------------
|/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
|                              
|McLean, Virginia              
|February 27, 2008
```
**Exhibit 32**
```

Section1350 Certifications  

----

**Exhibit 32**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2003**

 

The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the ChiefFinancial Officer of Greenville First Bancshares, Inc. (the "company"), eachcertify that, to his knowledge on the date of this certification:

1.     The annual report of the company for the period ended December 31,2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date (the"Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the company.

 

Date:        March21, 2007                                       By:      /s/ R. Arthur Seaver, Jr.      

                                                                                               R.Arthur Seaver, Jr.

                                                                                               ChiefExecutive Officer

 

Date:       March21, 2007                                     By:         /s/James M. Austin, III      

                                                                                                JamesM. Austin, III

                                                                                                ChiefFinancial Officer
#### DERBER v. MOBERLY et al.

No. KC-145.

United States District Court D. Kansas.

July 13, 1951.

William J. Burns, Independence, Kan., and Everett Fritz, Kansas City, Kan., for plaintiff.

James H. Barnes, Kansas City, Kan., for defendants.

MELLOTT. Chief Judge.

The issue, raised by a motion to dismiss, is whether this court has jurisdiction of an action instituted by a tenant under Section 205 of the Housing and Rent Act of 19471 to recover treble damages in an amount less than $3000 for alleged overcharges in rent.

The question has not been passed upon by the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals for this (the Tenth) Circuit. The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit approved dismissal for want of jurisdiction in Fields v. Washington.2 The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit took a contrary view in Adler v. Northern Hotel Co.,3 Judge, now Mr. Justice Minton *770dissenting. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit appears to have followed the Adler case in a per curiam opinion in Garlin v. Currie,4 one judge dissenting.

District Judges in circuits other than the Third, Fifth and Seventh have struggled with the problem. In the cases cited in Footnote5, below, Fields v. Washington was followed. In those cited in Footnote 6, below, the majority decision in Adler v. Northern Hotel Co. was followed. One of the latest, decided by Judge Ridge of the Western District of Missouri, Frasher v. Estes,6 pretty generally expresses the view of this court.

It would serve no useful purpose to extend this opinion by attempting to rationalize the conclusion reached. The court is of the view the motion to dismiss should be denied. Order so providing and allowing the defendants ten days in which to answer should be prepared by counsel for the plaintiff. Settle in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. and this court’s Rules of Practice.

1

. 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix § 1895.

2

. 173 F.2d 701.

3

. 175 F.2d 619.

4

. 185 F.2d 401.

5

. McCrae v. Johnson, D.C.Md., 84 F.Supp. 220; Hershenrader v. Campbell, D.C.W. D.Ky., 85 F.Supp. 75; Burns v. Bishop, D.C.W.D.Ark., 88 F.Supp. 1; Temmerman v. Scafidi, D.C.N.D.Cal., 88 F.Supp. 527; Aram v. Hazelwood Apartments Co., D.C.E.D.Mich., 89 F.Supp. 836.

6

. Adams v. Backlund, D.C.Neb., 81 F. Supp. 643; Albright v. Nelson, D.C. Minn., 87 F.Supp. 737; Frasher v. Estes, D.C.W.D.Mo., 95 F.Supp. 74.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1789 

To amend the Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure Act of 1978 to 

increase the minimum amount of a civil penalty imposed for violating 

such Act, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 24, 2023 

Mrs. MILLER of Illinois introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To amend the Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure 

Act of 1978 to increase the minimum amount of a civil 

penalty imposed for violating such Act, and for other 

purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. INCREASE IN MINIMUM AMOUNT OF CIVIL PEN4 ALTY IMPOSED FOR VIOLATING AFIDA. 

