alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Darbes SOILEAU, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. TRI-STATE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 2358.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Third Circuit.

June 18, 1968.

Rehearing Denied July 29, 1968.

*176Dubuisson & Dubuisson, by James G. Dubuisson, Opelousas, for defendant-appellant.

Fusilier, Pucheu & Soilea, by A. Gaynor Soileau, Ville Platte, for plaintiff-appellee.

En Banc.

FRUGÉ, Judge.

We have had two prior occasions to consider the question before us in this same case, 206 So.2d 716 (La.App.3d Cir., 1967), and on rehearing, 206 So.2d 718 (La.App. 3d Cir., 1968).

While the facts and issues are set forth in our previous dealings with this case, for the sake of clarity we shall repeat the essential facts.

Defendant sought to appeal from a final judgment nearly three and one-half months from the date of judgment. Counsel for appellant asserts that he had a right to appeal because he never received notice of the original judgment, as required in Code of Civil Procedure, Article 1913. Because of this lack of notice, he contends that the delays for applying for a new trial did not begin to run. (See Code of Civil Procedure Article 1974). As a result thereof, he urges that the pre-emptive period for seeking a devolutive and/or suspensive appeal under Code of Civil Procedure, Articles 2087 and 2123 did not begin to run. Thus, he concluded that his first appeal to this court was timely.

Upon that appeal to this court, the plaintiff-appellee filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, which we granted. (See our opinion, Soileau v. Tri-State Mutual Insurance Company, 206 So.2d 716 (La.App.3d Cir., 1967). On rehearing, we considered the merits of appellant’s position, and decided, in the interest of justice, to remand the case to the trial court “ * * * for the taking of evidence and a decision by the district judge on the factual issue of whether the clerk of court mailed the notice in compliance with L.S.A.-C.C.P. Article 1913".

The record reveals that the district court opened the case for further evidence on this question, and, after considering such evidence, the trial court concluded that “The Clerk of Court, through his Deputy Clerk, actually mailed notice of judgment to defendant in compliance with L.S.A.-C.C.P. Article 1913”.- We have reviewed the evidence upon which the trial court based the above conclusion and can find no manifest error therein.1

In view of the language in Code of Civil Procedure, Article 2087 that an appeal “may be taken * * * only within ninety days * * * ” from the delays for applying for a new trial, and in view of the fact that plaintiff-appellee has sought the dismissal of the appeal, we have no alternative but to grant the appellee’s motion and dismiss the appeal at appellant’s costs.

Appeal dismissed.

1

. While we believe that the notice of the judgment was properly mailed to counsel for defendant-appellant, we do not question his sincerity in asserting that he never received such notice. This unfortunate case exemplifies the inherent insecurity of relying upon the usual course of the United States mail.

On Application for Rehearing.

En Banc. Rehearing denied.
#### Arthur J. BALLETTI, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 71-175.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 24, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Anthony Palmer, Appellant.

[735 NYS2d 121]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (James Yates, J.), rendered March 20, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of grand larceny in the fourth degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 11/2 to 3 years and one year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s motion to suppress identification testimony and physical evidence was properly denied. During a buy-and-bust operation taking place at night in a desolate area, the arresting officer heard a radio transmission of the undercover officer screaming and responded to her location within seconds. When the arresting officer arrived at the scene, defendant, the only *225other person in the vicinity, was standing next to the undercover officer. The urgency of the undercover officer’s screams clearly indicated that defendant had committed or attempted to commit some criminal act against her and that her safety was in danger. Thus, the totality of the circumstances provided the arresting officer with reasonable suspicion to stop defendant *(see, People v Batista,*88 NY2d 650, 653; *People v Lopez,*258 AD2d 388, lv *denied*93 NY2d 1022). The frisk and momentary detention of defendant until the situation could be clarified, in a manner that would avoid revealing the undercover officer’s true status, was justified *(see, People v Hicks,*68 NY2d 234). The handcuffing of defendant was justified by the circumstances and did not elevate the detention to an arrest *(People v Allen,*73 NY2d 378). The arresting officer’s subsequent conversation with the undercover officer provided probable cause for defendant’s arrest.

