alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### WILMINGTON and KENNET TURNPIKE COMPANY *vs.*WILLIAM BOYD.

Inquisition against the Wilmington and Kennet Turnpike Company for not keeping the road in order.

Sufficient if it finds that the road between certain points is out of order, without stating- in what particulars.

The justice may appoint the inquisitors in this proceeding.

Certiorari to Justice Macbeth.

Record. William Boyd *vs.*Wilmington and Kennet Turnpike Company. Proceeding under sec. 14 of the charter of this company (4 *Del. Laws,'*362) for neglecting to keep the road in good order and repair.

Complaint made in writing and on oath. Summons issued, May 3d, for freeholders, “ Henry Du Pont, John Evans Young, and Dr. Allen McLane, to meet at the first toll-gate, on the Kennet Turnpike Road, on Thursday, 4th of May, at 10 o’clock, A. M., to examine said road from the said gate to the lane leading to Mrs. Dunnins, and from the blacksmith shop of one McCullough to the run beyond Waters’.” Notice given to Jesse Hollingsworth, the keeper of the toll-gate nearest Wilmington on the Kennet turnpike. Inquisition taken, and found “ the said road to be in bad order, and that the said road has been in bad order for fifteen days preceding our present finding; and we do condemn the said road within the limits aforesaid.” Copy of the inquisition served on Jesse Hollingsworth by John Evans Young, on Saturday, May 6, 1837 ; and the magistrate stated on the record that he was not informed that there was any other toll gatherer on said road.

Exceptions. 1st, Because the inquisition does not show in what respects the road mentioned in said proceeding was out of order. 2d, Because it does not appear that a copy of the said inquisition was sent to *each*of the keepers of the turnpike gates between which the defective places are. 3d, Because the inquisition found the road to be in bad order without specifying in what particulars.

*Per Curiam.*

The fourteenth section of this company’s charter is designed for the benefit of the public, and to compel the company to keep their road in good order and repair. This inquisition finds, in the words of the law, that the road between certain points is bad. This is sufficient — all that is required by law or by justice.

2d. It does appear that a copy of the inquisition was served on the keeper of one toll-gate. We know not how many there are, but *316as to that keeper it is good. If there be others not notified, they might continue to take toll notwithstanding the inquisition.

J. *A Bayard,*for plaintiff in error.

*Wales, for*defendant

3d. *It*may be proper to remark on another objection, though not taken in the exceptions, that in our opinion the justice is by law the proper person to select the freeholders who are to be inquisitors. It appears by the record that three judicious freeholders have been summoned, and we hold that to be sufficient. By analogy to all other proceedings by a justice of the peace and freeholders, the justice should select them, and there is nothing in this law to prohibit him.

Judgment affirmed.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Ray Anthony LANE.

No. 62690.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 15, 1978.

In re: Ray Anthony Lane, applying for writ of certiorari. Parish of Calcasieu. Writ denied. Relator has an adequate remedy by appeal in the event of conviction.

DIXON and DENNIS, JJ., dissent, would grant and order relator’s release on his own recognizance.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


                                                                                                                          Exhibit 12



                                                                                   The Gillette Company

                                                                             Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                                                Six months       Six months
Dollars in millions                               ended            ended
                                               June 30, 2004    June 30, 2003       2003       2002       2001       2000       1999
                                             ---------------  ---------------      -----      -----      -----      -----      -----
Earnings:
 Income from continuing operations before
 income taxes                               $          1,131              859      1,964      1,752      1,342      1,288      1,912
       Interest expense                                   23               30         54         84        145        223        136
       Interest portion of rental expense                 21               22         41         43         31         25         20
       Amortization of capitalized interest                4                5         10         10          9          6          5

                                                       -----            -----      -----      -----      -----      -----      -----
       Earnings available for fixed charges $          1,179              916      2,069      1,889      1,527      1,542      2,073
                                                       =====            =====      =====      =====      =====      =====      =====

Fixed Charges:
       Interest expense                     $             23               30         54         84        145        223        136
       Interest capitalized                                1                1          2          4         11         23         13
       Interest portion of rental expense                 21               22         41         43         31         25         20

                                                       -----            -----      -----      -----      -----      -----      -----
       Total fixed charges                  $             45               53         97        131        187        271        169
                                                       =====            =====      =====      =====      =====      =====      =====



Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges                      26.2             17.3       21.4       14.5        8.2        5.7       12.3
                                                       =====            =====      =====      =====      =====      =====      =====

<S><C>
</TABLE>
Order entered February 24, 2021

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05
- 20
- 01023
- CV FIRST CASH LTD., FIRST CASH CREDIT, LTD. AND PAWN TX, INC., Appellant s V.
DONALD LEE J ONES, Appellee On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC
- 20
- 06127

ORDER Before the Court is appellee’s third motion for extension of time to file his
brief

. The brief was due February 16 th , and appel lee explains the extension is necessary “due to the widespread power outage and loss of internet connection”
result ing from the winter storms.
We GRANT the motion and ORDER the brief be filed no later than M arch 5, 2021.
/s/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF J USTICE
#### LAST CHANCE, INCORPORATED, Appellant, v. DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATION et al., Appellees.

