alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOTICE OF APPEAL.

[Hamilton Circuit Court,

January Term, 1894.]

Smith, Swing and Cox, JJ.

#### *Twenty Fourth Ward Loan Co. v. Julia Joseph et al.

Notice oe Appeal Filed Five Days After Judgment is too Late Although Motion for New was not Disposed of.

Judgment being entered Nov. 23, and a motion for a new trial filed Nov. 25, a notice of appeal filed Nov. 28, is too late, although the motion was not disposed of.

Heard on Motion to dismiss Appeal.

*Scott*Bonham, for appellant.

*Jos. S. Meyers, contra.*

*

Notice of appeal not given within three days.

Smith, J.

This action was commenced in the Superior Court, March 17, 1893, and therefore comes within the provisions of the act of March 28, 1892, 89 O. L., 148. Under sec. 5227, as thereby amended, “a person desiring to appeal his cause to the Circuit Court, shall, within three days after the judgment or order is entered, enter on the records notice of such intention, and within thirty days after the entering of such judgment or order upon the journal of the court,, give an undertaking,” etc.

The judgment attempted to be appealed from was entered November 23,1893. On November 25, a motion for a new trial was filed, and November 28, the appellants gave notice of their intention to appeal the cause to the circuit court, and on December 20, appeal bond was filed.

The notice of an appeal, not having been given until five days after the-judgment was entered, was not in time, and the appeal must be dismissed, notwithstanding the fact that the motion for a new trial does not seem to have been, disposed of.
EXHIBIT 21  Page 1 of 1

THOMAS GROUP, INC.  SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY

|SUBSIDIARY                                   |  | JURISDICTION OF INCORPORATION
|-------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|                                             |  |                              
|Thomas Group (Switzerland) GmbH              |  | Switzerland                  
|Thomas Group Swiss Results GmbH              |  | Switzerland                  
|Thomas Group of Sweden, Inc.                 |  | Sweden                       
|Thomas Group Asia Pte. Ltd.                  |  | Singapore                    
|Thomas Group Hong Kong Limited               |  | Hong Kong                    
|Thomas Group Consulting (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. |  | China                        

---

QuickLinks
STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA

VERSUS

ANDREW HARVEY, JR. 

In Re: Andrew Harvey, 

21st Judicial

No. 801966. 

Jr. , applying

District Court, 

BEFORE: THERIOT, CHUTZ, AND HESTER, J~. 

NO. 2023 KW 0096

MARCH 13, 2023

for supervisory writs, 

Parish of Tangipahoa, 

WRIT DENIED AS MOOT. The record of the Tangipahoa Parish

Office of the Clerk of Court shows that on February 13, 2023, 

the district court acted on relator's application for

postconviction relief, filed on December 2, 2022. 

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT

FOR THE COURT

MRT

WRC

CHH
#### NEAL v. LYMAN et al.

No. 31182.

Dec. 21, 1943.

*144 P. 2d 113.*

Homer Caldwell, of Oklahoma City, and John T. Levergood, of Shawnee, for plaintiff in error.

M. M. Chapman, of Shawnee, for defendants in error.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff has appealed from a judgment rendered in favor of the defendants in the trial court, and on April 10, 1943, filed his brief. The authorities therein cited reasonably sustain the allegations of error. The defendants have filed no brief and have offered no excuse for such failure. Under such circumstances, as stated in Gooldy v. Hines, 186 Okla. 583, 99 P. 2d 498, it is not the duty of this court to search the record for some theory upon which to sustain the action of the trial court, but the cause will be reversed and remanded with directions.

The cause is, therefore, reversed and' remanded, with directions to vacate the judgment for the defendants and to grant a new trial.

CORN, C.J., and RILEY, OSBORN, BAYLESS, WELCH, HURST, DAVISON, and ARNOLD, JJ., concur. GIBSON, V.C.J., absent.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3062

To amend the Mineral Leasing Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior 

to issue separately, for the same area, a lease for tar sand and a 

lease for oil and gas, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 10, 2003

Mr. CANNON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Resources 

A BILL

To amend the Mineral Leasing Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to issue separately, for the same 

area, a lease for tar sand and a lease for oil and gas, 

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. COMBINED HYDROCARBON LEASING. 

