alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2018328EN.01002802.xml

| 17.9.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 328/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.9.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 328/28

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Najvyšší súd Slovenskej republiky (Slovakia) lodged on 9 July 2018 — UB v Generálny riaditeľ Sociálnej poisťovne Bratislava

(Case C-447/18)

(2018/C 328/37)

Language of the case: Slovak

Referring court

Najvyšší súd Slovenskej republiky

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: UB

Respondent: Generálny riaditeľ Sociálnej poisťovne Bratislava

Question referred

In the circumstances of the main proceedings, is it possible to interpret Article 1(w), Article 4 and Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems, considered in conjunction with the right to social security benefits and social advantages, as enshrined in Article 34(1) and (2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as precluding the application of a provision of national legislation pursuant to which the Slovak social security body is to take into consideration an applicant’s citizenship as a fundamental condition for the purposes of determining the right of national sports representatives to a benefit in addition to the old-age pension, even if another statutory requirement, namely the fact of having represented the legal predecessors of the State, including the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, is also part of that provision of national legislation?

---

(1)  OJ 2004 L 166, p. 1.

---
#### Hall v. State by Lewin

15688

12/22/93

Denied

863 P.2d 344
#### The State of Ohio, Appellee, *v.*Abbott, Appellant.

(No. 31741

Decided May 4, 1949.)

*Mr. Jackson Bosch,*prosecuting attorney, for appellee.

*Mr. Gilbert E. Condo*and *Mr. William F. Hopkins,*for appellant.

It is ordered and adjudged that this appeal as of right be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason that no debatable constitutional question is involved.

*Appeal dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Matthias, Hart, Stewart, Turner and Taft, JJ., concur. '

Zimmerman, J., not participating.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32.2

           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Annual Report of XATA Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending September 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company
hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that based on their knowledge: 1)
the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and 2) the information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company as of and for the periods covered in the
Report.

         /s/ John G. Lewis
--------------------------------------------
John G. Lewis, Chief Financial Officer

Dated: December 29, 2003

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to XATA Corporation and will be
retained by XATA Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
Annex 23. Item 6.12. – Article 10.6.2. of Chapter 10.6. Infection with infectious haematopoietic necrosis virus

CHAPTER 10.6.

INFECTION WITH INFECTIOUS HAEMATOPOIETIC NECROSIS VIRUS

[...]

Article 10.6.2.

Scope

The recommendations in this chapter apply to the following species that meet the criteria for listing as susceptible in accordance with Chapter 1.5.: ~~Arctic charr (*Salvelinus alpinus*), Atlantic salmon (*Salmo salar*), brook trout (*Salvelinus fontinalis*), brown trout (*Salmo trutta*), chinook salmon (*Oncorhynchus tshawytscha*), chum salmon (*Oncorhynchus keta*), coho salmon (*Oncorhynchus kisutch*), cutthroat trout (*Onchorynchus clarkii*), lake trout (*Salvelinus namaycush*), masu salmon (*Oncorhynchus masou*), marble trout (*Salmo marmoratus*), pike (*Esox lucius*), rainbow trout (*Oncorhynchus mykiss*) and sockeye salmon (*Oncorhynchus nerka*).~~

[...]

____________
#### State v. Decota

16497

9/01/94

Affirmed and Remanded 877 P.2d 897
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10
- 13
- 00416
- CR JOHN DAVID WAGUESPAC K , Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

From the 19th District Court McLennan County, Texas Trial Court No. 2012
- 46
- C1

ORDER
On November 19, 2013, appellant, John David Waguespack, was convicted of sexual assault, a first degree felony. S ee T EX

