alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Opinion issued February 21 , 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 18
- 00460
- CR

——————————— DEIDRIS WOODS , Appella nt

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appell e e
On Appeal from the 185th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Ca se No. 1457437

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant , Deidris Woods , pleaded guilty to the felony offense of assault on a public servant. On September 5, 2015, in accordance with appellant’s plea agreement with the State, the trial court signed an order deferring adjudication of2

guilt and plac ed appellant on community supervision for three years. 1 Appellant , acting pro se, filed n otice s of appeal on December 1, 2017 and May 11, 2018

. We dismiss the appeal

. In criminal cases, the appellant must file a notice of appeal “within 30 days after the day sentence is imposed.” T EX
. R. A PP
. P 26 .2(a)(1). Because the order appealed was signed on September 8, 2015 , the deadline for filing the notice of appeal was October 8 , 201 5 . Appellant ’s initial notice of appeal was filed on December 1, 2017 , over two years too late. If an appea l is not timely perfected, then a court of appeals does not obtain jurisdiction to address the merits of the appeal and can take no action other than to dismiss the appeal. See Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). Because appellant’ s notice s of appeal were untimely , we lack jurisdiction over this appeal

. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 25.1

. Moreover, in a plea

- bargain case, a defendant may only appeal those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial or after gett ing the trial court's permission to appeal. T EX
. C ODE C RIM
. P ROC . art. 44.02 ; T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(a)(2). An appeal must be dismissed if a certification showing that the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record. T EX
. R. A PP
. P

. 25.2(d);
see Dears v. State , 154 S.W.3d 610, 613 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Here, the clerk ’ s

1 Although the State moved to adjudicate guilt in June 2017, the record , which includes filings up to appellant’s second notice of appeal in May 2018 , shows no order granting th e motion.3

record supports the trial court ’ s certification that this is a plea

- bargain case and that appellant has no right of appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P

. 25.2(a)(2), (d); De ars , 154 S.W.3d at 615. Because appellant has no right of appeal, we must dismiss this appeal without further action. See Chavez v. State , 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (“A court of appeals, while having jurisdiction to ascertain whether an
ap pellant who plea

- bargained is permitted to appeal by Rule 25.2(a), must dismiss a prohibited appeal without further action, regardless of the basis for the appeal.”). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dismiss any pending moti ons as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Goodman and Countiss

. Do not publish. T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47.2( b).
§ 795.12 Applicant liability. ( a ) A coal operator who has received assistance pursuant to § 795.9 shall reimburse the regulatory authority for the cost of the services rendered if: ( 1 ) The applicant submits false information, fails to submit a permit application within 1 year from the date of receipt of the approved laboratory report, or fails to mine after obtaining a permit;
( 2 ) The program administrator finds that the operator's actual and attributed annual production of coal for all locations exceeds 300,000 tons during the 12 months immediately following the date on which the operator is issued the surface coal mining and reclamation permit; or
( 3 ) The permit is sold, transferred, or assigned to another person and the transferee's total actual and attributed production exceeds the 300,000 ton production limit during the 12 months immediately following the date on which the permit was originally issued. Under this paragraph the applicant and its successor are jointly and severally obligated to reimburse the regulatory authority.
( b ) The program administrator may waive the reimbursement obligation if he or she finds that the applicant at all times acted in good faith.
[48 FR 2272, Jan. 18, 1983, as amended at 59 FR 28168, May 31, 1994]
§ 77.701-1 Approved methods of grounding of equipment receiving power from ungrounded alternating current power systems. For purposes of grounding metallic frames, casings and other enclosures of equipment receiving power from ungrounded alternating current power systems, the following methods of grounding will be approved: ( a ) A solid connection between the metallic frame; casing, or other metal enclosure and the grounded metallic sheath, armor, or conduit enclosing the power conductor feeding the electric equipment enclosed;
( b ) A solid connection to metal waterlines having low resistance to earth;
( c ) A solid connection to a grounding conductor extending to a low-resistance ground field; and,
( d ) Any other method of grounding, approved by an authorized representative of the Secretary, which insures that there is no difference in potential between such metal enclosures and the earth.
###### Editorial Note on Part 75

#### Editorial Note:

The provisions of this part marked [Statutory Provision] appear in Title III of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969.

