alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case No. 6,436.

#### GILLESPIE v. REED et al.

[3 McLean, 377.] 1

Circuit Court, D. Illinois.

June Term, 1844.

Ejectment in Illinois — Evidence—Cory of Re-couoed Deed — Seal—Notice to Subsequent JPUUCnA-SEKS.

1. In Illinois, all fiction in the action of ejectment is abolished.

2. Tlie copy of a recorded deed may be received in evidence, to show that when recorded, it had a seal on it, which had been removed from the original.

3. Deeds recorded under a statute in Illinois, are made notice to creditors and subsequent purchasers, though not properly acknowledg. d. But such deed, when used in evidence, must be proved as similar instruments of writing.

At law.

Mr. Peter, for plaintiff.

Mr. Reed, for defendants.

OPINION OF

THE COURT.

This is an action of ejectment. All fiction in this action, in Illinois, is abolished by statute. In support of the plaintiff’s title, a deed was offered which was executed in New Hampshire, and the acknowledgment of which was taken in that state before a justice of tlie peace. The certificate of tlie secretary of state, and the state seal, were offered as proving that tlie person taking the acknowledgment was a justice of the peace. This was objected to. The statute of Illinois regulating the execution of deeds out of the state, for lands lying within it, at the time this deed was executed, requires the certificate of the clerk, and seal of the court; if the person taking the acknowledgment be a justice of tlie peace, that he is a justice. The district judge held this authentication sufficient. The circuit judge said, if the clerk, who is to certify, be tlie clerk of the county, which is supposed to be the meaning of the act, he thought the authentication not sufficient. That where the statute pointed out a form of a deed executed out of the state for land within it, the statute must be pursued. But the deed was. read in evidence. The defendants offered a deed purporting to be under seal, but tlie seal not appearing on the face of the deed, a copy of the record was *388admitted to prove that originally it had been sealed. An objection was made to the acknowledgment, because it did not state that the grantor making the acknowledgment, was known to the person taking it. The act of July 21, 1S17 [Laws Ill. p. IS, § 1], provides, “that the recording of any deed, grant, &c., shall be deemed and taken to be notice to subsequent purchasers and creditors, from the date of such recording, whether the said writing shall have been acknowledged or proven in conformity to the laws of the state or not; provided, that no such writing, acknowledged or i>roven in conformity to the laws of the state, to entitle the same to be recorded, shall be admitted as evidence in any court, unless execution thereof be proven in the manner required by the rule of evidence applicable to such writings.” And it was declared. that “that act shall apply to writings heretofore executed.” Previous laws author-ised deeds to be recorded which had been acknowledged, &c., without a certificate that the officer knew the person making it. The deed was admitted on parol proof of its execution.
No. 38958.

#### Petition 5619-R of Goff & Page Co. (Providence).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

Good faith having been established by the evidence,.^ the court granted the petition.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 24-0059

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

vs. 

VIDAL X NOTAFRAID JR,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including September 3, 2024, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 26 2024

07/26/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0059
# C_2007315EN.01000501.xml

| 22.12.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 315/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.12.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 315/5

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 18 October 2007 — Nordspedizionieri di Danielis Livio & C. Snc, in liquidation, Domenico D'Alessandro v Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-62/05 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Regulation (EEC) No 1430/79 - Remission of import duties - Consignment of cigarettes destined for Spain - Fraud committed in a Community transit operation)

(2007/C 315/07)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Appellants: Nordspedizionieri di Danielis Livio & C. Snc, in liquidation, Livio Danielis and Domenico D'Alessandro (represented by: G. Leone, lawyer)

Appellants:

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: X. Lewis, Agent, and G. Bambara, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 14 December 2004, in Case T-332/02 Nordspedizionieri di Danielis Livio and Others v Commission dismissing an action for the annulment of the Commission decision (REM 14/01) of 28 June 2002 informing the Italian authorities that there is no ground for the remission of import duties on a cargo of cigarettes destined for Spain on the ground that a fraud committed by third parties in the course of a Community transit operation does not constitute a special situation justifying the remission of import duties

Nordspedizionieri di Danielis Livio and Others

Commission

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1)

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2) | Orders Nordspedizionieri di Danielis Livio & C. Snc, in liquidation, and Mr Danielis and Mr D'Alessandro to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders Nordspedizionieri di Danielis Livio & C. Snc, in liquidation, and Mr Danielis and Mr D'Alessandro to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 82, 2.4.2005.