. P ENAL C ODE A NN

. § 22.011 (West 2011 ). Appellant was sentenced to life in prison. On the same date, appellant filed his notice of appeal in this Court. The appellate record was originally due in this appeal on January 21, 2014. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 35.2( a) (appellate record must be filed in the appellate court within 60 days after the date “the sentence is imposed or suspended inWaguespack v. State Page 2

open court or the order appealed from is signed” if a motion for new trial is not filed). 1 On January 22, 2014, the court rep orter, Rachell D. Karr, filed a motion for extension of time to file the reporter’s record. We granted Karr’s motion for extension of time and ordered that the reporter’s record be filed on April 21, 2014. Subsequently, on April 21, 2014, Karr filed anot her motion for extension of time to file the reporter’s record requesting a 60 day extension to file the record. We granted Karr’s motion for extension of time in part and ordered that the record be filed by June 20, 2014. No
record has been filed.
It is the joint responsibility of this Court and the trial court to ensure that the appellate record is timely filed. Id. at R. 35.3(c). Further, this Court may enter any order necessary to ensure the timely filing of the appellate record. Id. Accordingly, we abate this appeal and order the trial court to conduct a hearing within 21 days from the date of this order to determine a date certain by when the reporter’s record can be filed in a manner that does not further delay the prosecution of this appeal or have the practical effect of depriving appellant of his right of appeal. The court reporter is ordered to file a supplemental reporter’s record with this Court containing the transcription of the hearing within seven days of the hearing. Further, the dist rict clerk shall file a supplemental clerk’s record with this Court containing the trial court’s findings and order within seven days of the hearing.

PER CURIAM

1 The clerk’s record in this matter has been filed.Waguespack v. State Page 3

Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins Order issued and filed July 10, 2014
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 495 Reported in House (RH)]

<DOC>

                                                  House Calendar No. 70
114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 495

                          [Report No. 114-315]

 Providing for consideration of the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 
1314) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for a right 
 to an administrative appeal relating to adverse determinations of tax-
                exempt status of certain organizations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

             October 28 (legislative day, October 27), 2015

     Mr. Cole, 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 Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 
1314) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for a right 
 to an administrative appeal relating to adverse determinations of tax-
                exempt status of certain organizations.

    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 1314) to amend 
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for a right to an 
administrative appeal relating to adverse determinations of tax-exempt 
status of certain organizations, with the Senate amendment thereto, and 
to consider in the House, without intervention of any point of order, a 
motion offered by the Majority Leader or his designee that the House 
concur in the Senate amendment with the amendment printed in part A of 
the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution 
modified by the amendment printed in part B of that report. The Senate 
amendment and the motion shall be considered as read. The motion shall 
be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the 
Majority Leader and the Minority Leader or their respective designees. 
The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the motion to 
its adoption without intervening motion or demand for division of the 
question.
                                                  House Calendar No. 70

114th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                              H. RES. 495

                          [Report No. 114-315]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 Providing for consideration of the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 
1314) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for a right 
 to an administrative appeal relating to adverse determinations of tax-
                exempt status of certain organizations.