No. 73-45.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 21, 1973.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Broward County; L. Clayton Nance, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Edmond R. MICHAELS.

No. 62132.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 2, 1978.

In re: Edmond R. Michaels applying for supervisory writs. Jefferson Parish.

Writ denied. Upon advice of district judge that this prosecution has been dismissed and/or a judgment of acquittal has been entered, the application is moot.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### African Development Foundation

# AGENCY:

United States African Development Foundation.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

The US African Development Foundation (USADF) will hold its quarterly meeting of the Board of Directors to discuss the agency's programs and administration. This meeting will occur via telephone as a conference call.

# DATES:

The meeting date is Wednesday, July 18, 11:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting location is USADF, 1400 I St. NW, Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20005.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Patrick Crooks, 202-233-8803.

Authority:Public Law 96-533 (22 U.S.C. 290h).

Dated: July 5, 2018.

June B. Brown,

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 2018-14745 Filed 7-10-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 6117-01-P
EXHIBIT 32.2

WRITTEN STATEMENT OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) UNDER THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

The undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of Gerber Scientific, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies that, on the date hereof:

(i)	the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended July 31, 2004 filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(ii)	information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated:  September 9, 2004





| | /s/ Shawn M. Harrington                     | 
| | ------------------------------------------- | 
| | Shawn M. Harrington
Chief Financial Officer | 



The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.  This certification shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to liability under that section.  This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act except to the extent this Exhibit 32 is expressly and specifically incorporated by reference in any such filing.
# Official Journal C 257A/2017

| | |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 257A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 608 August 2017 |

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 257A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 608 August 2017

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V	Announcements | |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES | |
| | European Personnel Selection Office | |
| 2017/C 257 A/01 | Reserve lists — Open competition EPSO/AST-SC/05/16 — Accreditation Officers/Receptionists (SC 1/SC 2) | 1 |
| | | |

Notice No

Contents

page

V	Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Personnel Selection Office

2017/C 257 A/01

Reserve lists — Open competition EPSO/AST-SC/05/16 — Accreditation Officers/Receptionists (SC 1/SC 2)

1

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

EN
JUL-12-2011 16:22 P.01/0 3 

LAW OFFICES 

GAROFALO GOERLICH HAINBACH PC 

1200 NEW HAMPSHIRE AVENUE NW • SUITE 800 • WASHINGTOK DC 20036-5602 

TELEPHONE 202 776-3970 • FACEIUILE 202 776-3975 

WWW.QQH-AIRLAW.COM 

FAX NUMBER(S) TRANSMITTED TO: 202-493-5^2 

To: 

Company; 

Hearing Docket Clear, AGC-430 

Federal Aviation Administration 

From: Kristina Pickholtz 

Client/Matter: EVA Airways Corporation 

Date: July 12,2011 

DOCUMENTS 

Withdrawal of Appeal 

NUMBER OF PAGES 

3 (incIudin}J cover sheet) 

COMMENTS; 

Please see attached Withdrawal of Appeal. 

Thank you. 

52.o)o/^Jfn 1100 (f 

m i s MESSAGE 3S INTENDED ONt,Y FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR BNTITY TO V/HICH IT [S .«jiDR£SSL'D ANP MAY CONT/MN INFORMATION 

THAT IS PRIV1LE0EI5. CONHDENTIAL AND EXEMIT FROM LJISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAU.', IJ-' THii READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE 

TNTEKDED I^ECIPIENT. YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIPIE-D THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DLSTRIOUTION OR COPYING OK THl.S COMMUNICATION IS 

STRICTLY PROHlBrrED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN likROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMGDlATtLY l)Y TELEPHONE ^ND 

RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE- TO US ATTHE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA TUB U.S. POSTAL SERVICE. THANK YOU 
JUL-12-2011 16:23 P.02/03 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

")l:F/\RiMENTOF 

:HAN3?ORl'ATiOfJ 

'OCK^T OPERATIONS 

?Gii JU'L IB P 1: 33 

In the matter of: 

EVA Ainvays Corporation 

FAA Case No. 2010NM710061 

JUDGE NOT ASSIGNED 

WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL 

RESPONSDENT, EVA Airv^'ays Corporation, hereby withdraws its appeal 

pursuant to a settlement of this nnatter with the FAA. 

