alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 23

                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements of
Nobel Education Dynamics, Inc. (Formerly the Rocking Horse Child Care Centers of
America, Inc.) and subsidiaries on Form S-3 (File Nos. 333-3793, 333-3797, and
33-73496) and Forms S-8 (File Nos. 33-21859, 33-44888 and 33-64701) of our
report dated February 13, 1998, except for Note 16, as to which the date is
March 26, 1998, on our audits of the consolidated financial statements of Nobel
Education Dynamics, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1997 and 1996 and
for the years ended December 31, 1997, 1996 and 1995 which report is included in
this Annual Report on Form 10-K.


2400 Eleven Penn Center
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
March 27, 1998
exv10w1



 






Exhibit 10.1




Grubb & Ellis Company

1551 North Tustin Avenue

Suite 300

Santa Ana, California 92705




As of January 25, 2008




Grubb & Ellis Realty Advisors, Inc.

500 West Monroe Street

Suite 2800

Chicago, Illinois 60661




	 	 	 
	Re:

	 	Redemption of Shares of Common Stock of
	 

	 	Grubb & Ellis Realty Advisors, Inc. (the “Company”)
	 

	 	held by Grubb & Ellis Company (“GBE”)     
               






Ladies and Gentlemen:




     As you are aware, GBE currently owns an aggregate of 5,667,719 shares of common stock, par
value $.0001 per share, of the Company (the “Common Stock”).



     Subject to and simultaneously upon the closing of the business combination as contemplated by
the Company’s preliminary proxy statement (the “Preliminary Proxy Statement”) as last filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 3, 2007 (pursuant to which, among other things,
GAV is to acquire from GBE the “Properties”, as the term is defined in the Preliminary Proxy
Statement), GBE expressly agrees that the Company shall have the right to redeem from GBE an
aggregate of 4,395,788 shares of its Common Stock, for the par value thereof, resulting in
aggregate payment of $439.58 by the Company to GBE for the redemption of such 4,395,788 shares of
Common Stock (the “Redemption”).



     After giving effect to the Redemption, GBE will own 1,271,931 shares of Common Stock which
will represent 5% of the issued and outstanding Common Stock of the Company upon the closing of the
business combination.



     Please acknowledge your agreement with the foregoing, including your agreement to effect the
Redemption as hereinabove described, by counter-executing a copy of this letter where indicated
below. This letter agreement may be executed in one or more original, facsimile or electronic
counterparts, all of which when taken together shall constitute one instrument.



 









 





Grubb & Ellis Realty Advisors, Inc.

As of January 25, 2008

Page 2




     This letter agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the
State of Delaware, without giving effect to its conflicts of laws provisions.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	Very truly yours,	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	GRUBB & ELLIS COMPANY	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:
	 	/s/ Scott D. Peters	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Name:
	 	Scott D. Peters	 	 
	 

	 	Title:
	 	Chief Executive Officer and President	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 






	 	 	 	 	 
	Agreed to and Accepted by:	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	GRUBB & ELLIS
REALTY ADVISORS, INC.	 	 
	 	 	 
	By:

	 	/s/ Richard W. Pehlke	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	Name:

	 	Richard W. Pehlke	 	 
	Title:

	 	Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1955 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1955

  To authorize the interstate traffic of unpasteurized milk and milk 
        products that are packaged for direct human consumption.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            December 7, 2011

   Mr. Paul introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
  referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To authorize the interstate traffic of unpasteurized milk and milk 
        products that are packaged for direct human consumption.

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

SECTION 1. INTERSTATE TRAFFIC OF UNPASTEURIZED MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS.

