alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal L 237/2016

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 237 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 593 September 2016 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 237

English edition

Legislation

Volume 593 September 2016

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1450 of 23 May 2016 supplementing Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards specifying the criteria relating to the methodology for setting the minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (
  1
  ) | 1 |
| | | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1451 of 2 September 2016 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables | 10 |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | * | Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/1452 of 2 September 2016 concerning certain interim protective measures relating to African swine fever in Poland
  (notified under document C(2016) 5708)

   (
  1
  ) | 12 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1450 of 23 May 2016 supplementing Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards specifying the criteria relating to the methodology for setting the minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (
  1
  )

1

1

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1451 of 2 September 2016 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

10

DECISIONS

*

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/1452 of 2 September 2016 concerning certain interim protective measures relating to African swine fever in Poland
  (notified under document C(2016) 5708)

   (
  1
  )

(notified under document C(2016) 5708)

1

12

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 151 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 151

 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the income 
    tax imposed on social security benefits should not be increased.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 2, 1993

 Mr. Smith of New Jersey (for himself, Mr. Fields of Texas, Mr. Roth, 
   Mr. Kyl, Mr. Lightfoot, Mr. Zimmer, Mrs. Fowler, Mr. Rogers, Mrs. 
    Vucanovich, Mr. Walsh, Mr. Dornan, Mr. Zeliff, and Mr. Canady) 
submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee 
                           on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the income 
    tax imposed on social security benefits should not be increased.

Whereas over 9,000,000 social security recipients would be adversely affected by 
        the President's current proposal of an increase in the tax on social 
        security benefits;
Whereas those affected by this tax increase would pay on average an extra $483 
        per year;
Whereas without an inflation adjustment, the percentage of affected seniors who 
        would in effect be taxed twice on the same income will rise 
        significantly in 5 years;
Whereas under the President's current proposals, middle class senior citizens 
        would be expected to pay more taxes not only on social security 
        benefits, but also on Medicare premiums and energy costs;
Whereas the proposed increase in the tax on social security benefits is the only 
        part of the President's plan which is conceded to be a tax increase on a 
        segment of the middle class;
Whereas many senior citizens on fixed incomes cannot be without these much-
        needed benefits in this current economic climate;
Whereas senior citizens have historically been the target of numerous measures 
        to place on them heavy burdens, such as proposed freezes in their cost-
        of-living adjustment and the initial implementation of the tax on social 
        security benefits;
Whereas such a tax increase would affect not only current middle- and upper-
        class senior citizens but also millions of future social security 
        beneficiaries, and
Whereas almost three-quarters of all Americans oppose an increase in taxation on 
        social security benefits: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
the income tax imposed on social security benefits should not be 
increased.

                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 15

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Shareholders

Frischs Restaurants, Inc.

We have
reviewed the accompanying interim consolidated balance sheet of Frischs Restaurants, Inc. (an Ohio Corporation) and subsidiaries as of March 5, 2006, the related consolidated statements of earnings, shareholders equity and cash
flows for the forty and twelve week periods ended March 5, 2006 and March 6, 2005. These interim financial statements are the responsibility of the Companys management.

We conducted our reviews in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). A review of interim financial information consists principally of applying analytical
procedures and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and accounting matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, the objective of which is the expression
of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.

As
discussed in Note B, the consolidated financial statements have been restated.

Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modifications that
should be made to the accompanying financial statements for them to be in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

We have previously audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheet as of May 29, 2005, and the related consolidated statements of earnings,
shareholders equity and cash flows for the year then ended (not presented herein); and in our report dated July 22, 2005, except for Note B as to which the date is February 17, 2006, we expressed an unqualified opinion on those
consolidated financial statements.



|                      
|----------------------
|GRANT THORNTON LLP    
|                      
|/s/ Grant Thornton LLP
|Cincinnati, Ohio      
|April 10, 2006
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>



<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S UNAUDITED BALANCE SHEET AS OF JUNE 30, 1998 AND UNAUDITED
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NINE MONTHS THEN ENDED AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                         993,976
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,011,999
<ALLOWANCES>                                    91,333
<INVENTORY>                                  1,548,991
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,803,091
<PP&E>                                         710,503
<DEPRECIATION>                                  85,484
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,194,217
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,175,849
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        49,630
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,968,738
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,194,217
<SALES>                                      9,265,256
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,265,256
<CGS>                                        6,285,992
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                8,878,487
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             236,929
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                759,549
<INCOME-TAX>                                   303,818
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            455,731
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   455,731
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .08
        


</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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 Quarterly Report of Fresenius Medical Care Holdings, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Ben J. Lipps, Chief Executive 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:

      (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 result of operations of the
Company.