#### § 75.1700 Oil and gas wells.

[Statutory Provisions]

Each operator of a coal mine shall take reasonable measures to locate oil and gas wells penetrating coalbeds or any underground area of a coal mine. When located, such operator shall establish and maintain barriers around such oil and gas wells in accordance with State laws and regulations, except that such barriers shall not be less than 300 feet in diameter, unless the Secretary or his authorized representative permits a lesser barrier consistent with the applicable State laws and regulations where such lesser barrier will be adequate to protect against hazards from such wells to the miners in such mine, or unless the Secretary or his authorized representative requires a greater barrier where the depth of the mine, other geologic conditions, or other factors warrant such a greater barrier.
§ 57.19021 Minimum rope strength. At installation, the nominal strength (manufacturer's published catalog strength) of wire ropes used for hoisting shall meet the minimum rope strength values obtained by the following formulas in which “L” equals the maximum suspended rope length in feet: ( a ) *Winding drum ropes* (all constructions, including rotation resistant). For rope lengths less than 3,000 feet: Minimum Value = Static Load × (7.0 − 0.001L) For rope lengths 3,000 feet or greater: Minimum Value = Static Load × 4.0.
( b ) *Friction drum ropes.* For rope lengths less than 4,000 feet: Minimum Value = Static Load × (7.0 − 0.0005L) For rope lengths 4,000 feet or greater: Minimum Value = Static Load × 5.0.
( c ) *Tail ropes* (balance ropes).
Minimum Value = Weight of Rope × 7.0
Exhibit 99

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 Annual Report of Questar Pipeline Company (the "Company") on Form 10-K for 2002, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), D. N. Rose, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and S. E. Parks, Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:

(1)  The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 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 result of operations of the Company.

|               |  | QUESTAR PIPELINE COMPANY                                                       
|-------------- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|March 27, 2003 |  |                                                                                
|               |  | /s/D. N. ROSED. N. Rose
President and Chief Executive Officer                  
|March 27, 2003 |  |                                                                                
|               |  | /s/S. E. PARKSS. E. Parks
Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer

This
certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be
deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

---

QuickLinks
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000028385
<NAME> THE DETROIT EDISION COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                              13
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      550
<ALLOWANCES>                                        20
<INVENTORY>                                        318
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   912
<PP&E>                                          15,307
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,712
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  10,759
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,142
<BONDS>                                          3,512
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         48
<COMMON>                                         1,951
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,502
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    10,759
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,893
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,408
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    10
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 136
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    339
<INCOME-TAX>                                       146
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                193
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       193
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
##### 



Exhibit 10(v)
 REVISED SUMMARY SHEET
OF
2008 COMPENSATION
 Director Compensation
 Employee Directors
  Non-Employee Directors
   
    
    $12,000 restricted stock retainer, which vests over a three year period, issued under
the Companys 2007 Equity Incentive Plan. A copy of the 2007 Equity Incentive Plan is
filed as an exhibit to the Companys Form 8-K filed on April 20, 2007.
    
    $12,000 cash retainer payable in four quarterly payments.
  
    
    $900 cash fee for each Board of Directors meeting of the Company attended.
    
    $600 cash fee for each committee meeting attended.
  
    
    $2,000 fee payable in four quarterly payments to Presiding Independent Director.
    
    $2,000 fee payable in four quarterly payments to Committee Chairs.
  
    
    $900 additional fee for each full day spent in training at seminars or other training
sessions approved in advance by the Chairman of the Board.
    
    Reimbursement for travel and other expenses incurred for attending seminars or other
training sessions.
    
    Reimbursement for accommodations, travel or meals in connection with attending
corporate, board or other authorized functions, which includes Board of Directors meetings,
committee meetings, and Board retreats.
  Compensation of Named Executive Officers




---



##### 



Michael T. Vea, Chairman,
    
    $468,180President and Chief Executive
OfficerMartin M. Zorn, Executive
    
    $271,500Vice-President, Chief Risk
Officer and SecretaryArchie M. Brown, Executive
    
    $271,500Vice-President, Commercial
and Consumer BankingRaymond D. Beck, Executive
    
    $205,000Vice-President, Chief Credit
OfficerRoger M. Watson, Executive
    
    $210,000Vice-President, Division
Manager, Commercial Real
Estate
  Cash Incentives
  Equity-Based Incentives.
 th
 -2-




---



##### 



2008 Executive Compensation Decisions.
    Other Compensation of Named Executive Officers
   Agreements with Other Executive Officers
  -3-
1

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

AIKATERINI TSIOUPLI,

Plaintiff,

v.

