alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Timothy McCue et al., Plaintiffs, v Tower III, LLC, et al., Defendants. Tower III, LLC, et al., Third-Party Plaintiffs-Respondents, v SJ Electric, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Appellant.

[961 NYS2d 777]

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis B. York, J.), entered September 26, 2012, which denied third-party defendant-appellant SJ Electric, Inc.’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the third party complaint against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court correctly determined that issues of fact exist concerning whether SJ Electric was working on the fourth floor in the days prior to the accident and whether it was responsible for cleaning up debris created as a result of its work. These issues of fact preclude dismissal of the third-party *436complaint for indemnification *(see Pennisi v Standard Fruit & S.S. Co.,*206 AD2d 290 [1st Dept 1994]).

Concur—Friedman, J.E, Sweeny, Renwick, Richter and Román, JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Andres Ayala, Appellant.

Submitted June 21, 2010;

decided September 2, 2010

On the Court’s own motion, appeal dismissed, without costs, upon the ground that no appeal lies as of right from the unanimous order of the Appellate Division absent the direct involvement of a substantial constitutional question. Correction Law § 168-n (3) does not provide an independent predicate for an appeal as of right to the Court of Appeals. Motion for leave to appeal denied.
#### ILLINOIS-CALIFORNIA EXPRESS, Inc., v. DUFFY.

Civ. A. No. 2-381.

United States District Court S. D. Iowa, Central Division.

Aug. 10, 1953.

F. S. Fillmore, Des Moines, Iowa, for plaintiff.

W. C. Hoffmann and W. C. Hoffmann, Jr., Des Moines, Iowa, for defendant.

RILEY, District Judge.

This matter is before the court on defendant’s motions for more specific statement and to strike. Written statements of counsel in support and in opposition to the said motions have been presented and considered.

I.

The motion for more specific statement is directed to the alleged insufficiency which defendant claims to exist in paragraph 5 of the complaint wherein plaintiff states:

> “that the proximate cause of the damage sustained by plaintiff was the negligence of the defendant in *42the operation of his automobile at said time and place.”

Defendant relies upon Rule 112 of the Iowa Rules of Civil Procedure, 58 I.C.A., to support his motion for more specific statement. This court follows the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., of which Rule 8 specifies the type of statement which a complaint shall contain. The illustrative forms suggested in connection with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure include Form 9, Complaint for Negligence. Appendix of Forms, 28 U.S.C.A. Plaintiff’s complaint conforms therewith. Defendant has recourse to discovery proceedings to inform himself in greater detail. The motion therefore in this respect must be overruled.

II.

Defendant’s motion to strike is aimed at the following allegation found in paragraph 7 of the complaint:

> “that a certain portion of the cargo being hauled by plaintiff was irreparably damaged while in the possession of the plaintiff as bailee for transportation for hire and in the regular course of its business as common carrier of goods and merchandise in interstate commerce and by reason of plaintiff’s status as such bailee it reimbursed the lawful holders of the bills of lading of said cargo for the actual value of such cargo, plus labor costs for unloading, inspection, repackaging and reloading, in the aggregate sum of $12,451.74.”

As grounds therefore defendant contends that from this pleading it appears: (1) that the cargo involved was not the property of plaintiff; (2) that plaintiff therefore is not the proper person to bring this suit; (3) that so long as it exercised ordinary care in transporting the cargo in question, plaintiff as bailee was not obligated to pay for the damages claimed to have resulted from the alleged collision; and (4) having voluntarily paid its bailor for the resultant damages, it is in no position to collect from a possible joint tort-feasor. To accept these contentions of the defendant and to rule in his favor at this time would be equivalent to sustaining a motion to dismiss. The important question the court is concerned about now is to determine whether an adequate claim for relief has been plead. This requirement has been fulfilled. The present motion to strike will therefore be overruled without prejudice to the defendant of raising such legal questions as above mentioned at an appropriate time during trial.
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.                  

###### Federal Maritime Commission

The Federal Maritime Commission hereby gives notice that the following Ocean Transportation Intermediary licenses have been revoked pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. Chapter 409) and the regulations of the Commission pertaining to the licensing of Ocean Transportation Intermediaries, 46 CFR Part 515, effective on the corresponding date shown below:

*License Number:*                     020647N.                

*Name:*                     SJT Trading Corp.                

*Address:*                     7382 NW 35th Terr., Ste. 106, Miami, FL 33122.                

*Date Revoked:*                     May 15, 2009.                

*Reason:*                     Failed to maintain a valid bond.                

*License Number:*                     004670NF.                

*Name:*                     The Pelixan Group, Inc.                

*Address:*                     3405-B NW 72nd Ave., Ste. 111, Miami, FL 33122.                

*Date Revoked:*                     May 16, 2009 (NVOCC) and May 9, 2009 (OFF).                