/s/ Ben J. Lipps
______________________________
Ben J. Lipps
Chief Executive Officer
August 14, 2002
<PAGE>   1





                                                                      EXHIBIT 15





September 24, 1997


Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20549

Dear Sirs:

We are aware that the August 10, 1997 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of General
Host Corporation which includes our report dated September 4, 1997 (issued
pursuant to the provisions of Statements on Auditing Standards No. 71 and 42),
is incorporated by reference in its Registration Statement No. 33-50020 on Form
S-8 filed on July 27, 1992 and its Registration Statement No. 333-32845 on Form
S-8 filed on August 5, 1997.  We are also aware of our responsibilities under
the Securities Act of 1933.


Yours very truly,

Price Waterhouse LLP
Detroit, Michigan
#### THE STATE vs. PETER BUCKLEY.

Disorderly house—definition.

Indicted for keeping a disorderly house.

Chief Justice

Booth defined the offence of keeping a disorderly house as consisting not merely in the sale of liquor, whether lawfully or unlawfully; but in the improper government and control of the house, and the consequent results of public injury to the neighborhood. Every'man is responsible for the good government of his house or store, so far as the public is concerned; and the footway or pavement before a man’s store máy, by his permission and encouragement, be so used in connection with his house as to become for this purpose a part of his house, which he is required to exercise a proper control and restraint over. If a man keeping a store and selling liquor, whether lawfully or unlawfully, permit persons to collect there in crowds, who under the influence of liquor there obtained, are noisy and riotous, and by their cursing and swearing, or other misbehavior, disturb the neighborhood generally, and to the general annoyance of the people there residing or being, he is guilty of keeping a disorderly house, and indictable for maintaining a nuisance.
<PAGE>   1
Exhibit 12

GTE California Incorporated and Subsidiary
STATEMENT OF THE CONSOLIDATED RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

(Thousands of Dollars)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                   Nine Months Ended
                                                                   September 30, 1997
                                                                   ------------------
<S>                                                                <C>
Net earnings available for fixed charges:                         
  Income from continuing operations                                $          416,556
  Add - Income taxes                                                          267,789
      - Fixed charges                                                          92,781
                                                                   ------------------
Adjusted earnings                                                  $          771,126
                                                                   ==================

Fixed charges:
  Interest expense                                                 $           81,810
  Portion of rent expense
     representing interest                                                     10,971
                                                                   ------------------
Adjusted fixed charges                                             $           92,781
                                                                   ==================

RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES                                               8.38
</TABLE>
IV

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 102

Providing for the consideration of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 22) proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating

to voluntary prayer in the schools.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 23, 1993

Mr. STEARNS submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Rules

RESOLUTION

Providing for the consideration of the joint resolution (H.J.

Res. 22) proposing an amendment to the Constitution

of the United States relating to voluntary prayer in

the schools.

1 Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this

2 resolution the House shall resolve itself into the Commit3 tee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the

4 consideration of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 22) pro5 posing an amendment to the Constitution of the United

6 States relating to voluntary prayer in public schools, and

7 the first reading of the resolution shall be dispensed with.

8 After general debate which shall be confined to the joint
2

•HRES 102 IH

1 resolution and which shall not exceed two hours to be con2 trolled by Representative Duncan of Tennessee, the joint

3 resolution shall be considered for amendment under the

4 five-minute rule. At the conclusion of the consideration of

5 the joint resolution for amendment the Committee shall

6 rise and report the joint resolution to the House with such

7 amendments as may have been adopted, and the previous

8 question shall be considered as ordered on the joint resolu9 tion and amendments thereto to final passage without in10 tervening motion except one motion to recommit.

Æ
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. AP-77,041

BRIAN SUNIGA, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

ON DIRECT APPEAL FROM CAUSE NO. 2012-434109

IN THE 140 JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

TH

LUBBOCK COUNTY

Per curiam.

ORDER

The above-styled and numbered cause is pending before this Court as a result of

appellant’s capital murder conviction and resulting sentence of death in the 140 Judicial

th

District Court of Lubbock County, Cause No. 2012-434109, styled The State of Texas v.