1

---
# C_2007211EN.01000601.xml

| 8.9.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 211/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 211/6

---

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 18 July 2007 — Republic of Poland v European Parliament and Council of the European Union

(Case C-460/05) (1)

1

(Directive 2005/36/EC - Recognition of professional qualifications - Nurses responsible for general care - Midwives - Specific provisions applicable to Polish qualifications - Validity - Duty to give reasons - Introduced by Act of Accession)

(2007/C 211/09)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Poland (represented by: J. Pietras, M. Szpunar and M. Brzezińska, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendants: European Parliament (represented by: U. Rösslein and A. Padowska, acting as Agents) and Council of the European Union (represented by: M.C. Giorgi Fort, R. Szostak and F. Florindo Gijón, acting as Agents)

Defendants:

Intervener in support of the form of order sought by the defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: H. Stølvbæk and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the form of order sought by the defendant:

Re:

Annulment of Articles 33(2) and 43(3) of Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications (OJ 2005 L 255, p. 22) — Special rules for the recognition of the acquired rights of nurses responsible for general care and midwives who have Polish qualifications

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the Republic of Poland to pay the costs; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Republic of Poland to pay the costs;

| 3. | Orders the Commission of the European Communities to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Commission of the European Communities to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 60, 11.3.2006.

1

---
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 9331 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 9331

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the excise tax on 
        investment income of private colleges and universities.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 9, 2024

  Mr. Joyce of Ohio (for himself and Ms. Malliotakis) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the excise tax on 
        investment income of private colleges and universities.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Higher Education Accountability Tax 
Act''.

SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF EXCISE TAX ON INVESTMENT INCOME OF PRIVATE 
              COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES.

    (a) Increase in Rate of Tax.--Section 4968(a) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``1.4 percent'' and 
inserting ``10 percent''.
    (b) Additional Increase in Rate of Tax for Institutions With 
Increases in Net Price.--
            (1) In general.--Section 4968(a) of such Code, as amended 
        by subsection (a), is amended by inserting ``(20 percent in the 
        case of a net-price-increase institution)'' after ``10 
        percent''.
            (2) Net-price-increase institution.--Section 4968(b) of 
        such Code is amended by redesignating paragraph (2) as 
        paragraph (3) and by inserting after paragraph (1) the 
        following new paragraph:
            ``(2) Net-price-increase institution.--The term `net-price-
        increase institution' means any applicable educational 
        institution for any taxable year if, during the 3-taxable-year 
        period ending with the taxable year immediately preceding such 
        taxable year, the net price of such institution increased at a 
        rate which exceeds the rate of increase in the Consumer Price 
        Index (as defined in section 1(f)(5)) for such period. For 
        purposes of the preceding sentence, the term `net price' has 
        the meaning given such term by section 132(a)(3) of the Higher 
        Education Act of 1986 (20 U.S.C. 1015a(a)(3)) except that such 
        price shall be determined by taking into account all first-
        time, full-time undergraduate students at the institution (in 
        addition to such students who receive student aid).''.
    (c) Expansion of Institutions Subject to Tax.--Section 
4968(b)(1)(D) of such Code is amended by striking ``$500,000'' and 
inserting ``$250,000''.
    (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2024.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOEL RODRIGUEZ SOLANO,

Defendant.

Case No. 2:12-CR-16

Judge Peter C. Economus

ORDER

There being no objections, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s Report and 

Recommendation that the plea agreement and Defendant’s guilty plea be accepted. (Doc. # 23.) 

The Court accepts Defendant’s plea of guilty to Count One of the Indictment, on which 

Defendant is hereby adjudged guilty.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

PETER C. ECONOMUS

/s/ Peter C. Economus 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case: 2:12-cr-00016-PCE Doc #: 25 Filed: 05/15/12 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
Case: 2:11-cv-01055-GLF-TPK Doc #: 36 Filed: 12/05/14 Page: 1 of 1  PAGEID #: <pageID>

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2015-05-11T10:30:09-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, August 13, 2015.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of

the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, August 13, 2015

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A15I0256. TENET HEALTHSYSTEM GB, INC. v. QUACHASITY HOUSTON et al..

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

12EV016018
Before the Third Division,

August 12, 1943

No. 48661.

#### Protest 986078-G of Arles Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

The record showed that the bales were stenciled with shipping marks and the words “French Soudan” when imported and the collector required that they be marked “French Sudan” before being released. The question is whether the marking “French Soudan” is sufficient to indicate that French Sudan is the country of origin. In view of article 528 (b) of the Customs Regulations of 1937, as amended in T. D. 49658, and from an inspection of Webster’s New International Dictionary it was held that the marking “French Soudan” was sufficient. The protest was therefore sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 9278 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 9278

   To amend section 5336 of title 31, United States Code, to provide 
 existing small businesses with an additional year to file beneficial 
             ownership information, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 2, 2024

Mr. Nunn of Iowa (for himself, Ms. Caraveo, Mr. Hill, and Ms. Davids of 
   Kansas) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend section 5336 of title 31, United States Code, to provide 
 existing small businesses with an additional year to file beneficial 
             ownership information, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SMALL BUSINESS BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP REPORTING EXTENSION.