*Reason:*                     Failed to maintain valid bonds.                

*License Number:*                     020084N.                

*Name:*                     Velocity Freight Inc.                

*Address:*                     20283 State Rd. 7, Ste. 300, Boca Raton, FL 33498.                

*Date Revoked:*                     May 15, 2009.                

*Reason:*                     Failed to maintain a valid bond.                

*License Number:*                     017354N.                

*Name:*                     Wingar Logistics Inc.                

*Address:*                     9690 Telstar Ave., Ste. 207, El Monte, CA 91731.                

*Date Revoked:*                     May 17, 2009.                

*Reason:*                     Failed to maintain a valid bond.                

Sandra L. Kusumoto, 

Director, Bureau of Certification and Licensing.

[FR Doc. E9-12961 Filed 6-2-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<CIK> 0000806393 
<NAME>  ATLANTIC ENERGY, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    1,801,786
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                     63,879
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         243,429
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       352,813
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,461,907
<COMMON>                                        54,963
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      491,712
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            252,484
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 799,159
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          114,750
<PREFERRED>                                     40,000
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           802,356
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                              30,545
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                   12,247
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                       22,250
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                     40,227
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                   650
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 599,723
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                2,461,907
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      953,779
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            45,876
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     758,976
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     804,852
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                        148,927
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                              11,025
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                 159,952
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        61,200
<NET-INCOME>                                    98,752
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                     14,627
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   84,125
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        81,239
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                            0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                         157,427
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________** No. 23 - 20455 Summary Calendar

**____________ United States of America,**  Plaintiff
— Appellee **,** versus **Michael Goodwin,** Defendant
— Appellant **.**

**______________________________** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:19
- CR
- 719 - 4

**______________________ ________**  Before **Smith, Higginson,** and **Engelhardt,** Circuit Judges **. Per Curiam**  **:** ***** Michael Goodwin appeals his 324 - month sentence for conspiracy to advertise child pornography. He urge s that the district court erred in apply
ing a five
- level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2(b)(3)(B) based on his distribution of child pornography in exchange for valuable consider ation. T he g overnment maintain s that Goodwin know ingly and voluntarily

**_____________________** * This opinion is not designate d for publication. See **5th Cir .**  **R .**  47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED June 21, 2024 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 23-20455 Document: 66-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/21/2024No. 23 - 20455

2 waived his right to appeal, and it seeks to enforce the appeal waiver. In re
sponse, Goodwin a ver s that the court should adopt and apply a miscarriage
of
- justice exception to the ap peal waiver. The g overn ment replies that this court has not adopted a miscarriage
- of
- justice excep tion to appeal waivers and, even if it did, it would not apply to Goodwin’s standard sentencing challenge. “ This court reviews de novo whether an appeal waiver bars an appeal. ” United States v. Keele , 755 F.3d 752, 754 (5th Cir. 2014). A defen
dant may waive his statutory right to appeal if the waiver (1) is knowingly and voluntarily entered and (2) “ applies to the circumstances at hand, based on the plain language of the [plea] agreement. ” United States v. Higgins , 739 F.3d 733, 736 (5th Cir. 2014) . The record indicates Goodwin’s waiver of his appellate rights was knowing and voluntary , and therefore, the appeal waiver is valid and enforce
a ble. See Higgins , 739 F.3d at 736
– 37 ; see also United States v. McKinney , 406 F.3d 744, 746 (5th Cir. 2005) . Further, the record indicates that the appeal waiver “applies to the circumstances at hand, based on the plain lan
guage of the plea agreement.” Hig gins , 739 F.3d at 736. Although Goodwin reserved the right to raise a claim of ineffective assistance, he brings a sen tenc ing issue , which does not fall within the exception to the appeal waiver. Although some other circuit courts have recognized the p ossibility of a miscarriage
- of
- justice exception to appeal waiver s , this court has “declined to explicitly either adopt or reject” i t . United States v. Barnes , 953 F.3d 383, 389 (5th Cir. 2020). Accordingly, Goodwin’s enforceable appeal waiver bars this appeal. See Higgins , 739 F.3d at 736
– 37 ; see also McKinney , 406 F.3d at 746 . The motion t o dismiss is **GRANTED** , and th e appeal is **DISMISSED** . Case: 23-20455 Document: 66-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/21/2024
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 307 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide flexibility in 

the manner in which beds are counted for purposes of determining 

whether a hospital may be designated as a critical access hospital under 

the Medicare program and to exempt from the critical access hospital 

inpatient bed limitation the number of beds provided for certain veterans. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 22, 2009 

Mr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. CRAPO) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide 

flexibility in the manner in which beds are counted for 

purposes of determining whether a hospital may be designated as a critical access hospital under the Medicare 

program and to exempt from the critical access hospital 

inpatient bed limitation the number of beds provided 

for certain veterans. 

