alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
condensed consolidated balance sheet of Global Marine Inc. and subsidiaries
as of 6-30-00 and the related condensed consolidated statement of income for
the six months ended 6-30-00, and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         231,700
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  134,500
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,500
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               375,000
<PP&E>                                       2,432,800
<DEPRECIATION>                                 513,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,469,500
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          312,000
<BONDS>                                        895,900
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        17,500
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,169,900
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,469,500
<SALES>                                          7,800
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               435,400
<CGS>                                            3,400
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  351,200
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              34,100
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 57,200
<INCOME-TAX>                                    16,500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             40,700
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    40,700
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.23
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.23






</TABLE>
# C_2022095EN.01000501.xml

| 28.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 95/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/5

---

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 26 November 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Budapest Környéki Törvényszék — Hungary) — WD v Agrárminiszter

(Case C-273/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Agriculture - Common Agricultural Policy - Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013 - Direct support schemes - Article 4(1)(c) and (e) - Article 32(2) - Single area payment application - Concept of ‘eligible hectare’ - Land classified as an aerodrome according to the land register - Actual use for agricultural purposes)

(2022/C 95/07)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Budapest Környéki Törvényszék

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: WD

Defendant: Agrárminiszter

Operative part of the order

Article 4(1)(c) and (e) and Article 32(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing rules for direct payments to farmers under support schemes within the framework of the common agricultural policy and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 637/2008 and Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 must be interpreted as meaning that an area classified, under national law, as an aerodrome, but on which no activity relating to an aerodrome is carried out, must be classified as an agricultural area used for agricultural purposes since it is in fact used as permanent pasture for livestock

---

(1)  OJ C 252, 28.6.2021.

---
1

CCA NO. PD-0526-15

TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

STATE OF TEXAS §

§

vs. §

§

VICTOR MANUEL SCHUNIOR, JR. §

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

Now come ROBERTO BALLI and CLAUDIA V. BALLI and enter this 

Notice of Appearance as counsel of record for Appellant VICTOR MANUEL 

SCHUNIOR, JR.

ROBERTO BALLI and CLAUDIA V. BALLI hereby request that all 

notices of future Court settings, Court activity, or State motions hereby be 

addressed to them.

Respectfully submitted,

BALLI LAW OFFICE

P.O. Box 1058

Laredo, Texas 78042-1058

Tel: (956) 712-4999

Fax: (956) 724-5830

By: /s/ Roberto Balli

ROBERTO BALLI

SBN: 00795235

By: /s/ Claudia V. Balli

CLAUDIA V. BALLI

SBN: 24073773

PD-0526-15

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

Transmitted 10/5/2015 12:00:00 AM

Accepted 10/5/2015 7:51:40 AM

ABEL ACOSTA

CLERK
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Clifford E. DAVIS, Jr.

No. 52991.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 13, 1973.

Brown, McKernan, Monsour & Screen, J. Patrick Screen, Jr., New Orleans, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., LeRoy A. Hartley, Sp. Counsel, New Orleans, Sargent Pitcher, Jr., Dist. Atty., Ralph L. Roy, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The defendant was tried and convicted of murder. The jury rendered a verdict of “guilty without capital punishment” and the court sentenced the defendant to life imprisonment at the Louisiana State Penitentiary.

Although there were bills of exceptions reserved during the proceedings, there were no formal bills of exceptions perfected in the record, as required by La.C.Cr.P. Art. 844 and 845. We are, therefore, limited on appeal to a review of the pleadings and proceedings for errors discoverable on the face thereof. La.C.Cr.P. Art. 920, State v. Chase, 262 La. 95, 262 So.2d 382 (1972); State v. Daniels, 262 La. 475, 263 So.2d 859 (1972). We find none.

For the reasons assigned, the conviction and sentence are affirmed.
# C_2022222EN.01000502.xml

| 7.6.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 222/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/5

---

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 1 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal — Ireland) — Criminal proceedings against K.M.

(Case C-493/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Common fisheries policy - Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 - Control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy - Article 89 - Measures to ensure compliance - Article 90 - Criminal sanctions - Principle of proportionality - Interpretation of the judgment of 11 February 2021, K. M. (Sanctions imposed on the master of a vessel) (C-77/20, EU:C:2021:112))

(2022/C 222/07)

Language of the case: English

Referring court

Court of Appeal

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: K.M.

Other party: Director of Public Prosecutions

Operative part of the order

Articles 89 and 90 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy, amending Regulations (EC) No 847/96, (EC) No 2371/2002, (EC) No 811/2004, (EC) No 768/2005, (EC) No 2115/2005, (EC) No 2166/2005, (EC) No 388/2006, (EC) No 509/2007, (EC) No 676/2007, (EC) No 1098/2007, (EC) No 1300/2008, (EC) No 1342/2008 and repealing Regulations (EEC) No 2847/93, (EC) No 1627/94 and (EC) No 1966/2006, read in the light of the principle of proportionality enshrined in Article 49(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as meaning that it is for the national courts to assess, in accordance with the assessment criteria provided by the Court in the judgment of 11 February 2021, K. M. (Sanctions imposed on the master of a vessel) (C-77/20, EU:C:2021:112), whether, in relation to the infringement committed, including its seriousness, the mandatory forfeiture of all catch and all fishing gear found on board the vessel concerned is proportionate to the attainment of the objective legitimately pursued by the prohibition, laid down in Article 32(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 850/98 of 30 March 1998 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical measures for the protection of juveniles of marine organisms, as amended by Regulation (EU) No 227/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 March 2013, relating to grading equipment, and to examine, if necessary, the need to adjust, modulate or mitigate the extent of the forfeiture order in respect of the catch and the fishing gear.