KEVIN HENRY MCLAUGHLIN, 

JENNIFER V. MCLAUGHLIN, and 

NEAL R. MCLAUGHLIN,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

) C.A. No. N22C-04-057 CLS

)

)

)

)

)

)

Date Submitted: February 22, 2023

Date Decided: March 8, 2023

Upon Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine Regarding Plaintiff’s Injuries and Damages.

DENIED.

ORDER

Vincent J.X. Hedrick, II, Esquire, Bove & Hedrick, Wilmington, Delaware, 19899, 

Attorney for Plaintiff, Aikaterini Tsioupli. 

Miranda D. Clifton, Esquire, Heckler & Frabizzio, Wilmington, Delaware, 19899, 

Attorney for Defendants, Kevin Henry McLaughlin, Jennifer V. McLaughlin, and 

Neal R. McLaughlin.

SCOTT, J.
2

On this 8th day of March 2023, upon consideration of Plaintiff Aikaterini 

Tsioupli’s (“Ms. Tsioupli”) Motion in Limine Regarding Plaintiff’s Injuries and 

Damages, and Defendants Kevin Henry McLaughlin, Jennifer V. McLaughlin, and 

Neal R. McLaughlin’s (“Defendants”) response, it appears that:

1. Ms. Tsioupli sustained injury as a result of a collision caused by Defendant 

Kevin McLaughlin. As a result of the accident, Ms. Tsioupli filed this suit and 

identified two expert medical witnesses, Dr. Demetrios Zerefos and Dr. 

Michael Brooks, to testify and provide reports on her behalf. 

2. Defendants identified Dr. Frank Sarlo as their medical expert, and Dr. Sarlo 

provided a defense medical evaluation report setting forth his opinions. 

3. Ms. Tsioupli asks this Court to preclude Defendants from introducing any 

evidence suggesting Ms. Tsioupli’s injuries are from any other cause, or that

a jury should award no damages, or insinuate, either through documents, 

questions of witnesses or otherwise, that Ms. Tsioupli’s injuries and resulting 

damages were caused by anything other than this collision. Ms. Tsioupli 

believes the Court should grant this Motion because all experts establish that 

Ms. Tsioupli suffered injuries from the collision. 

4. Defendants argue they do not agree with Ms. Tsioupli’s representation that all 

experts agree as to the nature of Plaintiff’s injuries. Defendants note all 

experts agree Ms. Tsioupli had a pre-existing degeneration in her cervical and 
3

lumbar areas of her spine, the areas she claims injury from this accident, and 

all experts noted a prior accident in 2014. 

5. This Court agrees with Defendants. Defendants should and will be given an 

opportunity during the trial for testimony by an expert regarding the prior 

accident and its similarities to this current injury, and degenerative findings. 

The weight and credibility of the testimony is left to the jury to determine the 

cause of the injury. This Court shall not preclude expert testimony regarding 

the origin of injury or causation of injury. 

6. Based on the foregoing reasons, the Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine Regarding 

Plaintiff’s Injuries and Damages is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ Calvin L. Scott

Judge Calvin L. Scott, Jr.
§ 77.211 Draw-off tunnels; stockpiling and reclaiming operations; general. ( a ) Tunnels located below stockpiles, surge piles, and coal storage silos shall be ventilated so as to maintain concentrations of methane below 1.0 volume per centum.
( b ) In addition to the tests for methane required by § 77.201 such tests shall also be made before any electric equipment is energized or repaired, unless equipped with a continuous methane monitoring device installed and operated in accordance with the provisions of § 77.211-1. Electric equipment shall not be energized, operated, or repaired until the air contains less than 1.0 volume per centum of methane.
#### § 77.809 Identification of circuit breakers and disconnecting switches.

Circuit breakers and disconnecting switches shall be labeled to show which units they control, unless identification can be made readily by location.
#### Revlon, Inc. v. Riteprice Merchandise, Inc.