Brian Suniga. Appellant has filed in this Court a motion entitled “Further Motion to

Abate Appeal for Completion of the Appellate Record.”

1

This Court previously abated this case for supplementation of the record on May

1

20, 2015. A supplemental clerk’s record and a supplemental reporter’s record were filed

(continued...)
Suniga – 2

In his motion, appellant contends that Lieutenant Billy Koontz of the Lubbock

County Sheriff’s Office was “brought before the [trial] court and interviewed on May 2,

2014” regarding an alleged violation of the trial court’s gag order. Appellant contends

that the transcript of that proceeding “does not appear in the Reporter’s Record as it

currently stands.” Appellate counsel states that she “has attempted to contact the court

reporter to request the transcript,” but she “has not yet received a response.” Appellant

further contends that Chief Deputy Cody Scott of the Lubbock County Sheriff’s Office

may have also been questioned regarding the gag order, “[a]lthough the record does not

reflect whether Chief Deputy Scott was ever interviewed by the trial court, or appeared at

a hearing[.]”

We abate the appeal and remand this cause to the trial court to resolve this issue.

The trial court is directed to make findings of fact regarding whether any proceedings

involving Koontz and/or Scott were transcribed by the court reporter, and if so, whether

the transcripts were omitted from the reporter’s record that was sent to this Court. If

these items have been omitted, then the trial court shall direct the court reporter to

prepare, certify, and file in this Court a supplemental record containing the omitted items.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 34.6(d).

The findings shall be made and any necessary supplements shall be filed within 30

(...continued)

1

in this Court on June 22, 2015.
Suniga – 3

days of the date of this order. Appellant’s brief will be due in this Court within 14 days

thereafter.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 16 DAY OF DECEMBER, 2015.

th

Do not publish
#### PAYNTER & WIFE *vs.*JENIFER TAYLOR.

After judgment, execution and sale of land on foreign attachment, it is too late to object that the defendant, being a citizen, was not liable to this form of suit.

Foreign attachment. Land attached, as per inquisition; judgment ; fieri facias; levy on land and inquisition ; venditioni exponas, and sale of defendant’s lands.

A motion was now made by *Mr. Comegys,*in behalf of other creditors of Jenifer Taylor, on affidavit filed that Taylor was and had been from his birth, a resident of the State, for a rule to show causé why the attachment should not be dissolved.

*393
      *Mr. Fisher*

objected to the rule, that it was too late, and came from improper parties. He argued that after judgment and execution, it was not competent for. the defendant, much less for third parties, to set aside the judgment for informality of process.

*Mr. Oomegys*

said, that time had nothing to do with it. The contest is between creditors. The affiants are judgment creditors. They claim the right to controvert the judgment of plaintiffs, because they are interested to exclude it. The proceeds of sale are not sufficient to pay all. They had no interest to controvert the judgment of plaintiffs, until it appeared by a sale that the defendant’s property was not sufficient to pay the judgment creditors. And if the proceeding in this case be illegal, they may, at any time, exclude it from application of the proceeds of sale. He cited *McCaulley*vs. Shute, ante. 26.

*Mr. Fisher*

replied, that it was not reasonable to allow either the defendant or his other creditors to object to the form of action upon which this judgment was obtained, after judgment and execution. Reasonable diligence would bring them in sooner, especially where it appears that the defendant was in the county and in the court, as appears by his confession of judgment to the other creditors.

*Mr.*Comegys.

If he had confessed judgment in this, as in the other cases, they would all stand on the same footing; but the plaintiff chose to attempt getting ahead of all other creditors, by suing out a foreign attachment, and he must see that the judgment founded upon it is regular and legal. The court discharged the rule.

Comegys, for the rule.

Fisher, contra.
#### Edward J. SHARRETTS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 67-250.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Oct. 17, 1967.

Edward J. Sharretts, in pro. per.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Barry N. Semet, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before CHARLES CARROLL, C. J., and PEARSON and BARKDULL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Following his trial and conviction for robbery the appellant prosecuted an appeal to this court, and we affirmed. See Shar-retts v. State, Fla.App.1966, 186 So.2d 41. Subsequently he filed a motion for relief under Criminal Procedure Rule 1. His present appeal is from an order of the trial court summarily denying the motion. No basis to disturb the trial court’s ruling has been shown on this appeal. Moreover, the validity and admissibility of the confession and the matter of advice of right .to counsel were considered and determined on the earlier appeal.

Affirmed.