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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                  JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                    SEP-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                           1
<CASH>                              500,692
<SECURITIES>                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                             0
<ALLOWANCES>                              0
<INVENTORY>                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                    565,794
<PP&E>                              474,274
<DEPRECIATION>                     (296,477)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    3,084,159
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>             1,329,414
<BONDS>                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>             5,046,634
<PREFERRED>                       1,272,818
<COMMON>                         17,242,817
<OTHER-SE>                      (21,807,524)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      3,084,159
<SALES>                                   0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          0
<CGS>                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                    9,608
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  (1,238,514)
<INCOME-TAX>                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              (1,238,514)
<DISCONTINUED>                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<CHANGES>                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                     (1,238,514)
<EPS-BASIC>                         (0.47)
<EPS-DILUTED>                         (0.47)



</TABLE>
# C_2021431EN.01002501.xml

| 25.10.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 431/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 431/25

---

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 2 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Győri Ítélőtábla — Hungary) — JZ v OTP Jelzálogbank Zrt., OTP Bank Nyrt., OTP Faktoring Követeléskezelő Zrt.

(Case C-932/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Consumer protection - Unfair terms - Directive 93/13/EEC - Article 1(2) - Article 6(1) - Loan denominated in foreign currency - Difference between the exchange rate applicable when the loaned funds are released and when they are repaid - Member State legislation providing for the replacement of an unfair term by a provision of national law - Possibility for the national court to invalidate the entire agreement containing the unfair term - Possible consideration of the protection offered by that legislation and of the consumer’s wishes regarding its application)

(2021/C 431/26)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Győri Ítélőtábla

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: JZ

Defendants: OTP Jelzálogbank Zrt., OTP Bank Nyrt., OTP Faktoring Követeléskezelő Zrt.

Operative part of the judgment

Article 6(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which, in relation to loan agreements concluded with a consumer, renders void a term relating to the exchange difference that is regarded as unfair and requires the national court with jurisdiction to replace that term with a provision of national law imposing the use of an official exchange rate, without providing for the possibility, for that court, to grant the application of the consumer concerned for the annulment of the loan agreement in its entirety, even if that court considers that the continuation of that agreement would be contrary to the interests of the consumer, in particular with regard to the exchange risk which the latter would continue to bear by virtue of another term in that agreement, in so far as the court is, however, in a position to make a finding — in the exercise of its sovereign discretion, over which the consumer’s expressed wishes cannot prevail — that the implementation of the measures thus provided for by that national legislation makes it possible to re-establish the legal and factual situation which would have existed for the consumer in the absence of that unfair term.

---

(1)  OJ C 161, 11.5.2020.

---
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

JERRY LILLY, INDIVIDUALLY AND

D/B/A WESTAR INDUSTRIES,

Appellant,

v.

CHRIS PHAM, ATTORNEY

- IN

- FACT

FOR ALEX PHAM,

Appellee. §

§

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 16

- 00135

- CV

Appeal from

352nd District Court

of Tarrant Co unty, Texas

(TC # 352

- 280346

- 15 )

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes the appeal should be

dismissed for want of jurisdiction, in accordance with the opinion of this Court. We therefore

dismiss the appeal. We further order Appellant to pay all costs of this ap peal. We further order

that this decision be certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 2 7 TH DAY OF OCTOBER , 2016

.

ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

January 29, 2010 

s0125 

Order 

 

January 29, 2010 

140039 

BANK OF AMERICA N.A. f/k/a 

AMERICA’S WHOLESALE LENDER, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 140039 

 COA: 292026 

Kent CC: 08-000106-NZ 

WEST COAST REALTY, INC., BRIAN 

SILVERNAIL, and MICHELE SILVERNAIL, 

Defendants-Appellees. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 8, 2009 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23
- 1043

C. HOLMES , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF SOUTH CAROLINA, INC.; J. DOE #1 THROUGH J. DOE #X; SCOTT MCCARTHA; MS. SHIPMAN , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Charleston