_______________________________________________________________________

             October 28 (legislative day, October 27), 2015

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed
```
#### Doe, Guardianship of, In re

15991, 16084 & 16629

11/27/96

Affirmed
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATION FOUND ON
PAGES 3 AND 4 OF THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                           6,328
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  716,650
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                          31,367
<DEPRECIATION>                                  14,227
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 770,446
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        419,040
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           392
<OTHER-SE>                                     267,453
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   770,446
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                81,226
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  143,878
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              38,619
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (101,271)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (18,846)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (82,425)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (82,425)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.11)
        

</TABLE>
### IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2022 ND 224

In the Matter of Emelia Hirsch Trust, June 9, 1994, Irrevocable Trust

Timothy Betz, Respondent

v. Emelia A. Hirsch, aka Emelia Hirsch, aka Emilia Hirsch, Carolyn Twite and Duane Hirsch, Petitioners and Appellees and Marlene Betz, Interested Party and Allen Betz, Interested Party and Appellant

No. 20220194

Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial District, th e Honorable Bruce A. Romanick , Judge.

AFFIRMED

. Per Curiam

. Sheldon A. Smith and Tyler J. Malm , Bismarck, ND, for petitioners and appellees Carolyn Twite and Duane Hirsch ; submitted on brief

. Allen Betz, self

- represented, Burnsville, MN , interested party and appellant.1 Matter of Emelia Hirsch Trust

No. 20220194

Per Curiam

. [¶1] Allen Betz appeals from a district court order finding him to be a vexatious litigant and requiring him to obtain leave of the court prior to filing documents in any new or existing litigation . He claims the required procedure for issuing the vexatious litigant pre

- filing order was not followed and the court erred in issuing a July 16, 200 8 order reforming the Emelia Hirsch J une 9, 1994, Irrevocable Trust.
[¶2] The issues Allen Betz raises related to the July 16, 2008 order are not properly before this Court. See In re Emelia Hirsch Trust , 2022 ND 89, ¶ 7, 973 N.W.2d 427 (holding issues related to July 16, 2008 order would not be addressed on appeal because order was not appealed and any attempted appeal was untimely). Furthermore, w e affirmed the reformation order in In re Emelia Hirsch Trust , 2009 ND 135, 770 N.W.2d 225. Several other attempts to have the reformation order revisited have been unsuccessful. See In re Emelia Hirsch Trust , 2022 ND 89; In re Emelia Hirsch Trust , 2021 ND 142, 963 N.W.2d 259; In re Emelia Hirsch Trust , 2020 ND 129, 944 N.W.2d 334; In re Emelia Hirsch Trust , 2019 ND 2 64, 935 N.W.2d 255; In re Emelia Hirsch Trust , 2017 ND 291, 904 N.W.2d 740; In re Emelia Hirsch Trust , 2016 ND 217, 888 N.W.2d 205; In re Emelia Hirsch Trust , 2014 ND 135, 848 N.W.2d 719; In re Emelia Hirsch Trust , 2013 ND 63, 832 N.W.2d 334.
[¶3] “ This Court r eviews pre

- filing orders issued under N.D. Sup. Ct. Admin. R. 58 for an abuse of discretion. ” In re Emelia Hirsch Trust , 2022 ND 89, ¶ 10. We conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion by finding Allen Betz is a vexatious litigant and issuing the pre
- filing order. We affirm the vexatious litigant pre
- filing order under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). We order Allen Betz to pay double costs under N.D.R.App.P. 38.2

[¶4] Daniel J. Crothers, Acting C.J. Gerald W. Van deWalle Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte Daniel D. Narum , D.J.
[¶5] The Honorable Daniel D. Narum, D .J., sitting in place of Jensen , C.J., disqualified.
O pinion filed May 15 , 2014



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

__________

No. 11

- 1 4

- 00 087

- CV

__________
AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM, LLC , Appellant

V.

WILLIAM GERLOFF, JR. , Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2

Travis County, Texas

T rial Court Cause No. C

- 1

- CV

- 07

- 000406

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Appellant, Avis Rent a Car System, LLC , filed a notice of appeal on

March 19, 2014

. When the appeal was filed, the clerk of the court of appeals from
which this case was transferred requested that Appellant f orward the $195 filing

fee on or before March 31, 2014. After the appeal was transferred to this court, w e notified Appellant by letter s dated April 1, April 3, and April 11, 2014, that the
$195 filing fee was past due. In the April 11 letter, we directed counsel to pay the2 filing fee on or before April 18, 2014, and informed Appellant that the failure to
comply “may result in dismissal of the case.” As of this date, Appellant has not
remitted the filing fee

. Because A ppellant has failed to pay the required filing fee in this appeal , we dismiss the appeal. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 5, 42.3.

PER CURIAM

May 15 , 2014
Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., Willson , J., and Bailey , J.
#### The STATE of Utah, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Marcia Park LOPEZ, Defendant and Appellant.

No. 13402.

Supreme Court of Utah.

Feb. 26, 1974.

Gary H. Weight, of Aldrich & Nelson, Provo, for defendant and appellant.

