alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
O rder filed June 23, 2016



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

_____ _ ____ No. 11

- 1 6

- 00 167

- CV

__________ JOE PAYNE , Appellant

V.
TRACI KIM COURSEY , Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2

Midland County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 17623

O R D E R Joe Payne filed a notice of appeal from a n order in which the trial court granted Traci Kim Coursey ’s m otion for no

- evidence summary judgment and entered a take

nothing judgment against Payne on all causes of action asserted by him. After this appeal was filed, Coursey filed a motion to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction
and informed this court that the order from which Payne appealed was not final because Coursey has a pending coun terclaim for damages against Payne. Coursey
attached a file

- stamped copy of the counterclaim to her motion . We note that the2

order from which Payne appeals does not contain any language indicating that it is a final, appealable order. T he order , therefo re, did not dispose of the claim for
affirmative relief asserted by Coursey against Payne and, thus, does not appear to be a final, appealable order

. B ecause we do not believe the order is a final, appealable order, we abate the appeal. Unless specifically authorized by statute, appeals may be taken only from final judgments. Tex. A & M Univ. Sys. v. Koseoglu , 233 S.W.3d 835, 840

– 41 (Tex. 2007); Lehmann v. Har

– Con Corp. , 39 S.W.3d 191 , 195 (Tex. 2001). We determine whether a judgment is a final, appealable judgment based on the language in the judgment and the record of the case. Lehmann , 39 S.W.3d at 195

. A judgment is final and appealable if it disposes of all parties and all claims in the case. Id. The
order from which Payne attem pts to appeal does not dispose of the various claims
for affirmative relief asserted by Coursey against Payne , nor does the order contain any language indicating t hat it is final and appealable. Therefore, it is not a final
, appealable order. See id. at 205

– 06. Consequently, we abate the appeal pursuant to T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 27.2 to permit
the trial court to enter a final order or judgment. If a final, appealable order or judgment has not been entered by August 22 , 201 6 , this court may dismiss th is

appea l. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3. If a final judgment is entered by that date, t he parties are ordered to notify this court immediately

. The appeal is abated.

PER CURIAM

June 23, 2016
P anel consists of: Wright, C.J., Willson, J. , and Bailey, J

.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

Appellate case name: Antonio Ruiz Perez V. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01-12-01001-CR

Trial court case number: 1309538

Trial court: 339th District Court of Harris County

Date motion filed: March 31, 2015

Party filing motion: The State of Texas

It is ordered that the motion for rehearing is DENIED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Evelyn V. Keyes

 Acting for the Court

Panel consists of: Justices Keyes, Higley, and Massengale

Date: April 14, 2015
**Exhibit 23.1****Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Forms S-8 Nos.333-06409, 333-25245, 333-35745, 333-57031, 333-68499, 333-83927, 333-86861, 333-32380, 333-46640,333-58334, 333-73882, 333-99093, 333-100130, 333-112094, 333-118864, 333-131292, 333-133292,333-138859 and 333-147617) of SkillSoft Public Limited Company of our reports dated March 28, 2008,with respect to the consolidated financial statements of SkillSoft Public Limited Company, and theeffectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of SkillSoft Public Limited Companyincluded in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended January 31, 2008./s/ Ernst & Young LLPBoston, Massachusetts
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                           UT
<CIK> 0000053456
<NAME> JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000
<CURRENCY>                                  US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    2,873,493
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                    490,058
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         382,200
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       930,806
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,676,557
<COMMON>                                       153,713
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      510,769
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            915,717
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>               1,580,199
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          216,500    <F1>
<PREFERRED>                                     37,741
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                         1,173,364
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                       11
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                       12,500
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                77,616
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>               1,578,626
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                4,676,557
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      472,334
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            32,476
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     362,016
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     394,492
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         77,842
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                               1,487
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  79,329
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        26,513    <F2>
<NET-INCOME>                                    52,816
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                      2,738
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   50,078
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        10,000    <F3>
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                       88,893
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                         191,308
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1> INCLUDES COMPANY-OBLIGATED MANDATORILY REDEEMABLE PREFERRED
<F1> SECURITIES OF $125,000.
<F2> INCLUDES DIVIDENDS ON COMPANY-OBLIGATED MANDATORILY REDEEMABLE
<F2> PREFERRED SECURITIES OF $2,675.
<F3> REPRESENTS COMMON STOCK DIVIDENDS PAID TO PARENT CORPORATION.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
**Pennsylvania ’s**  **Portable Fuel Container Amendment**

The file size of this document is greater than 50MB. Because of its unusually large size, this document is not available for download from www.regulations.gov . C opies of this document are available for public inspection at the EPA Region III address listed in the Federal Register Proposed Rules document. For further information, EPA Region III’s point of contact (POC) is listed in this docket. 2009 Projected Gas Containers Excel Spreadsheet 2018 Projected Gas Containers Excel Spreadsheet MANEVU_2002_Area_040606 MANEVU2009AreaV3_1 MANEVU2018AreaV3_1 Portable Gas Containers 5