4 (a) SPECIAL PROVISIONS REGARDING LEASING.—

5 Section 17(b)(2) of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 

6 226(b)(2)) is amended—

7 (1) by inserting ‘‘(A)’’ after ‘‘(2)’’; and 

8 (2) by adding at the end the following: 
2

•HR 3062 IH 

1 ‘‘(B) The Secretary may issue under this Act for the 

2 same area, separately—

3 ‘‘(i) a lease for exploration for and extraction of 

4 tar sand; and

5 ‘‘(ii) a lease for exploration for and development 

6 of oil and gas. 

7 ‘‘(C) A lease issued under subparagraph (B)(ii) shall 

8 not be further subject to the Combined Hydrocarbon Leas9 ing Act of 1981 (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.).

10 ‘‘(D) A lease issued for tar sand shall be issued using 

11 the same bidding process, annual rental, and posting pe12 riod as a lease issued for oil and gas, except that the min13 imum acceptable bid required for a lease issued for tar 

14 sand shall be $2 per acre. 

15 ‘‘(E) The Secretary may waive, suspend, or alter any 

16 requirement under section 26 that a permittee under a 

17 permit authorizing prospecting for tar sand must exercise 

18 due diligence, to promote any resource covered by a com19 bined hydrocarbon lease.’’. 

20 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 

21 17(b)(1)(B) of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 

22 226(b)(1)(B)) is amended in the second sentence by in23 serting ‘‘, subject to paragraph (2)(B),’’ after ‘‘The Sec24 retary’’.
3

•HR 3062 IH 

1 (c) REGULATIONS.—Within 45 days after the date of 

2 the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior 

3 shall issue final regulations to implement this section.

Æ
§ 261a.9 Board review of request for amendment of record. ( a ) *Time limits.* We will acknowledge your request for amendment of your record within 10 business days after we receive your request. In the acknowledgment, we may request additional information necessary for a determination on the request for amendment. We will make a determination on a request to amend a record promptly.
( b ) *Contents of response to request for amendment.* When we respond to a request for amendment, we will tell you whether your request is granted or denied. If we grant your request, we will take the necessary steps to amend your record and, when appropriate and possible, notify prior recipients of the record of our action. If we deny the request, in whole or in part, we will tell you— ( 1 ) Why we denied the request (or portion of the request);
( 2 ) That you have a right to appeal; and
( 3 ) How to file an appeal.
Exhibit 32

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

In connection with the
Quarterly Report of Trans World Entertainment Corporation (the Company) on
Form 10-Q for the period ending July 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, Robert J. Higgins,
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company and John J. Sullivan,
Executive Vice President and 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, to the best of our knowledge:

| |     |                                                                                                                                                       
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (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/ Robert J. Higgins                 |                               | /s/ John J. Sullivan    | 
|Robert J. Higgins                     |                               | John J. Sullivan        | 
|Chairman and Chief
 Executive Officer | Executive Vice President
 and |                        
|                                      |                               | Chief Financial Officer | 
|September 9,
 2010                    |                               | September 9,
 2010      | 

27

---
# C_2016073EN.01000901.xml

| 25.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 73/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 73/9

---

State aid — Decision to raise no objections

(2016/C 73/05)

The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following state aid measure:

| Date of adoption of the decision | : | 25 November 2015 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Case No | : | 78009 |
| Decision No | : | 478/15/COL |
| EFTA State | : | Norway |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | : | CLIMIT Demo |
| Legal basis | : | Stortingsvedtak nr. 352 (2002-2003), Stortingsvedtak nr. 69 (2003-2004), Innst. S. nr. 250 (2003-2004) vedtak nr. 549, Budsjettvedtak re. Budsjett-innst. S. nr. 9 (2004-2005) fra energi og miljøkomiteen, Kongelig resolusjon av 17.12.2004 Om opprettelse og fastsettelse av vedtekter og fullmakter for forvaltningsorganet Gassnova, forskrift om endringer i forskrift 16. desember 1977 nr. 14, forskrift 16. desember 1977 nr. 15. |
| Type of measure | : | Scheme |
| Objective | : | R&D&I |
| Form of aid | : | Grants |
| Budget | : | Max. NOK 200 million/year |
| Intensity | : | 25 % - 100 % depending on type of aid |
| Duration | : | 5 years |
| Economic sectors | : | All |
| Name and address of the granting authority | : | Gassnova SF |
| Dokkvegen 10 |
| N-3920 Porsgrunn |
| NORWAY |