Motion to dismiss appeal granted, with $10 costs. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Valente and McNally, JJ.
Editorial Note on Part 773
Editorial Note: At 82 FR 54938, Nov. 17, 2017, as required by the Congressional Review Act and Public Law 115-5, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement removed all amendments to part 773 made effective on Jan. 19, 2017, at 81 FR 93323-93325, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 773.8 General provisions for review of permit application information and entry of information into AVS. ( a ) Based on an administratively complete application, we, the regulatory authority, must undertake the reviews required under §§ 773.9 through 773.11 of this part.
( b ) We will enter into AVS— ( 1 ) The information you are required to submit under §§ 778.11 and 778.12(c) of this subchapter.
( 2 ) The information you submit under § 778.14 of this subchapter pertaining to violations which are unabated or uncorrected after the abatement or correction period has expired.
( c ) We must update the information referred to in paragraph (b) of this section in AVS upon our verification of any additional information submitted or discovered during our permit application review.
[65 FR 79663, Dec. 19, 2000, as amended at 72 FR 68029, Dec. 3, 2007]
EXHIBIT 21SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT   NAME JURISDICTION OF INCORPORATION Integra Bank NA United States* IBNK Leasing Corp. State of Indiana* Integra Illinois Investment Co., LLC State of Delaware** Integra Loan Company, LLC State of Delaware*** Total Title Services, LLC State of IndianaIntegra Capital Trust II State of DelawareIntegra Capital Statutory Trust III State of ConnecticutIntegra Capital Statutory Trust IV State of DelawareIntegra Capital Statutory Trust V State of DelawareIntegra Reinsurance Company, LTD Turks and Caicos Islands *- Wholly owned subsidiary of Integra Bank NA **- Ninety-nine percent owned by Integra Illinois Investment Co., LLC and one percent owned byIntegra Bank NA ***- Sixty percent ownership by Integra Bank NA
# C_2023317EN.01001701.xml

| 7.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 317/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 317/17

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.11114 – SWOCTEM / KLÖCKNER)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 317/11)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | SWOCTEM GmbH (‘SWOCTEM’, Germany), controlled by Prof. Dr.-Ing. E.h. Friedhelm Loh, |
| --- | --- |

—

SWOCTEM GmbH (‘SWOCTEM’, Germany), controlled by Prof. Dr.-Ing. E.h. Friedhelm Loh,

| — | Klöckner & Co SE (‘Klöckner’, Germany). |
| --- | --- |

—

Klöckner & Co SE (‘Klöckner’, Germany).

SWOCTEM will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Klöckner.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

| — | SWOCTEM is is a holding company solely owned and controlled by Prof. Dr.-Ing. E.h. Friedhelm Loh who also owns and controls the Friedhelm Loh Group. The Friedhelm Loh Group comprises a portfolio of companies active across a range of sectors, including among others Stahlo, an operator of steel service centers in Germany, |
| --- | --- |

—

SWOCTEM is is a holding company solely owned and controlled by Prof. Dr.-Ing. E.h. Friedhelm Loh who also owns and controls the Friedhelm Loh Group. The Friedhelm Loh Group comprises a portfolio of companies active across a range of sectors, including among others Stahlo, an operator of steel service centers in Germany,

| — | Klöckner is is primarily active in the stockholding distribution of steel (including stainless steel), aluminium, plastic and other industrial products as well as operating steel service centres and oxy-cutting centres. |
| --- | --- |

—

Klöckner is is primarily active in the stockholding distribution of steel (including stainless steel), aluminium, plastic and other industrial products as well as operating steel service centres and oxy-cutting centres.

3.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

4.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.11114 – SWOCTEM / KLÖCKNER

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email or by post. Please use the contact details below:

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Postal address:

| European Commission |
| --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  
  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

(2)  
  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

2

---
<PAGE>   1

                                  EXHIBIT 23B

              CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent certified public accountants, we hereby consent to (1) the
inclusion in this Form 10-K of our Report (Gaither Koewler Rohlfer Luckett & Co.
as predecessor to Gaither Rutherford & Co., LLP) dated January 13, 1993, on the
consolidated financial statements of National City Bancshares, Inc. 1992 for
the year ended December 31, 1992, and (2) the incorporation of our report
included in this Form 10-K into the Corporation's previously filed Registration
Statement Commission File No. 0-13585.

As independent certified public accountants, we hereby consent to the inclusion
in this Form 10-K of our report (Gaither Koewler Rohlfer Luckett & Co. as
predecessor to Gaither Rutherford & Co., LLP) dated January 22, 1993, on the
consolidated financial statements of Lincolnland Bancorp, Inc. for the year
ended December 13, 1992.



/s/ GAITHER RUTHERFORD & CO., LLP
Certified Public Accountants
Evansville, Indiana
March 24, 1995
### SUBCHAPTER I—DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS