alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### DELTIC FARM & TIMBER COMPANY, INC., et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR the FIFTH LOUISIANA LEVEE DISTRICT, Defendant-Appellant. ANDERSON-TULLY COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR the FIFTH LOUISIANA LEVEE DISTRICT, Defendant-Appellant.

Nos. 13413, 13414.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit.

Dec. 5, 1977.

*1106C. Calvin Adams, Jr., Tallulah, for Bd. of Com’rs for the Fifth Louisiana Levee Dist., defendant-appellant; Jerry B. Daye, Ferri-day, of counsel.

Voelker, Ragland, Brackin & Crigler, by Frank Voelker, Jr., Lake Providence, for plaintiffs-appellees, Deltic Farm & Timber Co., Inc., et ál. and Anderson-Tully Co., plaintiffs-appellees.

Before PRICE, HALL and JONES, JJ.

JONES, Judge.

In these consolidated suits defendant appeals from a judgment recognizing plaintiffs’ lands taken by defendant for levee purposes were not subject to the levee servitude provided for in Civil Code Art. 665, and for this reason could not be appropriated. The court held fair market value must be paid for the land to compensate plaintiffs as in an expropriation proceeding.

Prior to trial the parties stipulated that only the legal issue of appropriation versus expropriation was to be tried and the issue of damages was specifically reserved for subsequent trial, in the event the court found the property subject to expropriation. This stipulation was incorporated in a pretrial order by the court. The case was tried in this posture.

This appeal presents the question as to whether this court has jurisdiction over an appeal from a judgment deciding the legal issue of expropriation vs. appropriation and reserving the issue of damages. Code of Civil Procedure Art. 2083 provides:

> “An appeal may be taken from a final judgment rendered in causes in which appeals are given by law whether rendered after hearing or by default, and from an interlocutory judgment which may cause irreparable injury.”

Judgments rendered in tort cases where only liability and not quantum had been tried have been held not to be final judgments within the provisions of C.C.P. Art. 2083 and not appealable. *Celestine v. Hub City Motors, Inc.,*327 So.2d 700 (La.App., 3d Cir. 1976); *Bettencourtt v. Boyd,*209 So.2d 339 (La.App., 1st Cir. 1968); *Jeansonne v. Willie,*188 So.2d 170 (La.App., 4th Cir. 1966). This case poses the identical situation where the issue of defendant’s liability to plaintiffs for market value and severance damages was tried and the amount to which plaintiffs were entitled was to be determined in subsequent trial. The case presents an example of piecemeal litigation which fosters multiplicity of trials and appeals. *Celestine v. Hub City Motors, Inc., supra.*

The defendant’s appeal is dismissed because the judgment appealed from is neither a final judgment nor an interlocutory judgment causing irreparable injury. C.C.P. Art. 2083.

The case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings. All costs on appeal are assessed against appellant.
#### SEABOARD COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant, v. Jack E. WELLINGTON, as father of Sue Ann Wellington, a deceased minor, Appellee.

No. 69-639.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 15, 1970.

Appeal dismissed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1998
<CASH>                                       4,504,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,459,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   512,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             8,009,000
<PP&E>                                       4,827,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,833,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              13,034,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,090,000
<BONDS>                                         80,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        83,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,722,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                13,034,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,807,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,746,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                86,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,142,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   424,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            718,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   718,000      
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .08
        

</TABLE>
#### Donald H. GROSE, II, Relator, v. Robert W. TYSON, Judge of the Circuit Court of Broward County, Respondent.

No. 73-112.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Feb. 6, 1973.

Prohibition denied.
#### FLORIDA NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, etc., and Olive Jane Jeffries, etc., Petitioners, v. George W. HICKEY et al., Respondents.

No. 42642.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June 8, 1973.

Certiorari dismissed. 263 So.2d 269.

CARLTON, C. J., and ERVIN, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., and GALE, C. J., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-02-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-02-1999
<CASH>                                             413
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,542
<ALLOWANCES>                                       122
<INVENTORY>                                      1,052
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 4,718
<PP&E>                                           2,581
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   7,340
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         34
<COMMON>                                            94
<OTHER-SE>                                         899
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     7,340
<SALES>                                         16,466
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                16,466
<CGS>                                           16,702
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   30,122
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (301)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (13,914)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (13,914)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (13,914)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.49)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.49)
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT
23.1




CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM








The Board
of Directors


Hyperdynamics
Corporation


Houston,
Texas








We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form
S-8 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on January 12, 2006 (File
No. 333-130976); the Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on March 18, 2008 (File No. 333-149774);
and the Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on January 23, 2008 (File No. 333-148287), of our report
dated September 30, 2008, relating to the consolidated financial statements as
of June 30, 2008 and for the year ended June 30, 2008 appearing in the Annual
Report on Form 10-K of Hyperdynamics Corporation for the year ended June 30,
2009.








/s/ MaloneBailey,
LLP


www.malone-bailey.com


Houston,
Texas





May 6,
2010
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Matthew LARRY.

No. 60932.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 14, 1977.

In re: Matthew Larry applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and stay order.

Writ refused. No merit in application.
**Exhibit 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF ACCOUNTING OFFICER**
Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. §1350)
I, Carol M. Herndon, Chief Accounting Officer, certify that:     1) I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Delhaize America,Inc.;     2) Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary tomake the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered bythis quarterly report;     3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cashflows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisquarterly report;     4) The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:       a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this quarterly report is being prepared;       b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this quarterly report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this quarterlyreport based on such evaluation; and       c) disclosed in this quarterly report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and     5) The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s boardof directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):       a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and       b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.
Dated: November 12, 2003          /s/ Carol M. Herndon
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                            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 Benihana Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K/A for the period ended March 27, 2005 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael R. Burris,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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


/s/ Michael R. Burris
-----------------------------------------
Michael R. Burris
Chief Financial Officer

July 25, 2005


                                       19
# C_2013378EN.01003101.xml

| 24.12.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 378/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.12.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 378/31

---

Notification of the Slovak Republic Government pursuant to Article 10(2) of Directive 2009/72/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Electricity Directive’) concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity regarding the designation of Slovenská elektrizačná prenosová sústava, a. s. as transmission system operator in the Slovak Republic — Electricity TSO

2013/C 378/16

Following the Slovak Republic regulatory authority's final decision of 14 October 2013 regarding the certification of Slovenská elektrizačná prenosová sústava, a. s. as ownership unbundled transmission system operator (Article 9 of the Electricity Directive), the Slovak Republic has notified to the Commission the official approval and designation of this company as a transmission system operator operating in the Slovak Republic in accordance with Article 10 of the Electricity Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council.

Any additional information can be obtained at the following address:

| Ministry of Economy |
| --- |
| Mierová 19 |
| 827 15 Bratislava 212 |
| SLOVENSKO/SLOVAKIA |
| http://www.economy.gov.sk |

Ministry of Economy

Mierová 19

827 15 Bratislava 212

SLOVENSKO/SLOVAKIA

http://www.economy.gov.sk

---
#### FLORIDA CITRUS COMMISSION, Appellant, v. HI-ACRES CONCENTRATE, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 2172.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Oct. 29, 1969.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 24, 1969.

Monterey Campbell, III, and William P. Tomasello, of Tomasello, Campbell, Dunlap & Norris, Bartow, for appellant.

*708Gregory A. Presnell, of Akerman, Sen-terfitt, Eidson, Mesmer, Robbinson & Wharton, Orlando, for appellee.

OWEN, Judge.

In this suit for declaratory judgment and injuctive relief, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff, enjoining the Florida Citrus Commission from enforcing its regulations requiring that composition type containers used for retail packs of frozen concentrated citrus juice have an “easy open” feature, on the grounds that the same were unconstitutional.

We affirm the judgment. The affidavits upon which the appellant relied in the trial court establish without contradiction that the purpose of the regulation was to improve the quality of containers used in the citrus industry, thereby selling more citrus juice and thus protecting and promoting the general economic welfare of the Florida citrus industry.

The regulation, to be valid, must bear some reasonable relationship to protection of public safety, health, morals, and general welfare. Stadnik v. Shell’s City, Inc., Fla.1962, 140 So.2d 871. Although the power of the state to make regulations for the protection of its citrus industry under its police power has been sustained many times, the exercise of the police power in this particular field cannot be properly exercised beyond such reasonable interference with the liberty of action of individuals as is reasonably necessary to preserve and protect the public health and welfare. Florida Citrus Commission v. Golden Gift, Inc., Fla. 1956, 91 So.2d 657.

The commission’s determination that requiring the composite type can to have the easy open feature would benefit the citrus industry by increased sale of citrus juices, is simply a determination by such administrative agency that using such type containers would result in economic benefits to the industry. This alone is not a valid basis upon which such regulation can be justified. Cf. Abdo v. City of Daytona Beach, Fla.App.1962, 147 So.2d 598. If this type of container will result in increased sales, the free enterprise system will appropriately adjust to the voluntary use of this type of container without the necessity of mandatory regulations.