Date of adoption of the decision

Date of adoption of the decision

:

25 November 2015

Case No

Case No

:

78009

Decision No

Decision No

:

478/15/COL

EFTA State

EFTA State

:

Norway

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

:

CLIMIT Demo

Legal basis

Legal basis

:

Stortingsvedtak nr. 352 (2002-2003), Stortingsvedtak nr. 69 (2003-2004), Innst. S. nr. 250 (2003-2004) vedtak nr. 549, Budsjettvedtak re. Budsjett-innst. S. nr. 9 (2004-2005) fra energi og miljøkomiteen, Kongelig resolusjon av 17.12.2004 Om opprettelse og fastsettelse av vedtekter og fullmakter for forvaltningsorganet Gassnova, forskrift om endringer i forskrift 16. desember 1977 nr. 14, forskrift 16. desember 1977 nr. 15.

Type of measure

Type of measure

:

Scheme

Objective

Objective

:

R&D&I

Form of aid

Form of aid

:

Grants

Budget

Budget

:

Max. NOK 200 million/year

Intensity

Intensity

:

25 % - 100 % depending on type of aid

Duration

Duration

:

5 years

Economic sectors

Economic sectors

:

All

Name and address of the granting authority

Name and address of the granting authority

:

Gassnova SF

Dokkvegen 10

N-3920 Porsgrunn

NORWAY

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website:

http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/

---
THE STATE OF TEXAS

M A N D A T E

*********************************************

TO THE 114TH DISTRICT COURT OF SMITH COUNTY, GREETING:

Before our Court of Appeals for the 12th Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 5th

day of August, 2015, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

WILLIAM M. SMITH, Appellant

NO. 12-14-00286-CR; Trial Court No. 114-0109-14

By per curiam opinion.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

“THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record and brief filed herein, and the 

same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that there was no error in the judgment.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the judgment of the court 

below be in all things affirmed, and that this decision be certified to the court below for 

observance.”

WHEREAS, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals 

for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District of Texas in this behalf, and in all things have it duly 

recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, THE HONORABLE JAMES T. WORTHEN, Chief Justice of our Court 

of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District, with the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of 

Tyler, this the 29th day of September, 2015.

PAM ESTES, CLERK

By: _______________________________

Chief Deputy Clerk
# C_2009064EN.01003801.xml

| 19.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 64/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 64/38

---

Information communicated by the EFTA States regarding State aid granted under the Act referred to in point 1 f of Annex XV of the EEA Agreement (Commission Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises)

(2009/C 64/11)

| Aid No | Aid to SMEs 1/08 |
| --- | --- |
| EFTA State | Norway |
| Region | All regions |
| Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving individual aid | The Bioenergy Scheme |
| Legal basis | Annual Agricultural Agreement, State Budget, Annual Letter of allocation from The Royal Ministry of Food and Agriculture |
| Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company | Aid scheme | Annual overall amount | Around 15 % of the total annual budget of EUR 4,3 million |
| Loans guaranteed | — |
| Individual aid aid | Overall aid amount | — |
| Loans guaranteec | — |
| Maximum aid intensity | In conformity with Articles 4(2)-(6) and 5 of the Regulation | Yes |
| Date of implementation | 1 January 2008 |
| Duration of scheme or individual aid award | Until 31 December 2014 |
| Objective of aid | Aid to SMEs | Yes |
| Economic sectors concerned | All sectors eligible for aid to SMEs | Yes |
| Limited to specific sectors






  — | Coalmining |

Aid No

Aid to SMEs 1/08

EFTA State

Norway

Region

All regions

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving individual aid

The Bioenergy Scheme

Legal basis

Annual Agricultural Agreement, State Budget, Annual Letter of allocation from The Royal Ministry of Food and Agriculture

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company

Aid scheme

Annual overall amount

Around 15 % of the total annual budget of EUR 4,3 million

Loans guaranteed

—

Individual aid aid

Overall aid amount

—

Loans guaranteec

—

Maximum aid intensity

In conformity with Articles 4(2)-(6) and 5 of the Regulation

Yes

Date of implementation

1 January 2008

Duration of scheme or individual aid award

Until 31 December 2014

Objective of aid

Aid to SMEs

Yes

Economic sectors concerned

All sectors eligible for aid to SMEs

Yes

Limited to specific sectors

—

Coalmining

All manufacturing

or

Steel

Shipbuilding

Synthetic fibres

Motor vehicles

Other manufacturing

All services

or

Transport services

Financial services

Other services

Yes

Name and address of the granting authority

| Ministry of Agriculture and Food |
| --- |
| Postbox 8007 |
| 0030 Oslo |
| NORWAY |

Ministry of Agriculture and Food

Postbox 8007

0030 Oslo

NORWAY

Large individual aid grants

In conformity with Article 6 of the Regulation

Yes

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-1867

DAVID E. HENDERSON, 

 Plaintiff – Appellant, 

 v. 