. Bruce H. Hendricks , District Judge. ( 2:20

- cv - 00004

- BHH

- MHC )

Submitted : October 31 , 2023 Decided: November 2, 2023

Before HARRIS and QUATTLEBAUM , Circuit Judges , and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge

.
Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. C. Holmes, Appellant Pro Se. James B. Hood, Kathryn N. Tanner, HOOD LAW FIRM, LLC, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-1043 Doc: 20 Filed: 11/02/2023 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: C. Holmes appeals the district court’s order s (1) denying her motion to restore or reopen a civil action that she had voluntarily dismissed and to stay proceedings pending resolution of an earlier appeal, and (2) denying her motions for reconsideration of th e denial of her motion to restore or reopen her case and for leave to amend her complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. * Accordingly, we affirm the district
court ’s orders

. Holmes v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of S

. C

. , Inc. , No. 2:20

- cv - 00004

- BHH

MHC (D.S.C. Aug. 24, 2022; Dec. 13, 2022). We grant Holmes’ motion to file an oversized informal brief. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

* Holmes’ reliance on South Carolina procedural rules is misplaced. See McFarland v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. , 810 F.3d 273, 284 (4th Cir. 2016) (“ Federal courts apply federal rules of procedure.”). USCA4 Appeal: 23-1043 Doc: 20 Filed: 11/02/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4335 

AN ACT 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for 

headstones and markers for, and interment in national 

cemeteries of, deceased spouses and dependent children 

of members of the Armed Forces serving on active duty, 

and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 4335 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Servicemember Family 

3 Burial Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS PROVISION 

5 OF HEADSTONES AND MARKERS FOR, AND IN6 TERMENT IN NATIONAL CEMETERIES OF, 

7 SPOUSES AND DEPENDENT CHILDREN OF 

8 MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES SERVING 

9 ON ACTIVE DUTY. 

10 (a) HEADSTONES AND MARKERS.—Section 

11 2306(b)(2) of title 38, United States Code, is amended— 

12 (1) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ‘‘, or the 

13 spouse of a member of the Armed Forces serving on 

14 active duty under conditions other than dishonor15 able, as shown by a statement from a general court16 martial convening authority, at the time of the 

17 spouse’s death if such death occurs before October 

18 1, 2024’’ after ‘‘veteran’’; and 

19 (2) in subparagraph (C), by inserting ‘‘, or the 

20 eligible dependent child of a member of the Armed 

21 Forces serving on active duty under conditions other 

22 than dishonorable, as shown by a statement from a 

23 general court-martial convening authority, at the 

24 time of the child’s death if such death occurs before 

25 October 1, 2024’’ after ‘‘veteran’’. 
3 

•HR 4335 EH

1 (b) INTERMENT IN NATIONAL CEMETERIES.—Sec2 tion 2402(a)(5) of such title is amended by inserting ‘‘, 

3 and the spouse, minor child, and, in the discretion of the 

4 Secretary, unmarried adult child of a member of the 

5 Armed Forces serving on active duty under conditions 

6 other than dishonorable, as shown by a statement from 

7 a general court-martial convening authority, at the time 

8 of the spouse’s or child’s death if such death occurs before 

9 October 1, 2024’’ after ‘‘paragraph (7)’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives May 7, 2018. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4335 

AN ACT 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide 

poses. Forces serving on active duty, and for other purpendent children of members of the Armed national cemeteries of, deceased spouses and defor headstones and markers for, and interment in
#### Rosa Chappelle McGill, Appellant, v. Lewis W. Chappelle and Damon G. Chappelle, as administrators ad litem of James E. Chappelle, Appellees.

An Appeal from Decrees of the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Cockrell & Cockrell, for Appellant.