    (a) Sale Allowed.--Notwithstanding the Federal Food, Drug, and 
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.), section 361 of the Public Health 
Service Act (42 U.S.C. 264), and any regulations or other guidance 
issued under such Act or section, a Federal department, agency, or 
court may not take any action (such as administrative, civil, criminal, 
or other actions) that would prohibit, interfere with, regulate, or 
otherwise restrict the interstate traffic of milk, or a milk product, 
that is unpasteurized and packaged for direct human consumption, if 
such restriction is based on the determination that, solely because 
such milk or milk product is unpasteurized, such milk or milk product 
is adulterated, misbranded, or otherwise in violation of Federal law.
    (b) Definitions.--In this section, the following definitions apply:
            (1) The terms ``interstate traffic'', ``milk'', and ``milk 
        product'' have the meanings given those terms in section 1240.3 
        of title 21, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the 
        date of enactment of this Act).
            (2) The term ``packaged for direct human consumption'' 
        means milk and milk products that are packaged for the final 
        consumer and intended for human consumption. Such term does not 
        include milk and milk products that are packaged for additional 
        processing, including pasteurization, before being consumed by 
        humans.
            (3) The term ``pasteurized'' means the process of heating 
        milk and milk products to the applicable temperature specified 
        in the tables contained in section 1240.61 of title 21, Code of 
        Federal Regulations (or successor regulations), and held 
        continuously at or above that temperature for at least the 
        corresponding specified time in such tables.
                                 <all>
```
##### 



Exhibit 18.1 November 10, 2004 Duke Energy Field Services, LLC  
370 Seventeenth Street Suite 2500  
Denver, Colorado 80202 Dear Sirs/Madams: At your request, we have read the description included in your Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q to the Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
September 30, 2004, of the facts relating to the change in the date of the
annual impairment test under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.
142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets. We believe, on the basis of the
facts so set forth and other information furnished to us by appropriate
officials of the Company, that the accounting change described in your Form
10-Q is to an alternative accounting principle that is preferable under the
circumstances. We have not audited any consolidated financial statements of Duke Energy Field
Services, LLC and its consolidated subsidiaries as of any date or for any
period subsequent to December 31, 2003. Therefore, we are unable to express,
and we do not express, an opinion on the facts set forth in the above-mentioned
Form 10-Q, on the related information furnished to us by officials of the
Company, or on the financial position, results of operations, or cash flows of
Duke Energy Field Services, LLC and its consolidated subsidiaries as of any
date or for any period subsequent to December 31, 2003. Yours truly, Deloitte & Touche LLP   Denver, Colorado
No. 44397.

#### Protest 832171-G of S. Hata Shoten, Ltd. (Honolulu).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

In accordance with the report of the appraiser that the cotton cloth in question is properly dutiable at 23.50 percent ad valorem under paragraph 904 (b) that claim was sustained. On the authority of *Lamborn*v. *United States*(27 C. C. P. A. 46, C. A. D. 60) the claim as to the Agricultural Adjustment Act was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 24.2


                               POWER OF ATTORNEY


KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, THAT THE UNDERSIGNED CONSTITUTES AND APPOINTS
TERENCE C. SEIKEL HIS TRUE AND LAWFUL ATTORNEY-IN-FACT AND AGENT, WITH FULL
POWER OF SUBSTITUTION AND RESUBSTITUTION, FOR HIM AND IN HIS NAME, PLACE AND
STEAD, IN ANY AND ALL CAPACITIES, TO SIGN: (i) FORM 10-K BEING FILED ON OR ABOUT
THE DATE HEREOF BY ADVANCED ACCESSORY SYSTEMS, LLC, (THE "COMPANY"), (ii) ANY OR
ALL AMENDMENTS (INCLUDING POST-EFFECTIVE AMENDMENTS) TO THE COMPANY'S
REGISTRATION STATEMENT FILED WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION AND
DECLARED EFFECTIVE ON OR ABOUT JUNE 10, 1998, AND TO FILE THE SAME, WITH ALL
EXHIBITS THERETO, AND OTHER DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (INCLUDING ANY
AMENDMENTS THERETO), WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, GRANTING UNTO
SAID ATTORNEY-IN-FACT AND AGENT FULL POWER AND AUTHORITY TO DO AND PERFORM EACH
AND EVERY ACT AND THING REQUISITE AND NECESSARY TO BE DONE AS FULLY TO ALL
INTENTS AND PURPOSES AS HE MIGHT OR COULD DO IN PERSON, HEREBY RATIFYING AND
CONFIRMING ALL THAT SAID ATTORNEY-IN-FACT AND AGENT OR HIS SUBSTITUTE OR
SUBSTITUTES, MAY LAWFULLY DO OR CAUSE TO BE DONE BY VIRTUE HEREOF.




                                                   /s/ F. Alan Smith
                                                   --------------------------
                                                   Name:  F. Alan Smith
                                                   Dated: March 15, 1999
# C_2013336EN.01002402.xml

| 16.11.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 336/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.11.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 336/24

---

Order of the General Court of 9 September 2013 — Planet v Commission

(Case T-489/12) (1)

1

(Arbitration clause - Sixth framework programme for research, technological development and demonstration - Contracts relating to Ontogov, FIT and RACWeb projects - Eligible costs - No legal interest in bringing proceedings - Inadmissible)

2013/C 336/51