---

(1)  OJ C 401, 4.10.2021.

---
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1012

To suspend temporarily the duty on 3,4,4’-trichlorocarbanilide.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 24 (legislative day, APRIL 19), 1993

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

the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on 3,4,4’-

trichlorocarbanilide.

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

3 SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following

7 new heading:

‘‘ 9902.31.12 3,4,4’-trichlorocarbanilide (provided for in subheading

2924.21.30008) Free No change No change On or before

12/31/94 ’’.
2

S 1012 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

2 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or

3 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after

4 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 589 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 589

  To express deep appreciation and gratitude to my current and former 
    staff members for their loyalty, support, and dedication to the 
Congress and the residents of the 20th and 22d Congressional Districts 
  of Pennsylvania during my 18 years as a Member of the United States 
                       House of Representatives.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 29, 1994

  Mr. Murphy (for himself and Mr. Greenwood) submitted the following 
resolution; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  To express deep appreciation and gratitude to my current and former 
    staff members for their loyalty, support, and dedication to the 
Congress and the residents of the 20th and 22d Congressional Districts 
  of Pennsylvania during my 18 years as a Member of the United States 
                       House of Representatives.

    Resolved, That the following current and former staff members are 
recognized with deep appreciation and gratitude for their loyalty, 
support, and dedication to the Congress and to the residents of the 
20th and 22d Congressional Districts of Pennsylvania over the past 18 
years:
            Fredrick P. McLuckie, Karen Mollenauer, Jacqueline Joseph, 
        Ron Ungvarsky, Erin Sheerin, Ken Laird, Martha Hunter, David 
        Mark, Marissa Creager, Stephen Mayberry Gates, Debbie Tekavec, 
        Charlene Konek, Dave Coder, Charles Losko, Jim Riley, Ted 
        Martin, John Gaspich, Vince Zapatosky, Dan Giosta, Jackie 
        Cassady, Paulette Bieneck, Joe Wise, Shelley Gutherie, Vicki 
        Nimmo, John T. Casey, Janet Martin, Lynn Rongaus, Mike Corbett, 
        Danette Delmastro, Andrew Juracko, Teresa Faunce, Landon 
        Washington, Mike Johns, Judy Loughman, Tom Lamb, Luther Sheets, 
        Jennifer Bigi, Cheryl Genevie, Melanie Taylor, John Woodward, 
        Christine McCormick, Karen Hofer, Sharon Wulbern, Bob Sturgeon, 
        Sally Scripture, Maryellen Stevens, Donna Thomas, Geri 
        Ethridge, Kim Moses, Joan Smith, Virgil Puskarich, Kerry 
        Keurbis, Tom Conrad, Tanya Rahall, Rich Fiesta, Charlie Tocci, 
        Karen Kadilak, Rita McCormick, Sara Ruth, Tina Tokish, Leo 
        Vicini, Joe Babish, Dominic Antonelli, James Levy, Florence 
        Potega, Maryann Cialone, Florentine Garcia, Debra Aiken Wilson, 
        Marlene France, Albert Spence, Clarence Norman, Cheryl Kinsey, 
        Judy Wagner, Patricia Perry, Sally Farrer, Barbara Neid, Kathy 
        Homrock, Robert Schiffbauer, Barbara Cassasanta, John Lignelli, 
        George Gallo, Louis Coccoli, Diane Jacobs, Yvonne Epps, Gary 
        Caruso, Greg Chaklos, Roseann Tulley and Rich Roberts.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2022084EN.01003101.xml

| 21.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 84/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84/31

---

Action brought on 21 December 2021 — European Commission v Republic of Poland

(Case C-814/21)

(2022/C 84/41)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: J. Tomkin and A. Szmytkowska, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Poland

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare that, by denying citizens of the European Union who do not have Polish nationality but who reside in the Republic of Poland the right to become members of a political party, the Republic of Poland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 22 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by denying citizens of the European Union who do not have Polish nationality but who reside in the Republic of Poland the right to become members of a political party, the Republic of Poland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 22 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

| — | order the Republic of Poland to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Republic of Poland to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Under Article 22 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, every citizen of the Union residing in a Member State of which he or she is not a national is to have the right to vote and to stand as a candidate in municipal elections and in elections to the European Parliament in the Member State in which he or she resides, under the same conditions as nationals of that State.

The Commission takes the view that denying citizens of the Union who do not have Polish nationality but who reside in the Republic of Poland the right to become members of a political party prevents them from exercising their political rights as conferred on them by Article 22 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union under the same conditions as Polish nationals.