Appeal dismissed on praecipe of counsel for Appellant, April 17, 1915.
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 99-10083

Summary Calendar

_____________________

ALONZO HOWARD PAYNE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

DR. REVELL; SUSAN SOSOBEE, also

known as Sosebee; CAPTAIN HARRELL; 

KENNETH McCOY, Lieutenant; KARA 

GIBBS, Sergeant; DARREL W. SCHAFFER, 

Correctional Officer III,

Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:96l-CV-200

_________________________________________________________________

November 11, 1999

Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Alonzo Howard Payne, Texas prisoner #487654, appeals the

district court’s summary judgment dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983

complaint as to the defendants, Dr. Timothy Revell, dietician Susan

Sosebee, and Captain Robert Harrell. Payne contends that he met

his burden of showing the existence of genuine issues for trial

with respect to his claim that these defendants were deliberately

indifferent to his serious medical needs. Payne has also filed a
2

motion for leave to file a petition for writ of mandamus. The

motion is DENIED. 

Payne’s voluminous medical history reflects that he received

extensive medical care for his diabetes. He acknowledges in his

appeal brief that he “is in disagreement with his physician over

the proper type of treatment.” However, Payne’s disagreement with

the extensive medical treatment he received is not sufficient to

raise a genuine issue of material fact. See Norton v. Dimazana,

122 F.3d 286, 292 (5th Cir. 1997). Furthermore, defendant Harrell

is entitled to qualified immunity in connection with his efforts to

accommodate Payne’s medical need for food while still maintaining

discipline. See Harris v. Victoria Indep. Sch. Dist., 168 F.3d

216, 223 (5th Cir. 1999). Accordingly, the district court did not

err in granting summary judgment in favor of defendants Revell,

Sosebee, and Harrell.

Payne has abandoned any claims against any other defendants by

failing to brief adequately any argument in connection therewith.

See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993).

AFFIRMED. MOTION DENIED.
#### Ollie George BANKS, Plaintiff in Error, v. STATE of Oklahoma, Defendant in Error.

No. A-12751.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

June 17, 1959.

*288Alvin C. Bruce, Ardmore, for plaintiff in error.

Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., Sam H. Lattimore, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.

BRETT, Judge.

This is an appeal by plaintiff in error Ollie George Banks, defendant below, from a conviction for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. 47 O.S.1951 § 93. He was tried by a jury which left the punishment to the trial court. Punishment was fixed at thirty days confinement in the county jail and a fine of $100, on which judgment and sentence were entered.

The cause was set for oral argument in this Court at which no appearance was made and no briefs were filed herein. The case was accordingly submitted .on the record. Under these conditions, we look to the pleadings, the instructions and exceptions, and the judgment and sentence, and if no prejudicial error appears, will affirm the judgment and sentence. Ford v. State, 90 Okl.Cr. 387, 214 P.2d 462.

Nevertheless, we have examined the record of evidence presented at the trial which amply supports the jury’s verdict. It appears that both the defendant and the other occupant of the automobile driven by defendant were highly intoxicated when observed by the Sheriff weaving down the public highway. A jar of moonshine whiskey had been broken, some of it was still evident, as was the broken glass, and the strong smell of liquor was observed. The defendant had collided with another automobile and pieces of his left headlight were found at the scene of the collision.

The judgment and sentence is affirmed.

POWELL, P. J., and NIX, J., concur.
Direct Dial: 703.760.5204 kpomfret@williamsmulien.com
BY FEDEX UAS Integration Office 

## WILLIAMS MULLEN
March 18, 2016
West Building Ground Floor, Room w12-140 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, DC 20590 Re: Petition forAmendmentto Exemption No. 13447 Dear Sir or Madam: 