Defendant’s claim that the court prematurely terminated a readback of testimony that had been interrupted by members of the deliberating jury is unpreserved because defendant accepted the court’s offer to clarify the situation by reminding the jury that it had not heard all of the testimony it had originally requested *(see, People v Whalen,*59 NY2d 273, 280), and we decline to review this claim in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the court responded meaningfully to the jury’s request *(see, People v Almodovar,*62 NY2d 126, 131-132). The record is clear that the jury chose to rescind its original request and was satisfied with the partial readback. Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Lerner, Rubin and Buckley, JJ.
# C_2014013EN.01000401.xml

| 17.1.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 13/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.1.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 13/4

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

16 January 2014

2014/C 13/05

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3597 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 142,21 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4620 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,83215 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,8174 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2350 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,3890 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,491 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 300,55 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1692 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,5303 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,9991 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5457 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4851 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,5441 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6375 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,7318 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 447,27 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 14,8164 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,2360 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,6260 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 16 481,01 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,4834 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 61,323 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 45,4230 |
| THB | Thai baht | 44,595 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,2269 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 18,0439 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 83,7100 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3597

JPY

Japanese yen

142,21

DKK

Danish krone

7,4620

GBP

Pound sterling

0,83215

SEK

Swedish krona

8,8174

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2350

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,3890

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,491

HUF

Hungarian forint

300,55

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1692

RON

Romanian leu

4,5303

TRY

Turkish lira

2,9991

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5457

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4851

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,5441

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6375

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,7318

KRW

South Korean won

1 447,27

ZAR

South African rand

14,8164

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,2360

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,6260

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

16 481,01

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,4834

PHP

Philippine peso

61,323

RUB

Russian rouble

45,4230

THB

Thai baht

44,595

BRL

Brazilian real

3,2269

MXN

Mexican peso

18,0439

INR

Indian rupee

83,7100

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.3

                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

The Board of Directors
of Security Capital Group Incorporated:

     We consent to the use of our reports dated January 27, 2000, except as to
Note 16, which is as of February 4, 2000, with respect to the balance sheets of
Archstone Communties Trust as of December 31, 1999 and 1998, and the related
statements of earnings, shareholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the
years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1999, and the related
schedule, which reports appear in the December 31, 1999 annual report on Form
10-K of Security Capital Group Incorporated. Further, we consent to the
incorporation by reference of the aforementioned reports into the registration
statements filed by Security Capital Group Incorporated on Form S-8 No's. 333-
38521, 333-38523, 333-38525, 333-38527, 333-38531, 333-38533, 333-38537, 333-
48167, 333-38539, 333-61395, Form S-4 No. 333-61401 and Form S-3 No. 333-64979.



                                                              KPMG LLP



Chicago, Illinois
March 24, 2000
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3341

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

NOVEMBER 3 (legislative day, NOVEMBER 2), 1993

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

NOVEMBER 17 (legislative day, NOVEMBER 2), 1993

Committee discharged

AN ACT

To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the

rate of special pension payable to persons who have

received the Congressional Medal of Honor.

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

3 SECTION 1. INCREASE IN RATE OF SPECIAL PENSION FOR

4 PERSONS ON THE MEDAL OF HONOR ROLL.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1562(a) of title 38,

6 United States Code, is amended by striking ‘‘$200’’ and

7 inserting ‘‘$400’’.
2

HR 3341 CDS

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

2 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to months begin3 ning after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Passed the House of Representatives November 2,

1993.

Attest: DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

Clerk.
ex10a.htm
















Exhibit (10)(a)

















Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm












We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Post-Effective Amendment No. 40 to the 1933 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-138190) and Amendment No. 537 to the 1940 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 811-08517), and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) March 31, 2016, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of The Lincoln National Life Insurance Company and (b) April 12, 2016, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln Life Variable Annuity Account N for the interests in a separate account under individual flexible payment deferred variable annuity contracts.







/s/ Ernst & Young LLP














Philadelphia, Pennsylvania


November 16, 2016
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND THE RELATED CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR THEN ENDED AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          61,540
<SECURITIES>                                     1,802
<RECEIVABLES>                                  133,577
<ALLOWANCES>                                       325
<INVENTORY>                                     36,400
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               249,534
<PP&E>                                         115,101
<DEPRECIATION>                                  72,125
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 330,161
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           91,325
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           234
<OTHER-SE>                                     182,731
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   330,161
<SALES>                                        510,759
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               515,521
<CGS>                                          404,144
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  404,144
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                85,574
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,313
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 21,490
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,482
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             14,008
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    14,008
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.57
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Exhibit 31-22**FORM 10-K CERTIFICATION**I, David E. Meador, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of The Detroit Edison Company; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b. (Intentionally omitted)  c. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and  d. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter(the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.     /s/ DAVID E. MEADOR Date: March 7, 2006   David E. Meador    Executive Vice President and    Chief Financial Officer of The Detroit Edison Company
# C_2014079EN.01000201.xml

| 18.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.7166 — Sacyr/LBEIP/HC)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2014/C 79/02

On 5 March 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in Spanish language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32014M7166. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32014M7166. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2024 ND 36

In the Interest of J.C., minor child

State of North Dakota, Petitioner and Appellee

v.

