alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
January 26. 1987 

Ms. Louise Sanders, R.N. 

Acting Executive Secretary 

Board of Nurse Examiners 

1300 E. Anderson Lane 

Building C, Suite 225 

Austin. Texas 78752 

Opinion No.JM-625 

Re: Whether the Board of Nurse 

Examiners may expend funds for 

liability insurance required to 

rent convention center 

Dear Ms. Sanders: 

You have requested our opinion about the authority of the Board 

of Nurse Examiners to purchase liability insurance. The board is 

required to give the licensing examination for nurses in "various 

cities throughout the State." V.T.C.S. art. 4519. You have chosen 

several sites for the February 1987 examination. You explain, 

however, that the owner of one facility you would like to use rgquires 

that anyone who rents.the facility must carry liability insurance. 

You ask whether the board may purchase liability insurance in order to 

rent the facility. 

Specific statutory authority is necessary to authorize state 

agencies to purchase liability insurance. Attorney General Opinion 

H-1318 (1978). State agencies do have statutory authority to purchase 

insurance policies protecting against claims arising under the Tort 

Claims Act. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code P101.027. However, the General 

Appropriation Bill for the current fiscal year contains the following 

provision: 

None of the funds appropriated in this Act may 

be expended for the purpose of purchasing policies 

of insurance covering claims arising under the 

Texas Tort Claims Act. 

General Appropriations Act, Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 980, art. V, 

556, at V-62. Therefore, the board may not use appropriated funds to 

purchase liability insurance in order to rent a convention center. 

Attorney General Opinions m-551 (1986); M-1215 (1972); M-559 (1970). 

See also V.T.C.S. art. 4527 (fees received by Board of Nurse Examiners 

to be placed in state treasury to be expended as specified by 

Appropriations Act); General Appropriations Act, Acts 1985. 69th 

Leg., ch. 980, art. I, at I-137 (appropriation for Board of Nurse 

Examiners). 

p. 2821 
Ms. Louise Sanders - Page 2 (X4-625) 

SUMKARY 

The Board of Nurse Examiners may not 

use appropriated funds to purchase liability 

insurance. 

JIM MATTOX 

Attorney General of Texas 

JACK HIGHTOWER 

First Assistant Attorney General 

MARY KELLER 

Executive Assistant Attorney General 

RICK GILPIN 

Chainuan, Opinion Committee 

Prepared by Sarah Woelk 

Assistant Attorney General 

p. 2822
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov","title":"1993 - Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"ZNv37cemO2\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov\/1993\/\">1993<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov\/1993\/embed\/#?secret=ZNv37cemO2\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“1993” — Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service\" data-secret=\"ZNv37cemO2\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\/* <![CDATA[ *\/\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n\/* ]]> *\/\n<\/script>\n","description":"John Calhoun Wells is appointed by President Clinton as FMCS\u2019s thirteenth director and launches a broad transformation initiative focusing on expanded services, improved competencies and enhanced technology. President Clinton issues Executive Order 12871 which creates the National Partnership Council and directs each Executive agency to form a partnership with its employees and their representatives to […]"}
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Gerald FELTON, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 10-6708.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Oct. 6, 2010.

Decided: Dec. 8, 2010.

*840Gerald Felton, Appellant pro se. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, NC, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Gerald Felton seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2010) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Felton has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED.*
**EXHIBIT      32.1**

**Certification      of Periodic Financial Report**

**Pursuant      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**

| Dated:                February 13, 2007 | /s/                Matthew Boyle       |
|-----------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|
|                                    | Matthew                Boyle           |
|                                    | Chief                Executive Officer |
|                                    |                                   |
|                                    |                                   |
|                                    |                                   |
| Dated:                February 13, 2007 | /s/                Paul A. McPartlin   |
|                                    | Paul                A. McPartlin       |
|                                    | Chief                Financial Officer |
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO



SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Paragon Financial Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), Paul K. Danner, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(2) The information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                        |  |        |  |                                                               
|----------------------- |  | ------ |  | --------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: November 22, 2004 |  | By:    |  | /s/ Paul K. Danner                                            
|                        |  | Name:  |  | Paul K. Danner                                                
|                        |  | Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors
#### SPECIAL IND. FUND v. DOLE et al.

