alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                                                  
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                  
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                    
|View History: Annual                                                                              
|View History: Annual                                                                              
|View History:                                                                                     
|                                                                                                  
|No chart available.                                                                               
|No chart available.                                                                               
|                                                                                                  
|                                                                                                  
|Mississippi (with State off) Shale Proved Reserves Extensions and Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                  

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, August 21, 2020.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, August 21, 2020

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A21I0017. MARK SMITH v. STEPHANIE SANDERS.

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of 

this order. The Clerk of State Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record 

transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

LC NUMBERS:

19A75007
|                                                                     
|---------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                     
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                       
|View History: Annual                                                 
|View History: Annual                                                 
|View History:                                                        
|                                                                     
|Kentucky Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)
|                                                                     
|                                                                     
|Kentucky Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)
|                                                                     

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1970's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 26    
|1980's                                                                                                                            | 25     | 25     | 35     | 31     | 24     | 27     | 29     | 23     | 24     | 16    
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 25     | 24     | 32     | 26     | 39     | 43     | 46     | 48     | 54     | 69    
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 56     | 72     | 66     | 66     | 72     | 70     | 105    | 89     | 100    |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Leslie White, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620, 621), we find that the proof was legally sufficient to support defendant’s convictions for assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [2]). Whether a particular object constitutes a dangerous instrument as defined by Penal Law § 10.00 (13) depends upon the manner and circumstances in which it is used *(People v Carter,*53 NY2d 113, 116). Evidence that defendant exerted "a lot of force” in striking two young girls, ages 5 and 3, with a belt, impairing the ability of one child to walk for a period of time, was sufficient to raise a factual issue for the jury whether the belt was readily capable of producing serious physical injury *(see, People v Rollins,*120 AD2d 896, *lv denied*68 NY2d 773). The People also presented sufficient evidence to raise a jury issue regarding defendant’s intent to cause injury and whether the victims suffered a physical injury as defined by Penal Law § 10.00 (9) *(see, People v Fasano,*112 AD2d 791, *Iv denied*65 NY2d 979).

There is no merit to defendant’s contentions that the trial court erred in refusing to suppress an admission made in Family Court in an abuse and neglect proceeding and in denying his motion to dismiss the indictment on speedy trial grounds. The record does not support the claim that defendant was deprived of a fair trial by repeated comments concerning *871sexual abuse. The remaining claim of error in admitting photographs of the victims was not preserved for our review and, in any event, also lacks merit. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Marshall, J.—assault, second degree.) Present—Denman, J. P., Green, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 32.01

                            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 on Form 10-K of Windrose Medical
Properties Trust (the "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Fred S. Klipsch, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (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.

Dated: March 17, 2006                           /s/ Fred S. Klipsch
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Fred S. Klipsch
                                                Chairman of the Board and
                                                Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4646 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4646

       To suspend temporarily the duty on certain grill brushes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 25, 2012

Mr. Bishop of Georgia introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
       To suspend temporarily the duty on certain grill brushes.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN GRILL BRUSHES.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00        Heavy-duty grill    Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          cleaning brushes                                                  12/31/2015
                          with both
                          removable steel
                          bristle heads and
                          multi-blade
                          scrapers
                          (provided for in
                          subheading
                          9603.90.80)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>

                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.3.2

                           AMENDMENT No. 1 OF LEASE
                           ------------------------

     This Amendment No. 1 of Lease (this "Amendment") dated as of June 12, 1997
between Theodore Pasquarello, not individually but as Trustee of the E.B. Realty
Trust under Declaration of Trust dated January 28, 1988 ("Landlord") and New
England Business Service, Inc. ("Tenant").

     WHEREAS, Landlord and Tenant are parties to a certain Lease dated as of
March 31, 1997 for the land and the building located at 33 Union Avenue,
Sudbury, Massachusetts (the "Lease").

     WHEREAS, Landlord and Tenant desire to amend the Lease as hereinafter set
forth.  Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the same meanings
ascribed to them in the Lease.

     NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, Landlord and Tenant
hereby agree to amend the Lease as follows:

     A.   Effective as of March 31, 1997 the second sentence of (S)17.4 of the
Lease which stated that "[t]he parties acknowledge that Tenant has a right to
terminate this Lease in the event of a default by Landlord or Theodore
Pasquarello under the provisions of (S)2 of that certain Letter of Credit
Agreement of even date herewith between Landlord, Tenant, Theodore Pasquarello
and the Paris Trust Landlord" is hereby deleted and the following sentence
substituted therefore:

          The parties acknowledge that certain of Landlord's
          obligations under this Article XVII are secured by
          a limited Guaranty of Theodore Pasquarello dated as
          of March 31, 1997.

     B.   The terms and provisions of the Lease are hereby ratified and
confirmed.

     C.   This Amendment shall be binding upon the parties and upon their
successors and assigns.
<PAGE>

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment No. 1 of Lease has been executed by
Landlord and Tenant as a sealed instrument as of the date first written above.

                                   LANDLORD:


                                   By:__________________________________
                                    Theodore Pasquarello, not indivdually
                                    but as Trustee of E.B. Realty Trust


                                   TENANT:

                                   NEW ENGLAND BUSINESS SERVICE,
                                   INC.

                                   By:__________________________________
                                   Name:________________________________
                                   Title:_______________________________
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO DIVISION

JTH TAX LLC d/b/a LIBERTY TAX 

SERVICE, SIEMPRETAX+, LLC, Plaintiffs,

v.

MICKEY WHITE, NATTY’S TAX 

SERVICE, Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL NO. 6-20-CV-00140

ORDER DISMISSING CASE

Before the Court is Defendant Mickey White’s (d/b/a Natty’s Tax Service) Motion to 

Dismiss (ECF No. 29). the above-entitled cause of action. The Court, having considered the 

Motion and finds it is unopposed by the Plaintiffs, finds that the Motion should be GRANTED. 

Pursuant to Local Rule 7(e)(2), “[i]f there is no response [to a motion] filed within the time 

period prescribed by this rule, the court may grant the motion as unopposed.” W.D. Tex. Civ. R. 

7(e)(2). White filed his Motion to Dismiss on June 3, 2020. Nine months have elapsed since 

Defendant filed his motion and Plaintiffs have yet to file a response. See W.D. Tex. Civ. R. 

7(e)(2) (“A response to a dispositive motion shall be filed not later than 14 days after the filing of 

the motion.”). Accordingly, the Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to file a timely response to 

White’s Motion to Dismiss, and therefore, the Court finds that White’s Motion to Dismiss be 

granted as unopposed.

Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED and Plaintiff’s claims 

against Defendants are DISMISSED without prejudice.

Case 6:20-cv-00140-ADA Document 45 Filed 04/01/21 Page 1 of 2
SIGNED this 1st day of April, 2021.

ALAN D ALBRIGHT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 6:20-cv-00140-ADA Document 45 Filed 04/01/21 Page 2 of 2
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

 FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

ESTATE OF CLYDE L. HARRIGER,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D16-1708

ALICE JEAN ROGERS HARRIGER,

Appellee.

________________________________/

Opinion filed March 24, 2017

Appeal from the Circuit Court 

for Volusia County,

Karen Adams Foxman, Judge.

Allison J. McCabe and Susanne D. 

McCabe, of McCabe Law Firm, Port 

Orange, for Appellant.

No Appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM. 

The estate of Clyde L. Harriger (“Former Husband”) appeals the Final Judgment 

of Dissolution of Marriage regarding Former Husband and Alice Jean Rogers Harriger 

(“Former Wife”). Former Husband raises three issues on appeal, contending that the trial 

court erred in: 1) considering the subject of nonmarital property despite Former Wife’s 

failure to raise it in her pleadings; 2) determining that Former Wife possessed nonmarital 

property and categorizing two Bank of America accounts as nonmarital; and 3) failing to 
2

make factual findings regarding six Wells Fargo accounts. We affirm as to the first two 

issues without further discussion. 