BRIDGET R. MUGANE, Attorney at Law, 

 Defendant – Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. 

(1:08-cv-01616-CCB) 

Submitted: November 13, 2008 Decided: November 18, 2008 

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

David E. Henderson, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

 David E. Henderson appeals the district court's order 

dismissing without prejudice his complaint against Defendant 

summarily asserting, in part, that since 1983 Defendant has 

refused to assist him in obtaining medical retirement or 

reemployment with the United States Foreign Service. Because 

Henderson may amend his complaint to cure the pleading defects 

identified by the district court, we find that the dismissal 

order is interlocutory and not appealable. See Chao v. 

Rivendell Woods, Inc., 415 F.3d 342, 345 (4th Cir. 2005); Domino 

Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 

1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for 

lack of jurisdiction. 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
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 13

- 00038

- CR

Ex parte Michael Owenga §

§

§

§

§ From Criminal District Court No. 2

o f Tarrant County (C

- 2

- 009711

- 1200172

- AP )

July 3, 2014

P er C uriam

(nfp)



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered t hat the judgment of

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

PER CURIAM
<PAGE>
                                 EXHIBIT 23.1
                                       

              CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS




Casino Resource Corporation
Ocean Springs, Mississippi

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in Casino Resource
Corporation's previously filed Registration Statement of our report dated
December 11, 1997, except for Note 19 as to which the date is January 15, 1998,
relating to the consolidate financial statements of Casino Resource Corporation
and Subsidiaries appearing in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for
the year ended September 30, 1997.

We also consent to the reference to us under the caption "Experts" in the
Prospectus.


Chicago, Illinois                       BDO Seidman, LLP
January 16, 1998
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Restoring Taiwan’s Appropriate Place at the World Health Assembly

# 									Restoring Taiwan’s Appropriate Place at the World Health Assembly							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

May 7, 2021

Beginning on May 24, the world will gather virtually for the 74th annual World Health Assembly (WHA). The Assembly is the decision-making body of the World Health Organization, and it sets the agenda for strengthening international cooperation to end the COVID-19 pandemic and advancing global health and global health security — issues that affect us all. And yet, unless the Organization’s leadership takes appropriate action, the Assembly will once again exclude the vital participation of Taiwan.

There is no reasonable justification for Taiwan’s continued exclusion from this forum, and the United States calls upon the WHO Director-General to invite Taiwan to participate as an observer at the WHA – as it has in previous years, prior to objections registered by the government of the People’s Republic of China.

Global health and global health security challenges do not respect borders nor recognize political disputes. Taiwan offers valuable contributions and lessons learned from its approach to these issues, and WHO leadership and all responsible nations should recognize that excluding the interests of 24 million people at the WHA serves only to imperil, not advance, our shared global health objectives.

Taiwan is a reliable partner, a vibrant democracy, and a force for good in the world, and its exclusion from the WHA would be detrimental to our collective international efforts to get the pandemic under control and prevent future health crises. We urge Taiwan’s immediate invitation to the World Health Assembly.

Tags

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsChinaCOVID-19Global HealthGlobal HealthOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of StateTaiwanWorld Health Organization

Back to Top
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S UNAUDITED BALANCE SHEET AS OF MARCH 31, 1997 AND UNAUDITED CONDENSED
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS FOR THE PERIOD ENDING MARCH
31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH UNAUDITED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-KSB FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,
1996.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          46,586
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   21,388
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,702
<INVENTORY>                                     73,070
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               271,087
<PP&E>                                           5,564
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,625
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 276,651
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           96,428
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     4,203,423
<OTHER-SE>                                     180,223
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   276,651
<SALES>                                        153,475
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               153,475
<CGS>                                           72,703
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   87,628
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (1,547)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                474,766
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (200)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             13,774
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                460,992
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   474,566
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .13
        

</TABLE>