# -=;::o 5;;./**d){)t~-** 

# 34--SLo

By letter dated July 7, 2015, the Property Drone Consortium requested an exemption pursuant to Section 333 ofthe FAA Modernization and Reform Act of2012 to operate several classes of unmanned aircraft systems (''UAS"). This request was granted in Exemption No. 13447 on October 30, 2015. The Property Drone Consortium nowwishes to amend Exemption No. 13447to include all ofthe platforms on the List ofApproved UnmannedAerial Systems under Section 333 posted at www.regulations.gov, as amended from time to time. In addition, we request that our exemption be amended to include the conditions relating to flight operations relative to persons, vessels, vehicles and structures that are included in Exemption No. 15343granted on March 10, 2016. Otherthan these revisions, there will be no request for a change in the terms in Exemption No. 13447. Thankyou for your prompt consideration ofthis request. Please contact me at 703.760.5204 or kpomfret@williamsmullen.com ifyou have any questions.
KDP/kmb 30651891_1.docx

8300 Greensboro Drive, Suite 1100 Tysons Corner, VA 22102 T 703.760.5200 F703.748.0244 williamsmullen.com I A Professional Corporation
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

TERRENCE BETHEA, 

 Appellant 

 v. 

PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF 

CORRECTIONS, PA. STATE POLICE, 

 Appellees 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 85 MAP 2014 

Appeal from Appeal from the Order from 

Commonwealth Court dated June 18, 2014 

at Docket No. 261 MD 2014 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM DECIDED: April 27, 2015 

AND NOW, this 27th day of April, 2015, the Order of the Commonwealth Court is 

AFFIRMED.
# C_2011152EN.01000301.xml

| 21.5.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 152/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.5.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 152/3

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 29 March 2011 — European Commission v Italian Republic

(Case C-565/08) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Articles 43 EC and 49 EC - Lawyers - Obligation to comply with maximum fee tariffs - Obstacle to market access - No obstacle)

2011/C 152/03

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: E. Traversa and L. Prete, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Italian Republic (represented: I. Bruni, G. Calmieri and W. Ferrante, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Articles 43 EC and 49 EC — Lawyers — Obligation to comply with compulsory fee ceilings

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the European Commission and the Italian Republic to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission and the Italian Republic to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 55, 7.3.2009.

1

---
#### In the Matter of the Claims of Joseph C. Rea et al., Appellants. Thomas F. Hartnett, as Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

Weiss, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed February 26, 1990, which dismissed claimants’ request for a hearing as untimely.

Notices of determinations which ruled claimants ineligible for unemployment insurance benefits for various reasons were mailed to each claimant on October 11, 1988. Claimants did not request hearings to review these determinations until *442January 5, 1989. The threshold issue raised at the hearing was the timeliness of the hearing requests. Claimants presented testimony that they did not receive the determinations. An investigator for the Commissioner of Labor testified that the notices were properly addressed, sealed in envelopes and placed in the departmental mail box. She also testified that the documents displayed by claimants at the hearing were the original documents that had been mailed to them on October 11, 1988. We find that there was sufficient evidence of the actual mailing and of the office practice demonstrating that the notices were properly mailed *(see, Matter of Colyar [New York Tel. Co.*— Roberts], 129 AD2d 946) to establish the presumption of receipt. As there is a rational basis for the finding of untimeliness made by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board *(see, Matter of Chapman [Roberts]*138 AD2d 866), the decision must be affirmed.

Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Levine and Mercure, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                           0000880580
<NAME>                          Enex 90-91 Income & Retirement Fund - Sr 3, L.P.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              dec-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 jan-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   sep-30-1996
<CASH>                                         38236
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  49195
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               87431
<PP&E>                                         962796
<DEPRECIATION>                                 472343
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 577884
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          38
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     577846
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   577884
<SALES>                                        186485
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               186485
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  61748
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               29354
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   95383
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
        


</TABLE>
H. Res. 99 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

February 10, 2015. 

Resolved, That the House has heard with profound sorrow of the death of the Honorable Alan Nunnelee, a Representative from the State of Mississippi. 

Resolved, That the Clerk communicate these resolutions 

to the Senate and transmit a copy thereof to the family of 

the deceased. 

Resolved, That when the House adjourns today, it adjourn as a further mark of respect to the memory of the deceased. 

Attest: 

Clerk.