No. 34731.

Nov. 14, 1950.

*223 P. 2d 1086.*

Mont Powell, of Oklahoma City, for petitioner.

Hugh Conway, of Enid, Cheek, Cheek & Cheek, of Oklahoma City, and Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

An award was entered in favor of claimant by and through his guardian against the Union Equity Co-Operative and its insurance *551carrier, Farmers Elevator Mutual Casualty, and the Special Indemnity Fund jointly. The award was for total permanent disability with a part thereof to be paid by the Special Indemnity Fund. The Special Indemnity Fund brought this proceeding to review the award.

A confession of error has been filed in which the claimant is joined by Union Equity Co-Operative and Farmers Elevator Mutual Casualty, stating that the award should be vacated insofar as it directs any payment by the Special Indemnity Fund and the cause remanded to the State Industrial Commission, with directions to assess the award for total permanent disability against the employer and its insurance carrier.

In a like proceeding by a claimant in McQueen & Johnson, Inc., et al., v. Morgan, 188 Okla. 574, 111 P. 2d 1079, we vacated the cause with directions to proceed in accordance with the confession of error. The principle applied therein is applicable here.

The award entered against the Special Indemnity Fund is hereby vacated and the cause is remanded to the State Industrial Commission, with directions to proceed in accordance with the confession of error.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-11-00544-CV

IN THE ESTATE OF ROSE MARIE WENDLANDT, DECEASED

On Appeal from the

County Court at Law No 2 of Nueces County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 2009-PR-46376-2

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against 

appellant.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

December 12, 2013
{"id":7581,"date":"2023-04-18T12:46:59","date_gmt":"2023-04-18T16:46:59","guid":{"rendered":"\/?p=7581"},"modified":"2023-04-18T12:46:59","modified_gmt":"2023-04-18T16:46:59","slug":"new-video-explains-charge-complaint-process","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"\/new-video-explains-charge-complaint-process\/","title":{"rendered":"New Video Explains Charge Complaint Process\u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>A new multimedia presentation provides the public with <a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=Wf1jQAJdE9g\">instructions on how to file charge complaints<\/a> at the Federal Maritime Commission.<\/p>\n<p>Charge Complaints were established by the <a href=\"\/osra-2022-implementation\/\">Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022<\/a> and provide an expedited process for disputing charges which may have been wrongly assessed by a common carrier.<\/p>\n<p>The primer provides viewers with background on the process that includes the types of charges that can be contested, the materials needed to file a complaint, how investigations are conducted, and potential outcomes.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>A new multimedia presentation provides the public with instructions on how to file charge complaints at the Federal Maritime Commission. Charge Complaints were established by the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022 and provide an expedited process for disputing charges which may have been wrongly assessed by a common carrier.... <a class=\"read-more\" href=\"\/new-video-explains-charge-complaint-process\/\">Read More »<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[4],"tags":[47],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7581"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/7"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7581"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7581\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7582,"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7581\/revisions\/7582"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7581"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7581"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7581"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 243 (Tuesday, December 18, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 65222]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-31151]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-38,452]