---
# C_2023261EN.01000201.xml

| 24.7.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 261/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 261/2

---

Appeal brought on 31 August 2021 by the Fundację Instytut na rzecz Kultury Prawnej Ordo Iuris against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 25 June 2021 in Case T-42/21 Fundację Instytut na rzecz Kultury Prawnej Ordo Iuris v European Parliament

(Case C-546/21 P)

(2023/C 261/02)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Appellant: Fundację Instytut na rzecz Kultury Prawnej Ordo Iuris (represented by: K. Koźmiński, legal advisor, T. Siemiński, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Parliament

By order of 15 February 2023, the Court (Second Chamber) set aside the order of the General Court of the European Union of 25 June 2021, Fundację Instytut na rzecz Kultury Prawnej Ordo Iuris v Parliament (T-42/21, not published, EU:T:2021:385), and referred the case back to the General Court of the European Union.

---
# C_2021289EN.01002901.xml

| 19.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 289/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 289/29

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas (Lithuania) lodged on 7 May 2021 — ‘Vittamed technologijos’ UAB, in liquidation v Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija

(Case C-293/21)

(2021/C 289/40)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant:‘Vittamed technologijos’ UAB, in liquidation

Respondent: Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija

Question referred

Are Articles 184 to 187 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (1) of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax to be interpreted as meaning that a taxable person is (or is not) obliged to adjust deductions of value added tax (VAT) charged on the acquisition of goods and services for the purposes of producing capital goods in the case where those goods are no longer intended to be used in the course of taxable economic activities because the owner (shareholder) of the taxable person decides to place it in liquidation and that taxable person submits a request that it be removed from the register of VAT payers? Is the answer to that question affected by the reasons for deciding to liquidate the taxable person, namely the fact that the decision to place that person in liquidation was taken due to growing losses, the absence of orders and the shareholder’s doubts as to the profitability of the planned (intended) economic activity?

---

(1)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).

---
House Calendar No. 187

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 482

[Report No. 103–612]

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3838)

other purposes.housing and community development, and forto amend and extend certain laws relating to

JULY 20, 1994

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
IV

House Calendar No. 187

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 482

[Report No. 103–612]

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3838) to amend and extend

certain laws relating to housing and community development, and for

other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 20, 1994

Ms. SLAUGHTER from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3838) to amend

and extend certain laws relating to housing and community development, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this

2 resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of

3 rule XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee

4 of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consider5 ation of the bill (H.R. 3838) to amend and extend certain

6 laws relating to housing and community development, and

7 for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be
2

HRES 482 RH

1 dispensed with. All points of order against consideration

2 of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined

3 to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided

4 and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority

5 member of the Committee on Banking, Finance and

6 Urban Affairs. After general debate the bill shall be con7 sidered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall

8 be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose

9 of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment

10 in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Commit11 tee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs now printed

12 in the bill. The amendment in the nature of a substitute

13 shall be considered by title rather than by section. Each

14 title shall be considered as read. Points of order against

15 the amendment in the nature of a substitute for failure

16 to comply with clause 7 of rule XVI or clause 5(a) of rule

17 XXI are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of the

18 bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report

19 the bill to the House with such amendments as may have

20 been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote

21 in the House on any amendment adopted in the Commit22 tee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee amend23 ment in the nature of a substitute. The previous question

24 shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments
3

HRES 482 RH

1 thereto to final passage without intervening motion except

2 one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Judges McClanahan, Haley and Senior Judge Willis

CLAUDE WESLY STOOTS MEMORANDUM OPINION * v. Record No. 1699-10-3 PER CURIAM JANUARY 11, 2011 BOART LONGYEAR COMPANY AND ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION

(Ginger J. Largen; J.D. Morefield; Morefield & Largen , on brief), for appellant.

(Kevin W. Cloe; Angela F. Gibb s; Midkiff, Muncie & Ross, P.C., on brief), for appellees.

Claude W. Stoots appeals a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Commission finding

that Stoots did not adequately market his residua l work capacity. We have reviewed the record

and the commission’s opinion and find that this app eal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm

for the reasons stated by the co mmission in its final opinion. See Stoots v. Boart Longyear Co.

, VWC File No. 232-80-81 (July 8, 2010). We dispen se with oral argument and summarily affirm

because the facts and legal contentions are adequate ly presented in the materials before the Court

and argument would not aid the decisional process. See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27.

Affirmed.

* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opin ion is not designated for publication.
# C_2022148EN.01001001.xml

| 4.4.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 148/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.4.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 148/10

---

Appeal brought on 10 November 2021 by Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd against the judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) delivered on 1 September 2021 in Case T-463/20, Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe v EUIPO

(Case C-678/21 P)

(2022/C 148/14)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd (represented by: S. Malynicz, BL, M. Maier, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office

By order of 24 February 2022, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) held that the appeal was not allowed to proceed and that Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd shall bear its own costs.

---
#### Isabelle CARBONE, Petitioner, v. The TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent.

No. 44828.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 15, 1974.

Certiorari denied. 286 So.2d 618.

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