J.C., child, J.C., father to J.C., Respondents

and

T.W., mother, Respondent and Appellant

No. 20230377

In the Interest of M.W., minor child

State of North Dakota, Petitioner and Appellee

v.

M.W., child, Unknown, father to M.W., Respondents 

and

T.W., mother, Respondent and Appellant

No. 20230378

Appeal from the Juvenile Court of Ward County, North Central Judicial 

District, the Honorable Kelly A. Dillon, Judicial Referee.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

FILED 

IN THE OFFICE OF THE 

CLERK OF SUPREME COURT 

MARCH 7, 2024 

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
Rozanna C. Larson, State’s Attorney, Minot, ND, for petitioner and appellee.

William R. Hartl, Rugby, ND, for respondent and appellant.
1

Interest of J.C. and M.W.

Nos. 20230377 & 20230378

Per Curiam.

[¶1] T.W. appealed from a juvenile court order terminating her parental 

rights to J.C. and M.W. This Court retained jurisdiction under N.D.R.App.P. 

35(a)(3)(B) and remanded with instructions for the juvenile court to issue an 

order based only on the evidence received at trial. In re J.C., 2024 ND 9, ¶ 1. 

The parties did not request additional briefing or oral argument under 

N.D.R.App.P. 35(a)(3)(B)(ii). Upon reviewing the court’s order on remand, we 

affirm the termination of parental rights.

[¶2] The juvenile court concluded the children spent over 450 of the last 660 

nights in the care, control, and custody of the Human Service Zone. The court 

further concluded the children are in need of protection. The court’s findings 

are supported by the record and are not clearly erroneous. It is unnecessary to 

address other findings of the court. N.D.C.C. § 27-20.3-20(1)(c)(2); In re R.L.-

P., 2014 ND 28, ¶ 23, 842 N.W.2d 889 (“Because a finding that the children 

have been in foster care more than 450 out of the previous 660 nights, along 

with a finding of deprivation [now, the children are ‘in need of protection’], is 

sufficient to terminate parental rights under N.D.C.C. § 27-20-44(1)(c) [now 

N.D.C.C. § 27-20.3-20(1)(c)], it is unnecessary to address the parents’ challenge 

to the finding that the conditions and causes of the deprivation will likely 

continue.”). We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

[¶3] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.

Daniel J. Crothers

Lisa Fair McEvers

Jerod E. Tufte

Douglas A. Bahr
**REGULATORY EVALUATION**

**Directorate Identifier:** 2013

- NM

- 2 58

- AD

**Executive Order 12866:** Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significant? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. I s it appropriate t o include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES ( ) explain NO (X)
# C_2013249EN.01000101.xml

| 30.8.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 249/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.8.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 249/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

29 August 2013

2013/C 249/01

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3266 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 130,34 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4594 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,85490 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,7178 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2308 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,0490 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,678 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 300,46 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7027 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2825 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4405 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,6943 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4839 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3923 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,2886 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7062 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6915 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 475,99 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 13,6964 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,1214 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5653 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 791,09 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,3754 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 59,111 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 44,0150 |
| THB | Thai baht | 42,690 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,1142 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 17,6040 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 88,8230 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3266

JPY

Japanese yen

130,34

DKK

Danish krone

7,4594

GBP

Pound sterling

0,85490

SEK

Swedish krona

8,7178

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2308

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,0490

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,678

HUF

Hungarian forint

300,46

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7027

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2825

RON

Romanian leu

4,4405

TRY

Turkish lira

2,6943

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4839

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3923

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,2886

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7062

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6915

KRW

South Korean won

1 475,99

ZAR

South African rand

13,6964

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,1214

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5653

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 791,09

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,3754

PHP

Philippine peso

59,111

RUB

Russian rouble

44,0150

THB

Thai baht

42,690

BRL

Brazilian real

3,1142

MXN

Mexican peso

17,6040

INR

Indian rupee

88,8230

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---