ARA Cutting, LC, Miami, FL; Amended Certification Regarding 
Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
2273), the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to 
Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance on February 13, 2001, applicable 
to workers of ARA Cutting, LC, Miami, Florida. The notice was published 
in the Federal Register on April 5, 2001 (66 FR 18118).
    At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers were engaged 
in the production of pants and shorts. New information provided by the 
State shows that workers separated from employment at ARA Cutting, LC 
had their wages reported under two separate unemployment insurance (UI) 
tax accounts; ADP Total Source FL XZII, Inc., Miami, Florida and United 
Enterprises of Southwest Florida. Inc., d/b/a Fidelity United Miami, 
Florida.
    Accordingly, the Department is amending the certification to 
properly reflect this matter.
    The intent of the Department's certification is to include all 
workers of ARA Cutting, LC adversely affected by increased imports.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-38,452 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    All workers of the ARA Cutting, LC, Miami, Florida, including 
those receiving their compensation through ADP Total Source FL XZII, 
Inc., Miami, Florida and United Enterprises of Southwest Florida, 
Inc., d/b/a Fidelity United, Miami, Florida, who became totally or 
partially separated from employment on or after December 6, 1999, 
through February 13, 2003, are eligible to apply for adjustment 
assistance under section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974.


    Signed at Washington, DC this 3rd day of December, 2001.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance
[FR Doc. 01-31151 Filed 12-17-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 243 (Tuesday, December 18, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 65195]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-31076]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP99-513-010]


Questar Pipeline Co.; Notice of Negotiated Rate

December 11, 2001.
    Take notice that on December 3, 2001, Questar Pipeline Company's 
(Questar) filed a tariff filing to implement a negotiated-rate contract 
as authorized by Commission orders issued October 27, 1999, and 
December 14, 1999, in Docket Nos. RP99-513, et al. The Commission 
approved Questar's request to implement a negotiated-rate option for 
Rate Schedules T-1, NNT, T-2, PKS, FSS and ISS shippers. Questar 
submitted its negotiated-rate filing in accordance with the 
Commission's Policy Statement in Docket Nos. RM95-6-000 and RM96-7-000 
(Policy Statement) issued January 31, 1996.
    Questar requested waiver of 18 CFR 154.207 so that Eleventh Revised 
Sheet No. 7 to First Revised Volume No. 1 of its FERC Gas Tariff may 
become effective December 1, 2001.
    Questar states that a copy of this filing has been served upon 
Questar's customers, the Public Service Commission of Utah and the 
Public Service Commission of Wyoming.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sec. 385.214 or Sec. 385.211 of the Commission's rules 
and regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with Sec. 154.210 of the Commission's regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a 
motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection. This filing may 
also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``RIMS'' 
link, select ``Docket#'' and follow the instructions (call 202-208-2222 
for assistance). Comments, protests and interventions may be filed 
electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site 
under the ``e-Filing'' link.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-31076 Filed 12-17-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 245 (Thursday, December 20, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65777-65778]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-31388]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Customs Service

[T.D. 01-92]


Cancellation of Customs Broker Licenses

AGENCY: U.S. Customs Service, Department of the Treasury.

ACTION: Customs Broker License Cancellations.

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

[[Page 65778]]

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 641 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 
(19 USC 1641) and the Customs Regulations (19 CFR 111, Subpart D), the 
following Customs broker licenses are cancelled. Because previous 
publication of these records cannot be readily verified, the records 
are now being published to ensure Customs compliance with 
administrative requirements.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Name                           License    Port
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harry I. Hoskins....................................     00193  Seattle.
John P. Hausman.....................................     00194  Seattle.
Victor D. Harlow....................................     00200  Seattle.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Dated: December 17, 2001.
Bonni G. Tischler,
Assistant Commissioner, Office of Field Operations.
[FR Doc. 01-31388 Filed 12-19-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4820-02-P
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

              In connection with the Quarterly Report of Score One, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2006 filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), we, Hoi-ho Kiu, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, and Lai Ming Lau, Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S. C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
                  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (2)      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
                  all material respects, the financial condition and results of
                  operations of the Company.

                                            /S/ HOI-HU KIU
                                            ------------------------
                                            Hoi-ho Kiu
                                            Chief Executive Officer

                                            April 20, 2006

                                            /S/ LAI MING LAU
                                            ------------------------
                                            Lai Ming Lau
                                            Chief Financial Officer

                                            April 20, 2006