Affirmed.

McCAIN and REED, JJ„ concur.
<PAGE>

Exhibit 32.1

                             Certificate 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 Multi-Media Tutorial Services,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended February 28, 2006 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Barry Reichman, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         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 as of and for the period covered by
                  the Report.


Date: June 15, 2006                       /s/ Barry Reichman
                                          ------------------
                                          Barry Reichman
                                          Chief Executive Officer and Director,
                                          Chief Financial Officer
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



The Board of Directors
Coastal Financial Corporation:

We consent to incorporation  by reference in the registration  statement on Form
S-8 of Coastal  Financial  Corporation  of our report  dated  October 27,  1999,
relating  to the  consolidated  statements  of  financial  condition  of Coastal
Financial  Corporation  and  subsidiaries as of September 30, 1999 and 1998, and
the related  consolidated  statements of  operations,  stockholders'  equity and
comprehensive  income,  and cash  flows for each of the years in the  three-year
period ended  September 30, 1999,  which report is  incorporated by reference in
the  September  30,  1999,  Annual  Report  on Form  10-K of  Coastal  Financial
Corporation.




                                                                   /s/KPMG LLP
                                                                   -----------
                                                                      KPMG LLP



Greenville, South Carolina
December 29, 1999
1

Medina, Dayana

From: Pettyjohn, Mary <PETTYJOHN@adeq.state.ar.us>

Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 10:07 AM

To: Medina, Dayana

Subject: FW: Entergy Arkansas, Inc. - Lake Catherine Unit 4 - BART FFA

Attachments: LC U4 FFA Cover Letter.pdf; LC U4 BART FFA - Final 03-04-2013.pdf

Hi Dayana,

Here is Entergy’s Lake Catherine BART analysis.  Please share with the group.

Thank you,

Mary

From: Triplett, David [mailto:dtripl1@entergy.com] 

Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 9:33 AM 

To: Bates, Mike 

Cc: Bassett, Karen; Spencer, Stuart; Pettyjohn, Mary; GLOVER, MYRA H; GUNN, TOMMY REID; McQueen, Kelly; 

JOHNSON, GEORGE; HANTZ, JOSEPH; 'Jeremy Jewell'; Kasi Dubbs 

Subject: Entergy Arkansas, Inc. - Lake Catherine Unit 4 - BART FFA 

Mike, 

Please find the attached BART 5-factor analysis and cover letter for Unit 4 at Entergy’s Lake Catherine facility. A hard 

copy will be hand-delivered later this morning. 

Thanks. 

David Triplett, P.E.

Air Lead, Arkansas Environmental Support

Entergy Services, Inc.

(501) 377-4030 (office) | (501) 650-1752 (cell) | (281) 297-6126 (fax)
#### Larry Eugene BLEHM, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 41053.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June 10, 1971.

Certiorari denied. 245 So.2d 703.

ROBERTS, C. J., and BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

ERVIN, J, dissents.
255 La. 337

#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Lawrence HENDERSON v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 50372.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 13, 1970.

In re: Lawrence Henderson applying for writ of habeas corpus.

Writs refused. The showing made does not warrant the exercise of either our original or supervisory jurisdiction.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET OF FANSTEEL INC. AS OF JUNE 30, 2000 AND THE RELATED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2000 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO THE FORM 10-Q FILING FOR THE
PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 2000.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         133,634
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               22,542,538
<ALLOWANCES>                                   414,322
<INVENTORY>                                 21,530,884
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            46,831,117
<PP&E>                                      73,067,922
<DEPRECIATION>                              53,340,490
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             105,823,248
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       25,046,818
<BONDS>                                      2,042,753
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    21,747,145
<OTHER-SE>                                  38,088,251
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               105,823,248
<SALES>                                     78,052,963
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            78,052,963
<CGS>                                       63,005,362
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               73,131,380
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (127,129)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              (41,400)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              49,944
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              5,048,712
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,723,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          3,325,712
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,325,712
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .39


</TABLE>
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement of
Intercardia, Inc. on Form S-8 (File No. 333-12923) of our report dated October
24, 1997, except as to the information presented in Note M, for which the date
is November 5, 1997, on our audits of the consolidated financial statements of
Intercardia, Inc. as of September 30, 1997 and September 30, 1996 and for each
of the three years in the period ended September 30, 1997, which report is
included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.


Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.
Raleigh, North Carolina
December 18, 1997