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 ‘‘Critical Access Hos5 pital Flexibility Act of 2009’’. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•S 307 IS

1 SEC. 2. FLEXIBILITY IN THE MANNER IN WHICH BEDS ARE 

2 COUNTED FOR PURPOSES OF DETERMINING 

3 WHETHER A HOSPITAL MAY BE DESIGNATED 

4 AS A CRITICAL ACCESS HOSPITAL UNDER 

5 THE MEDICARE PROGRAM. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1820(c)(2)(B) of the So7 cial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395i–4(c)(2)(B)) is amend8 ed— 

9 (1) in clause (iii), by inserting ‘‘(or 20, as de10 termined on an annual, average basis)’’ after ‘‘25’’; 

11 and 

12 (2) by adding at the end the following flush 

13 sentence: 

14 ‘‘In determining the number of beds for purposes of 

15 clause (iii), only beds that are occupied shall be 

16 counted.’’. 

17 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

18 this section take effect on January 1, 2010. 

19 SEC. 3. CRITICAL ACCESS HOSPITAL INPATIENT BED LIMI20 TATION EXEMPTION FOR BEDS PROVIDED TO 

21 CERTAIN VETERANS. 

22 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1820(c) of the Social Se23 curity Act (42 U.S.C. 1395i–4(c)) is amended by adding 

24 at the end the following new paragraph: 

25 ‘‘(3) EXEMPTION FROM BED LIMITATION.—For 

26 purposes of this section, no acute care inpatient bed 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
3 

•S 307 IS

1 shall be counted against any numerical limitation 

2 specified under this section for such a bed (or for in3 patient bed days with respect to such a bed) if the 

4 bed is provided for an individual who is a veteran 

5 and the Department of Veterans Affairs referred the 

6 individual for care in the hospital or is coordinating 

7 such care with other care being provided by such 

8 Department.’’. 

9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

10 subsection (a) shall apply to cost reporting periods begin11 ning on or after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3016 

To prohibit the further extension or establishment of national monuments 

in Utah except by express authorization of Congress. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 22, 2010 

Mr. BENNETT (for himself and Mr. HATCH) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To prohibit the further extension or establishment of national 

monuments in Utah except by express authorization of 

Congress. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON FURTHER EXTENSION OR ES4 TABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL MONUMENTS IN 

5 UTAH. 

6 This proviso of the last sentence of the first section 

7 of the Act of September 14, 1950 (64 Stat. 849, chapter 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3016 IS

1 950; 16 U.S.C. 431a), is amended by inserting ‘‘or Utah’’ 

2 after ‘‘Wyoming’’. 

Æ 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-7723

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JOHNNY LEE WESLEY,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr.,

Senior District Judge. (CR-97-382)

Submitted: March 10, 2005 Decided: March 14, 2005

Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Johnny Lee Wesley, Appellant Pro Se. James L. Trump, OFFICE OF THE

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
*

This date gives Wesley the benefit of Houston v. Lack, 487

U.S. 266 (1988).

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Johnny Lee Wesley seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion to reconsider in his

underlying 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) action. We dismiss the appeal

for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not

timely filed. 

In actions where the United States is a party, parties

are accorded sixty days after the entry of the district court’s

final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P.

4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal period

under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under

Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and

jurisdictional.” Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr., 434 U.S. 257,

264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229

(1960)). 

The district court’s judgment was entered on the docket

on December 11, 2003. The notice of appeal was filed on

October 12, 2004.* Because Wesley failed to file a timely notice

of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal

period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in
- 3 -

the materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2707 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2707

         To suspend temporarily the duty on Pigment Yellow 97.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            November 2, 2009

  Mr. Whitehouse (for himself and Mr. Reed) introduced the following 
  bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
         To suspend temporarily the duty on Pigment Yellow 97.

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

SECTION 1. PIGMENT YELLOW 97.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00      Butanamide, N-(4-   Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                        chloro-2,5-                                                        31/2011.......
                        dimethoxyphenyl)-
                        2-[2-[2,5-
                        dimethoxy-4-
                        [(phenylamino)sul
                        fonyl]phenyl]diaz
                        enyl]-3-oxo (CAS
                        No. 12225-18-2)
                        (provided for in
                        subheading
                        3204.17.04)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AS OF JUNE 30, 1999 AND THE  STATEMENT  OF  OPERATIONS  FOR THE SIX MONTHS
ENDED JUNE 30,  1999 AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY  BY  REFERENCE  TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 824098
<NAME> SCOTTSDALE LAND TRUST LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                       2,023,080
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 16,337,102
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              26,145,699
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  25,941,222
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                26,145,699
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               471,336
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 98,354
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             98,354
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    98,354
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.95
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>