- 2

- 13 Portable gas containers read me Portable Gas Containers
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
JOHNSTON INDUSTRIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF
OCTOBER 3, 1998 AND 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>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-03-1998
<CASH>                                       1,236,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               41,557,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,738,000
<INVENTORY>                                 55,936,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           108,319,000
<PP&E>                                     241,314,000
<DEPRECIATION>                             136,299,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             229,691,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      104,438,000
<BONDS>                                    128,286,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,246,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  46,471,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               229,691,000
<SALES>                                    218,474,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           218,474,000
<CGS>                                      175,639,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              175,639,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            15,500,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               627,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          10,141,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (3,256,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                (1,893,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,363,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,363,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.13)
        

</TABLE>
#### Micklethwait *v.*City of Portsmouth et al.

*Supreme Court*— Insufficient *record for review*— No *bill of exceptions*— Conditional *bids for public improvement.*

(No. 18320

Decided June 3, 1924.)

Error to the Court of Appeals of Scioto county.

*Mr. Joseph T. Michlethwait*and *Messrs. Miller & 8earl,*for plaintiff in error.

*Messrs. Bannom & Bannon; Mr. S'herrard M. Johnson*and *Messrs. Andrews, Andrews & Rogers,*for defendants in error.

By the Court.

This cause has been admitted to this court on error from the Court of Appeals of Scioto county, in which court it was heard upon appeal. In the hearing upon appeal there was an agreement between the parties that the evidence which had been introduced in the court of common pleas should be submitted as the evidence in the hearing in the Court of Appeals. The principal issue in the case was whether bids which had been submitted for constructing street improvements were conditional bids and whether for that reason they were invalid. The evidence submitted included a communication addressed by the bidder to the city, accompanying the bids, and the Court of Appeals in rendering final judgment, in its journal entry, found as a fact that the communication did not render the bids conditional bids and did not affect in any way the validity of the bids submitted. The plaintiff in error has assumed that the agreement above referred to, and the finding *515of the court, as shown *by*the entry, would dispense with the necessity for a bill of exceptions, and, therefore, no bill of exceptions has been allowed. This court is of the opinion that the agreement between the parties related only to the procedure in the Court of Appeals, and, inasmuch as the finding of fact was against the plaintiff in error upon the evidence submitted, and this court does not have before it the evidence upon which that finding was made, this court can only consider the pleadings and the judgment of the Court of Appeals. The answer in the trial court being a denial of the allegations of the petition there is nothing for this Court to consider. The judgment of the Court of Appeals will therefore be affirmed.

Judgment• *affirmed.*

Marshall, C. J., Robinson, Jones, Matthias, Day and Allen, JJ., concur.

Wanamaker, J., not participating.
259 La. 757

#### Lee Paul MANUEL, Sr. v. JENNINGS LUMBER COMPANY, Inc., et al.

No. 51586.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 28, 1971.

In re: Lee Paul Manuel Sr., applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Jefferson Davis. 248 So.2d 908.

Application denied; the showing made does not warrant the granting of the writ.
# Official Journal L 177/2006

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 177 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 4930 June 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 177

English edition

Legislation

Volume 4930 June 2006

---

| Contents | | I   Acts whose publication is obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | * | Directive 2006/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2006 relating to the taking up and pursuit of the business of credit institutions (recast)
   (1) | 1 |
| | * | Directive 2006/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2006 on the capital adequacy of investment firms and credit institutions (recast) | 201 |

Contents

I   Acts whose publication is obligatory

page

*

Directive 2006/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2006 relating to the taking up and pursuit of the business of credit institutions (recast)
   (1)

1

*

Directive 2006/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2006 on the capital adequacy of investment firms and credit institutions (recast)

201

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

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

| 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.
# Official Journal C 41/2022

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 41 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6527 January 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 41

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6527 January 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 41/01 | Euro exchange rates — 26 January 2022 | 1 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2022/C 41/01

Euro exchange rates — 26 January 2022

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
|                                   |                                                                                                                                          |                                                    |
|----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------|
| Date:                February 14, 2007 |                                                                                                                                     | /s/ Howard                S.                Modlin |
|                                   | Howard                S. ModlinChairman                  of the Board, President andChief                  Executive                  Officer |

|         |                                                                                                                                                                    |                                     |
|--------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|
|    |                                                                                                                                                               |                                |
|         |                                                                                                                                                               | /s/ William                G. Henry |
|         | William                G. Henry                Vice                  President, Finance and Administrationand                  Chief Financial                  Officer |

----
#### Matthew Allen MASTERS, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. II-440.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 11, 1978.

Rehearing Denied June 15, 1978.

Ronald A. Nour, Daytona Beach, for petitioner.

William K. Howell, Jr., Senior Asst. County Atty., Volusia County, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner/defendant filed a motion to tax costs against Volusia County seeking to recover certain appellate costs. Defendant urges the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law by denying this motion.