5 Section 3(b) of the Agricultural Foreign Investment 

6 Disclosure Act of 1978 (7 U.S.C. 3502(b)) is amended 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1789 IH

1 by striking ‘‘shall not exceed 25 percent’’ and inserting 

2 ‘‘shall be at least 50 percent’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 12(A)


                           DORAL FINANCIAL CORPORATION
                COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                      THREE-MONTH
                                                                     PERIOD ENDED
                                                                    MARCH 31, 2000
                                                                   ----------------
<S>                                                                <C>
INCLUDING INTEREST ON DEPOSITS

EARNINGS:
     Pre-tax income from continuing operations                            $22,593
  Plus:
     Fixed Charges (excluding capitalized interest)                        61,001
                                                                          -------

TOTAL EARNINGS                                                            $83,594
                                                                          =======

FIXED CHARGES:
     Interest expensed and capitalized                                    $62,017
     Amortized premiums, discounts, and capitalized
        expenses related to indebtedness                                      493
     An estimate of the interest component within rental expense              455
                                                                          -------

TOTAL FIXED CHARGES                                                       $62,965
                                                                          =======

RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES                                           1.33
                                                                          =======




EXCLUDING INTEREST ON DEPOSITS

EARNINGS:
     Pre-tax income from continuing operations                            $22,593
  Plus:
     Fixed Charges (excluding capitalized interest)                        47,897
                                                                          -------

TOTAL EARNINGS                                                            $70,490
                                                                          =======

FIXED CHARGES:
     Interest expensed and capitalized                                    $48,913
     Amortized premiums, discounts, and capitalized
        expenses related to indebtedness                                      493
     An estimate of the interest component within rental expense              455
                                                                          -------

TOTAL FIXED CHARGES                                                       $49,861
                                                                          =======

RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES                                           1.41
                                                                          =======
</TABLE>
#### James Graham *v.*J. R. Moore and Wife.

Wills — Title to Real Estate.

Where it is provided in a will that “the real estate herein devised’ to said Lee Ann Smith, now Moore, I direct in case of marriage, to he entirely free from the control or disposition of her husband, and not in any way subject to his debts,” the devisee, after marriage, her husband joining with her, may convey all the title of the devised real estate to her purchaser.

APPEAL PROM WARREN CIRCUIT COURT.

December 19, 1874.

Opinion by

Judge Pryor :

The fifth clause of Burnam’s will provided that “the real estate herein devised to said Lee Ann Smith, now Moore, I direct, in case of marriage, to be entirely free from the control or disposition of her husband, and not in any way subject to his debts.” Lee Ann Smith, the devisee, having married John R. Moore, her husband and herself have united in a deed to the appellant for a part of the real estate devised to her under the 9th clause of the will; and the ap*272pellant claims that by reason of this provision of the will they are unable to make title. By an act concerning separate estates of married women, approved January 16, 1868, it is provided in substance that where separate estate is conveyed or devised to a married woman for her separate use, without the intervention of a trustee, and without any restriction upon the sale or conveyance thereof during coveture, the right of said married woman to sell and convey the property should be the same as if the said property had been conveyed or devised to her absolutely, without any separate use being expressed; but her separate use shall continue in the proceeds of such sale. See General Statutes, page 532. If this devise be regarded as passing to Mrs. Moore a separate estate, and we are of the opinion it does, it is clear that the husband and wife, by reason of the act referred to, can make to the appellant title, and whether regarded as general or separate estate, all the title the wife acquired by the will passed by the deed, and the purchaser must pay the money.

*Hines & Porter, for appellant.*

*H. T. Clark, for appellees.*

One of the notes by its stipulations makes the interest payable annually, and the question is whether interest shall run upon this interest from the time it was payable, or whether it then becomes a part of the principal.

The court is equally divided in opinion on this branch of the case, and the judgment of the court below is therefore *affirmed*on both the original and cross-appeal.

No damages will be awarded, as these parties have agreed as to the amount to be paid in lieu of damages, as appears by an endorsement on the record, and this is left for appellee to enforce.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<PAGE>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              APR-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 MAY-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUL-31-1998
<CASH>                                              50,289
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            0
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,155,246
<PP&E>                                               7,568
<DEPRECIATION>                                       7,568
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,259,216
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,437,823
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                          5,000
<COMMON>                                             9,062
<OTHER-SE>                                        (192,669)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,259,216
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         0
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      246,058
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  59,545
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    509,539
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                509,539
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                       509,539
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         0.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0.03
        


</TABLE>