    Section 5336(b)(1)(B) of title 31, United States Code, is amended 
by inserting after ``paragraph (2)'' the following: ``, except that any 
such reporting company that is a small business concern (as defined 
under section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632)) shall submit 
to FinCEN a report that contains such information during the period 
beginning on the effective date of the regulations prescribed under 
this subsection and ending on December 31, 2025''.
                                 <all>
```
Before the Third Division,

November 1, 1950

No. 54811.

#### The Kalva Corporation *v.*United States,

protest 114841-K (Laredo).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of unsweetened cocoa similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Gallagher & Ascher Co.*v. *United States*(24 Cust. Ct. 1, C. D. 1199), the claims of the plaintiff were sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 9328 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 9328

    To amend title 38, United States Code, to establish additional 
 presumptions of service connection for certain diseases that occur in 
 veterans who suffered toxic exposure while serving at Karshi Khanabad 
                         Air Base, Uzbekistan.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 9, 2024

   Mr. Green of Tennessee (for himself and Mr. Lynch) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Veterans' 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend title 38, United States Code, to establish additional 
 presumptions of service connection for certain diseases that occur in 
 veterans who suffered toxic exposure while serving at Karshi Khanabad 
                         Air Base, Uzbekistan.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``K2 Veterans Total Coverage Act of 
2024''.

SEC. 2. PRESUMPTION OF SERVICE CONNECTION FOR CERTAIN DISEASES THAT 
              OCCUR IN VETERANS WHO SERVED AT KARSHI KHANABAD AIR BASE, 
              UZBEKISTAN.

    Section 1120(b) of title 38, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) by redesignating paragraph (15) as paragraph (16); and
            (2) by inserting, after paragraph (14), the following new 
        paragraph (15):
            ``(15) In the case of a veteran who served at Karshi 
        Khanabad Air Base, Uzbekistan, the following diseases, in 
        addition to those diseases specified in this subsection:
                    ``(A) Any cancer.
                    ``(B) Any thyroid disease.
                    ``(C) Any bone disease.
                    ``(D) Any cardiovascular disease.
                    ``(E) Any skin disease.
                    ``(F) Any neurological disease.
                    ``(G) Any reproductive disease.
                    ``(H) Any respiratory disease.
                    ``(I) Any endocrine disease.
                    ``(J) Any liver disease.
                    ``(K) Any kidney disease.
                    ``(L) Cataracts.''.
                                 <all>
```
August 15, 1941

No. 46279.

Suit 4355.

#### United *States*v. *International Import Co.*

Abstract 45347. Appeal dismissed on stipulation (June 6, 1941; not yet reported).
# C_2007315EN.01003101.xml

| 22.12.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 315/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.12.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 315/31

---

Order of the President of the Fourth Chamber of the Court of 27 September 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Civile Di Genova — Italy) — Alessandro Tedesco v Tomasoni Fittings SrL, RWO Marine Equipment Ltd

(Case C-175/06) (1)

1

(2007/C 315/52)

Language of the case: Italian

Language of the case: Italian

The President of the Fourth Chamber of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 154, 1.7.2006.

1

---
Exhibit 13.2

Certification by the Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of China Ming Yang Wind Power
Group Limited (the Company) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Vincent Pang, 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 my knowledge:



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



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

Date: April 30, 2013



|    |  |                               
|--- |  | ------------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Vincent Pang              
|    |  | Name: Vincent Pang            
|    |  | Title: Chief Financial Officer
# C_2007155EN.01002101.xml

| 7.7.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 155/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155/21

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 22 May 2007 — Commission v IIC

(Case T-500/04) (1)

1

(Arbitration clause - Jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance - Repayment of the advance paid by the Community for projects financed in the domain of trans-European telecommunications networks - Forfeiture - Eligibility of the costs purportedly incurred)

(2007/C 155/40)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: G. Braun, W. Wils and N. Knittlmayer, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: IIC Informations-Industrie Consulting GmbH (established in Königswinter, Germany) (represented by: E. Rott and J. Wolff, lawyers)

Defendant:

Re:

Application under Article 238 EC for an order requiring the defendant to repay part of the advance paid by the Community in implementation of two financing contracts in relation to cultural programmes.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Orders IIC Informations-Industrie Consulting GmbH to pay the Commission of the European Communities the principal sum due of EUR 179 337, together with default interest at 4 % per annum as from 1 November 1998 until full payment of the sums due; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Orders IIC Informations-Industrie Consulting GmbH to pay the Commission of the European Communities the principal sum due of EUR 179 337, together with default interest at 4 % per annum as from 1 November 1998 until full payment of the sums due;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Dismisses the application by IIC Informations-Industrie Consulting GmbH for suspension of enforcement of this judgment; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Dismisses the application by IIC Informations-Industrie Consulting GmbH for suspension of enforcement of this judgment;

| 4. | Orders IIC Informations-Industrie Consulting GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders IIC Informations-Industrie Consulting GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 82, 2.4.2005.

1

---