Defendant was tried and convicted upon a three count information for certain alleged drug offenses. In *Masters*v. *State,*344 So.2d 616 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977), cert. den., 352 So.2d 173 (Fla.1977), the judgment and sentence as to he third count of the information (misdemeanor possession of marijuana) was remanded with directions that it be vacated and set aside. The judgments and sentences as to the remaining counts were affirmed; however, the cause was remanded to the trial court to set aside one or the other of the concurrent sentences under the single transaction rule.

Recovery and allowance of costs in criminal cases is solely dependent on statutory provisions. See *Wood v. City of Jacksonville,*248 So.2d 176 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971). Section 939.15, Florida Statutes (1975), provides:

> “When the defendant in any criminal case pending in any circuit or county court, a district court of appeal or the supreme court of this state has been adjudged insolvent . . *., or when the defendant is discharged or the judgment reversed,*the costs allowed by law shall be paid by the county in which the crime was committed, . . ” (emphasis supplied).

*1144We construe Section 939.15 as applicable solely to costs attributable to the charge as to which the defendant was discharged or for which the judgment was reversed. The defendant has failed to sustain his burden of proof that any portion of the costs claimed herein were so attributable. Accordingly, the petition for writ of certiorari is DENIED.

McCORD, C. J., and BOYER and MELVIN, JJ., concur.
#### CITY OF HOLLYWOOD, Florida, et al., Petitioners, v. Morris FERRARO, as father of Kenneth Ferraro, deceased, Respondent.

No. 41652.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Nov. 23, 1971.

Certiorari denied. 252 So.2d 411.

ERVIN, Acting C. J., and CARLTON, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 411 Agreed to House (ATH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 411

       Expressing the profound regret and sorrow of the House of 
Representatives on the death of Richard Milhous Nixon, former President 
                    of the United States of America.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 25, 1994

Mr. Michel submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 
                               agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
       Expressing the profound regret and sorrow of the House of 
Representatives on the death of Richard Milhous Nixon, former President 
                    of the United States of America.

    Resolved, That the House of Representatives has learned with 
profound regret and sorrow of the death of Richard Milhous Nixon, 
former President of the United States of America.
    Resolved, That in recognition of the many virtues, public and 
private, of one who served with distinction as Representative, Senator, 
Vice President, and President, the Speaker shall appoint committees of 
the House to join with such Members of the Senate as may be designated, 
to attend the funeral services of the former President.
    Resolved, That the House tenders its deep sympathy to the members 
of the family of the former President in their sad bereavement.
    Resolved, That the Sergeant at Arms of the House be authorized and 
directed to take such steps as may be necessary for carrying out the 
provisions of these resolutions, and that the necessary expenses in 
connection there-with be paid out of the contingent fund of the House.
    Resolved, That the Clerk communicate these resolutions to the 
Senate and transmit a copy of the same to the family of the former 
President.
    Resolved, That when the House adjourns today, it adjourn as a 
further mark of respect to the memory of the former President.

                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 129 (Thursday, July 5, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 31390]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14417]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Notice of Request for Additional Information

    The Commission gives notice that it has formally requested that the 
parties to the below listed agreements provide additional information 
pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 40304(d). This action prevents the agreements 
from becoming effective as originally scheduled. Interested parties may 
file comments within fifteen (15) days after publication of this notice 
appears in the Federal Register.
    Agreement No.: 201143-017.
    Title: West Coast MTO Agreement.
    Parties: APM Terminals Pacific, Ltd.; Eagle Marine Services, Ltd.; 
Everport Terminal Services Inc.; International Transportation Service, 
Inc.; LBCT LLC; Pacific Maritime Services, L.L.C.; SSA Terminals (Pier 
A), LLC; SSA Terminals, LLC; Total Terminals International, LLC; TraPac 
Inc.; West Basin Container Terminal LLC; and Yusen Terminals LLC.

    By Order of the Federal Maritime Commission.

    Dated: June 29, 2018.
Rachel E. Dickon,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-14417 Filed 7-3-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6731-AA-P
Order entered July 2, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-12-01345-CR

TIMOTHY ALEXANDER, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 195th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F11-34377-N

ORDER

The Court has before it the June 28, 2013 motion of Kathleen Walsh to withdraw as 

appellant’s counsel based on the fact that appellant filed pro se motions indicating his desire to 

dismiss counsel and proceed pro se. By order dated July 1, 2013, the Court denied appellant’s 

motion to dismiss counsel and proceed pro se and the other pro se motions appellant filed. See 

Martinez v. Court of Appeals of Cal., Fourth Appellate Dist., 528 U.S. 152 (2000). Moreover, 

counsel states that she was already in the process of preparing appellant’s brief in this appeal.

Accordingly, we DENY the June 28, 2013 motion of Kathleen Walsh to withdraw as 

appellant’s attorney of record.

/s/ DAVID EVANS

JUSTICE