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Planet AE Anonymi Etaireia Parochis Symvouleftikon Ypiresion (Athens, Greece) (represented by: V. Christianos, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal and B. Conte, agents, and by S. Drakakakis, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action based on Article 272 TFEU and the first paragraph of Article 340 TFEU seeking a declaration that, first, the refusal by the Commission to allow as eligible costs certain sums paid in advance of completion of the contracts ‘Ontology enabled E-Gov Service Configuration (ONTOGOV)’, ‘Fostering self-adaptive e-government service improvement using semantic technologies (FIT)’ and ‘Risk Assessment for Customs in Western Balkans (RACWeb)’, concluded as part of the Sixth framework programme of the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities, contributing to the creation of the European Research Area and to innovation (2002-2006), is an infringement by the Commission of its contractual obligations and, secondly, that those sums are eligible costs and ought not to be repaid.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as being inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as being inadmissible.

| 2. | Planet AE Anonymi Etaireia Parochis Symvouleftikon Ypiresion shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Planet AE Anonymi Etaireia Parochis Symvouleftikon Ypiresion shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 26, 26.1.2013.

1

---
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 16 

To repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 25 (legislative day, JANUARY 5), 2011 

Mr. VITTER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Patient Choice Res5 toration Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REPEAL. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—The following Acts, and the 

8 amendments made by such Acts, are repealed: 

9 (1) The Patient Protection and Affordable Care 

10 Act (Public Law 111–148). 

11 (2) The Health Care and Education Reconcili12 ation Act of 2010 (Public Law 111–152). 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 16 IS

1 (b) EFFECT OF LAW.—The provisions of law amend2 ed by the Acts referred to in subsection (a) are restored 

3 as if such Acts had never been enacted. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
# C_2013079EN.01001801.xml

| 16.3.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.3.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/18

---

Judgment of the General Court of 31 January 2013 — K2 Sports Europe v OHIM — Karhu Sport Iberica (SPORT)

(Case T-54/12) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark SPORT - Earlier national and international word marks K2 SPORTS - Relative ground for refusal - No similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2013/C 79/32

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: K2 Sports Europe GmbH (Penzberg, Germany) (represented by: J. Güell Serra, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral and I. Harrington, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Karhu Sport Iberica, SL (Córdoba, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 29 November 2011 (Case R 986/2010-4), concerning opposition proceedings between K2 Sports Europe GmbH and Karhu Sport Iberica, SL.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders K2 Sports Europe GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders K2 Sports Europe GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 109, 14.4.2012.

1

---
No. 96-7876.

#### Baramdyka *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
No. 48217.

#### Protests 92672-K, etc., of Jean Patou, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The court found that the atomizers in question are similar to those passed upon in *Rice Co.*v. *United States,*T. D. 49373, which record was incorporated herein, and held them dutiable as household utensils at 40 percent under paragraph 339 as claimed.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1924 

To authorize States to enforce pipeline safety requirements related to 

wellbores at interstate storage facilities. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 30, 2011 

Mr. ROBERTS (for himself and Mr. MORAN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To authorize States to enforce pipeline safety requirements 

related to wellbores at interstate storage facilities. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Underground Gas 

5 Storage Facility Safety Act of 2011’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

7 Section 60101(a) of title 49, United States Code, is 

8 amended— 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1924 IS

1 (1) by redesignating paragraphs (20), (21), 

2 (22), (23), (24), and (25) as paragraphs (23), (24), 

3 (25), (20), (21), and (22), respectively; 

4 (2) in paragraph (21), as redesignated, by 

5 striking ‘‘and’’ at the end; 

6 (3) in paragraph (22), as redesignated, by 

7 striking the period at the end and inserting a semi8 colon; and 

9 (4) by adding at the end the following: 

10 ‘‘(26) ‘underground gas storage wellbore’ means 

11 the piping and hole drilled connecting the surface of 

12 the earth with the underground gas storage res13 ervoir; and 

14 ‘‘(27) ‘underground hazardous liquid storage 

15 wellbore’ means the piping and hole drilled con16 necting the surface of the earth with the under17 ground hazardous liquid storage reservoir.’’. 

18 SEC. 3. STATE ENFORCEMENT OF PIPELINE SAFETY RE19 QUIREMENTS. 

20 Section 60104(c) of title 49, United States Code, is 

21 amended— 

22 (1) by striking ‘‘A State authority that’’ and in23 serting the following: 

24 ‘‘(1) A State authority that’’; 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1924 IS

1 (2) by striking ‘‘A State authority may not’’ 

2 and inserting the following: 

3 ‘‘(2) A State authority may not’’; 

4 (3) by striking ‘‘Notwithstanding the preceding 

5 sentence, a State authority may enforce a require6 ment’’ and inserting the following: 

7 ‘‘(3) Notwithstanding the limitation set forth in 

8 paragraph (2), a State authority may— 

9 ‘‘(A) enforce a requirement’’; 

10 (4) by striking ‘‘chapter 61.’’ and inserting 

11 ‘‘chapter 61; and’’; and 

12 (5) by adding at the end the following: 

13 ‘‘(B) enforce a State requirement for the 