Vernon B. Romney, Atty. Gen., M. Reid Russell, Earl F. Dorius, Asst. Attys. Gen., Salt Lake City, for plaintiff and respondent.

HENRIOD, Justice:

Appeal from a conviction for possessing a controlled substance (Obedrin L. A.). Affirmed.

Defendant forged a doctor’s prescription. The druggist, suspicioning it, told defendant to return later, which she did, but, after having paid for the drug, was about to take it and leave,—when apprehended and prevented from doing so by a peace officer who arrested her for violation of Title 58-37-8(4) (a) (ii) Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended.

Only question is whether defendant violated the act with respect to gaining possession by virtue of a forgery. We think that under the circumstances of this case the defendant’s actions and intent and the custodial features involved here impress us with a conclusion that technical touching and taking or asportation and such are minutiae, and should not be dispositive of the clear import of the statute or by any hypertechnical claim of abuse by split-second interruption.

CALLISTER, C. J., and ELLETT, CROCKETT and TUCKETT, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<RESTATED>
<CIK> 0000880052
<NAME> TOWNE FINANCIAL CORP/OH
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           1,125
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                              80
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 1,200
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     15,882
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          12,604
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            12,401
<LOANS>                                         60,217
<ALLOWANCE>                                        235
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  95,607
<DEPOSITS>                                      75,516
<SHORT-TERM>                                     2,430
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,171
<LONG-TERM>                                      9,219
<COMMON>                                           208
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,063
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  95,607
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,503
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  933
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    56
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 3,492
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,868
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,180
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            1,312
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        9
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  1,359
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     76
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                          76
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        46
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .22
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    2.94
<LOANS-NON>                                         27
<LOANS-PAST>                                       221
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   231
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        5
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  239
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               239
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit






Amendment to Consulting Agreement
This Amendment to Consulting Agreement (this “Amendment”) is made as of May 2, 2018 by and between Scientific Games Corporation, a Nevada corporation (the “Company”) and Michael Gavin Isaacs (“Consultant”).
WHEREAS, the Company and Consultant entered into a Consulting Agreement dated as of January 1, 2017 (the “Agreement”); 
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual benefits to be derived herefrom and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 
		
	1.
	The Agreement is hereby amended by deleting Section 5.1 and replacing it with the following:


“Term of the Agreement.  The term of this Agreement shall commence on January 1, 2017 and shall continue until December 31, 2018, unless earlier terminated in accordance with Section 5.2 (the “Term”). The term of the Agreement can be extended if agreed to by both parties in writing.”
		
	2.
	Section 5.4 is amended by adding the following sentence to the end of the subsection:


“For the avoidance of doubt, in the event the Company otherwise terminates this Agreement after June 30, 2018, no liquidated damages will be owed by the Company and the Company will only owe Consultant fees for Services performed through the date of termination.”
3.    Section 6.1 of the Agreement is revised to update the Company's address as follows: "In the case of the Company: Scientific Games Corporation, 6601 Bermuda Road, Las Vegas NV 89119, Attn: Chief Legal Officer."
4.    Except as set forth in this Amendment, all terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect in accordance with their terms.  All references to the “Agreement” in the Agreement shall refer to the Agreement as amended by this Amendment.
5.    This Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall for all purposes be deemed to be an original and all of which shall constitute the same instrument.  Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page of this Amendment by electronic transmission shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this Amendment.


[Signatures follow on the next page]


1









IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the parties hereto has duly executed this Amendment as of May 2, 2018.


SCIENTIFIC GAMES CORPORATION




By:  /s/Shawn Williams                  
Name:    Shawn Williams
Title: SVP, Chief Human Resources Officer
    


/s/Michael Gavin Isaacs                  
Michael Gavin Isaacs






2
9 P.3d 518

INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I

April 7, 2000

22107

#### State v. French

Affirmed