Respectfully Submitted, 

Victor H. Smith 

Garofalo Goerlich Hainbach PC 

1200 New Hampshire Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20036 

Counsel for Respondent 

Dated: July 12, 2011 
JUL-12-2011 16=23 P. 1J3/Q3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Witlidrawal of Appeal was 

served by facsimile and certified mail - Return Receipt Requested this date, to the 

following: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

Fax: (202)493-5142 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 

1601 Lind Avenue S.W. 

Renton, Washington 98057 

Fax: (425) 227-1007 

Attn: Kyle Lomozow 

Dated this 12'^" day of July, 2011 

Kristina Pickholtz 

Garofalo Goerlich Hainbach PC 

1200 New Hampshire Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20036 

TDIflL P.03
# C_2023205EN.01001201.xml

| 12.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 205/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 205/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 27 April 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Înalta Curte de Casaţie şi Justiţie — Romania) — Banca A v Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală (ANAF), Preşedintele ANAF

(Case C-827/21, (1) Banca A (Application of the Merger Directive in a domestic situation))

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2009/133/EC - Article 7 - Merger by absorption - Purely domestic operation - Primacy of EU law outside the scope of EU law - None - Interpretation of EU law outside its scope - Jurisdiction of the Court to deliver preliminary rulings - Condition - EU law made applicable by national law directly and unconditionally)

(2023/C 205/13)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Înalta Curte de Casaţie şi Justiţie

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Banca A

Defendants: Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală (ANAF), Preşedintele ANAF

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | EU law does not require a national court to interpret, in accordance with Council Directive 2009/133/EC of 19 October 2009 on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, partial divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States and to the transfer of the registered office of an SE or SCE between Member States, a provision of national legislation applicable to a purely domestic merger of two undertakings, each having their registered office in the same Member State, as that operation does not come within the scope of that directive. |
| --- | --- |

1.

EU law does not require a national court to interpret, in accordance with Council Directive 2009/133/EC of 19 October 2009 on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, partial divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States and to the transfer of the registered office of an SE or SCE between Member States, a provision of national legislation applicable to a purely domestic merger of two undertakings, each having their registered office in the same Member State, as that operation does not come within the scope of that directive.

| 2. | The Court does not have jurisdiction to answer the questions referred regarding the interpretation of Directive 2009/133, as the facts of the dispute in the main proceedings do not come within its scope and, moreover, domestic law has not made it applicable to those facts directly and unconditionally. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Court does not have jurisdiction to answer the questions referred regarding the interpretation of Directive 2009/133, as the facts of the dispute in the main proceedings do not come within its scope and, moreover, domestic law has not made it applicable to those facts directly and unconditionally.

---

(1)  OJ C 165, 19.4.2022.

---
#### STATE of Florida, ex rel. B. KAUFMAN, Appellant, v. Ruth SUTTON, as Justice of the Peace, in and for Dade County, Florida, District Three, Appellee.

No. 69-614.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 24, 1970.

Schonfeld & Feldman, Miami, for appellant.

Ruth Sutton, in pro. per.

Before BARKDULL, HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.

*875BARKDULL, Judge.

The appellant filed a petition for a writ of mandamus in the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit, in and for Dade County, Florida, seeking the issuance of an alternative writ of mandamus commanding Ruth Sutton, as Justice of the Peace of District Three, Dade County, Florida, through her agents to accept the filing of a complaint for unlawful detainer, alleging a cause of action pursuant to § 37.011, Fla. Stat. (1967), F.S.A., averring that said complaint had been tendered to the justice of the peace or her agents and that they had refused to accept same for filing. The trial court refused to issue the alternative writ and this appeal ensued. We reverse.

The acceptance of the filing of a complaint is a mere ministerial act, and the officer charged with the responsibility of receiving same is required to accept what is tendered to him if it is accompanied by the proper fee. Newport v. Culbreath, 120 Fla. 152, 162 So. 340; State ex rel. Druissi v. Almand, Fla.1954, 75 So.2d 905. See also: State v. Quarles, 13 Idaho 252, 89 P. 636; State ex rel. Wanamaker v. Miller, 164 Ohio St. 176, 128 N.E.2d 110; State ex rel. Dawson v. Roberts, 165 Ohio St. 341, 135 N.E.2d 409; Malinou v. McElroy, 99 R.I. 277, 207 A.2d 44. It is not incumbent upon one who has the ministerial function of áccepting the filing of a complaint to judicially determine the legal significance of the tendered document.

By this opinion, we are neither approving nor disapproving the alleged cause of action for unlawful detainer, as this is the judicial function which should first be exercised by the trial judge. Newport v. Culbreath, supra.

Therefore, for the reasons above stated the order here under review, declining to issue the alternative writ of mandamus, is hereby reversed with directions to the trial court to issue the alternative writ and take such other proceedings as are consistent with this opinion.