14 safe construction and operation of underground 

15 gas storage wellbores and underground haz16 ardous liquid storage wellbores if— 

17 ‘‘(i) the State requirement has been 

18 approved by the Federal Energy Regu19 latory Commission (referred to in this sub20 paragraph as the ‘Commission’); or 

21 ‘‘(ii) the Commission fails to make a 

22 decision with respect to the State require23 ment during the 30-day period beginning 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
4 

•S 1924 IS

1 on the date on which the State submits the 

2 State requirement to the Commission.’’. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. JUVENILE MLA, Appellant.

No. 98-1043.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted Sept. 30, 1998.

Decided Oct. 7, 1998.

Raymond R. DeGeest, Rapid City, SD, argued, for Appellant.

Ted L. McBride, Asst. U.S. Atty., Rapid City, SD, for Appellee.

Before McMILLIAN, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

RICHARD S. ARNOLD, Circuit Judge.

Juvenile MLA appeals from the District *617Court’s1 order transferring Mm for criminal prosecution as an adult. We affirm.

The government charged MLA with aggravated sexual abuse, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2241(a) and 1153, and sexual abuse, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2242 and 1153. The government then filed a motion under 18 U.S.C. § 5032 to transfer this ease to the District Court for proceedings against MLA as an adult. At a hearing on the motion, the government presented evidence that after an intoxicated and unconscious woman was carried into MLA’s house, MLA removed her clothing and had sexual intercourse with her; another person had sex with the victim; and MLA had sex with her again, at wMch time she woke up. The victim went to the hospital, and the attending physician’s report indicated that the victim’s vagina was bleeding very heavily, that her blood count was low, and that an immediate operation was necessary. The physician further indicated that there might be permanent damage to her reproductive organs, and that in his fifty years of practice, he had seen lacerations this severe only “in a patient in whom a tire iron was used.” The government also submitted evidence of MLA’s background, juvenile record, and treatment Mstory.

As required by Section 5032, the District Court made findings on specified factors. The Court found that the offense was committed sixteen days before MLA’s sixteenth birthday, and that MLA received little parental guidance and had a history of familial dysfunction. Referring to the offense as “particularly heinous,” the Court found that MLA committed two acts of sexual intercourse and that the victim was assaulted and extensively injured. The Court further found that MLA had been first arrested at age ten and had been arrested for several other offenses since that time; that there was evidence of borderline intellectual functioning and psychological immaturity; and that MLA had had difficulties in prior treatment programs, and had exhausted many of the available programs designed to treat juvenile behavior problems. On these findings, the District Court concluded transfer for adult prosecution was in the interest of justice.

We review transfer to adult status for an abuse of discretion, and the underlying factual findings for clear error. See *United States v. Juvenile JG,*139 F.3d 584, 586 (8th Cir.1998). After carefully reviewing the record and the parties’ submissions, we see no clear error and conclude the District Court did not abuse its discretion. We deny the parties’ motions to supplement the record.

Accordingly, we affirm.

1

. The Honorable Richard H. Battey, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of South Dakota.
610 S.E.2d 326

#### David Lee MOORE,Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Virginia, Appellee.

Record No. 2648-03-1.

Court of Appeals of Virginia.

March 22, 2005.

Before Chief Judge FITZPATRICK, Judges BENTON, ELDER, BUMGARDNER, FRANK, HUMPHREYS, CLEMENTS, FELTON, KELSEY, McCLANAHAN and HALEY.

Upon a Petition for Rehearing En Banc

On March 8, 2005 came the appellee, by the Attorney General of Virginia, and filed a petition praying that the Court set aside the judgment rendered herein on, February 22, 2005 and grant a rehearing *en banc*thereof.

On consideration whereof, the petition for rehearing *en banc*is granted, the mandate entered herein on February 22, 2005 is stayed pending the decision of the Court *en banc,*and the appeal is reinstated on the docket of this Court.

The parties shall file briefs in compliance with Rule 5A:35. The appellee shall attach as an addendum to the opening brief upon rehearing *en banc*a copy of the opinion previously rendered by the Court in this matter. It is further ordered that the appellee shall file with the clerk of this Court twelve additional copies of the appendix previously filed in this case.
# C_2014439EN.01000401.xml

| 8.12.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 439/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.12.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 439/4

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 9 October 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Teleklagenævnet — Denmark) — TDC A/S v Erhvervsstyrelsen

(Case C-222/13) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Electronic communications networks and services - Directive 2002/22/EC - Article 32 - Additional mandatory services - Compensation mechanism for the cost associated with providing those services - Meaning of ‘court or tribunal’ for the purposes of Article 267 TFEU - Lack of jurisdiction of the Court))

(2014/C 439/05)

Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Referring court

Teleklagenævnet

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: TDC A/S

Applicant:

Defendant: Erhvervsstyrelsen

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court of Justice of the European Union has no jurisdiction to answer the questions referred by the Teleklagenævnet (Denmark) in its decision of 22 April 2013.

---

(1)  OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.

1

---