As to the third issue, we reverse and remand for the trial court to make factual 

findings regarding the Wells Fargo bank accounts. See Winney v. Winney, 979 So. 2d 

396, 400 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (“A trial court’s failure to make adequate factual findings in 

a final judgment of dissolution of marriage is typically reversible error because, in most 

circumstances, this failure precludes meaningful appellate review.”). Specifically, the trial 

court is directed on remand to make written findings stating whether these accounts are 

marital or nonmarital property.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED. 

SAWAYA, TORPY and BERGER, JJ., concur.
EX PARTE

NO. 62,593

Trial Cause No. 762351

\tSM?)'02.

IN THE TEXAS COURT OF

BERNARDO ADAN TERCERO CRIMINAL APPEALS

MOTION TO FILE CD-ROM

EXHIBITS 9g, 9h, 10, and 11

to

SUGGESTION FOR THIS COURT TO RECONSIDER ON ITS

OWN MOTION MR. TERCERO'S SECOND APPLICATION

FOR HABEAS CORPUS, NO. 62,593-02

AND ACCOMPANYING

MOTION FOR STAY OF EXECUTION

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGES OF THE TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS:

COMES NOW Movant, BERNARDO TERCERO, by and through his pro-bono counsel,

Walter C. Long, and respectfully moves that he be allowed to file with this Court the

accompanying CD-Rom with the remaining exhibits that could not be uploaded for electronic

filing today.

This was the undersigned's first experience of e-filing to the Court ofCriminal Appeals.

Exhibits 9g and 9h contain large photographic documents and could not be uploaded.

Please forgive the inconvenience. Hard, bound copies ofthe Suggestion for

Reconsideration and all exhibits will be filed early tomorrow morning in compliance with the

rules.

Sincere

Walter C. Long

SBOT 24002491

P.O. Box 41557

Austin, Texas 78704

512-912-0722 (office)

512-554-2269 (cell)

RECEIVED IN

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUG 18 2015

Abel Acosta, Clerk
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 24 (Friday, February 4, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 5692]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-2504]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-36,258 and TA-W-36,258A]


Burlen Corporation, Fitzgerald Plant, Fitzgerald, Georgia and 
Burlen Corporation, Tifton Plant, Tifton, Georgia; Amended 
Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment 
Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
2273) the Department of Labor issued a Notice of Certification 
Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance on 
September 20, 1999, applicable to workers of Burlen Corporation, 
Fitzgerald Plant, Fitzgerald, Georgia. The notice was published in the 
Federal Register on October 14, 1999 (64 FR 55751).
    At the request of the petitioners, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers were engaged 
in the production of women's underwear. New information shows that 
workers were separated in December, 1999 at the Tifton Plant, Tifton, 
Georgia location of Burlen Corporation. The workers are engaged in the 
production of women's underwear and provide distribution and shipping 
services for the subject firms' production facility in Fitzgerald, 
Georgia which closed in July, 1999.
    Accordingly, the Department is amending the certification to cover 
the workers of Burlen Corporation, Tifton Plant, Tifton, Georgia.
    The intent of the Department's certification is to include all 
workers of Burlen Corporation who were adversely affected by increased 
imports.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-36,258 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    ``All workers of Burlen Corporation, Fitzgerald Plant, 
Fitzgerald, Georgia (TA-W-36,258) and Tifton Plant, Tifton, Georgia 
(TA-W-36,258A) who became totally or partially separated from 
employment on or after May 14, 1998 through September 20, 2001 are 
eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the 
Trade Act of 1974.''

    Signed at Washington, DC this 19th day of January, 2000.
Grant D. Beale,
Program Manager, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 00-2504 Filed 2-3-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
Exhibit 32.1  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 Report of Castle Arch Real Estate Investment Company, L.L.C. a California limited liability company (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) I, Kirby D. Cochran, Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to my knowledge:  a. the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and  b. the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.    /s/ Kirby D. Cochran Kirby D. Cochran, President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)  Dated April 14, 2008