Reversed and remanded, with directions.
#### Jones *et al. vs.*Habersham *et al.,*executors.

In a will case, where the caveators have all joined in a bill of exceptions to this court, each should embody in it, or under it, all the assignments of error he expects to insist on here, and where one or more of such caveators afterward sues out another bill of exceptions and writ of error in the same case, and from the same judgment, such second writ will he dismissed.

Practice in the Supreme Court. January Term, 1878.

T. M. Norwood; B.E. Lester; N. O. Collier; Biohard H. Clark; O. A. Lochrane; Bobert Toombs, for A. P. Wetter, guardian.

W. W. Montgomery ; J. B. Saussey, for Geo. Noble Jones *et ad.*

Jackson, Lawton *&*Basinger ; ILartridge *&*Chisholm ; Wm. Grayson Mann, for the executors.

This case was argued together with *Wetter, guardian, et al. vs. Habersham et al., executors.*The plaintiffs in error in the present case were among the caveators of the Telfair will, all of whom joined in the bill of exceptions in that case. Afterwards some of them sued out a separate writ of error, and brought up the present case. It- was dismissed.
Appendix D.6 

TDEC-APC Emission Inventory 

Supporting Documentation 

CONTENTS: 

TN 2002 INVENTORY.XLS 

TN REQUESTED UPDATE TO 2018 INVENTORY. DOC 

VISTAS BASE 2G DOCUMENTATION GUIDANCE 

 

Pre-Hearing Draft

Regional Haze SIP fdor TN Class I Areas

Appendix D.6 - 1

January 18, 2008
emma-ex41_15.htm



 

Exhibit 4.1

 



 

NUMBER EMM [LOGO] SHARES SPECIMEN COMMON STOCK INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE SEE REVERSE  FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES  OF COMMON STOCK OF $0.001 PAR VALUE EACH OF EMMAUS LIFE  SCIENCES, INC.transferable on  the books  of the Corporation in person  or by attorney upon surrender of this certificate  duly  endorsed or assigned.  This certificate  and  the shares represented hereby are  subject  to the laws of the State  of Delaware, and  to the Certificate  of Incorporation and Bylaws of the Corporation, as now  or hereafter amended. This certificate is not valid until countersigned by the Transfer  Agent. WITNESS the facsimile signatures of its duly  authorized  officers. DATED: SECRETARY CHAIRMAN

 



 

 



THE CORPORATION WILL FURNISH TO ANY STOCKHOLDER, UPON REQUEST AND WITHOUT CHARGE, A FULL STATEMENT OF THE DESIGNA­ TIONS, RELATIVE RIGHTS, PREFERENCES AND LIMITATIONS OF THE SHARES OF EACH CLASS AND SERIES AUTHORIZED TO BE ISSUED, SO FAR AS THE SAME HAVE BEEN DETERMINED, AND OF THE AUTHORITY, IF ANY, OF THE BOARD TO DIVIDE THE SHARES INTO CLASSES OR SERIES AND TO DETERMINE AND CHANGE THE RELATIVE RIGHTS, PREFERENCES AND LIMITATIONS OF ANY CLASS OR SERIES. SUCH REQUEST MAY BE MADE TO THE SECRETARY OF THE CORPORATION OR TO THE TRANSFER AGENT NAMED ON THIS CERTIFICATE. The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations:TEN COM  -  as tenants in common TEN ENT   -  as tenants by the entireties JT TEN-  as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common UNIF GIFT MIN ACT- . . .. ....... ..... Custodian.. ..... .... ... .. .. . . (Gust)(Minor) under Uniform Gifts to Minors Act.. .... .... .... .. (State) Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. For Value Received,  hereby  sell, assign  and transfer unto PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE (PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS, INCLUDING ZIP CODE, OF ASSIGNEE) Shares of the stock represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint Attorney to transfer the said stock on the books of the within named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated Signature(s) Guaranteed NOTICE: THE SIGNATURE(S) TOTHISASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME(S)AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE, IN EVERY PARTICULAR, WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE WHATSOEVER.By The Signature(s)  must be guaranteed by an eligible guarantor institution (Banks, Stockbrokers, Savings and Loan Associations and Credit Unions with membership in an approved Signature Guarantee Medallion Program), pursuant to SEC Rule 17Ad-15. COLUMBIA PRINTING SERVICES, LLC- www.stockinformation.com
-/^/£3 Wtz/trdf Gtf/b//7/f£ /f/t/r&yf/S

jQc/t-z citse'M ,

g;;* J5 2015

Ab®lAcosta,Cterk

7"M# '4k7f$0# X <?/« W/6>/*-/*$ fo j/t0S /s //i ^c'p^^r/c

01'b #/ CO/zfitrek'&uff C&>? f^x-