alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Rabbit HALE v. STATE.

No. 17706.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 27, 1935.

B. B. Chappell, of Dublin, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Conviction for possessing intoxicating liquor for purposes of sale; punishment, one year and six months in the penitentiary.

*484This is a prosecution liad under the provisions of what is known as the Dean Law (Pen.Code 1925, art. 666 et seq., as amended). Following what has been said by us in an opinion this day handed down in Guy Meadows v. State, 88 S.W.(2d) 481, the judgment in this case will be reversed and the prosecution ordered dismissed.
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-17-0000151 21-JUL-2017 09:55 AM
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 Quarterly
Report of Cypress Sharpridge Investments, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Frances Spark,
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer 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, as amended; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: October 21, 2010



/s/ FRANCES R. SPARKFrances R. SparkChief Financial Officer and Treasurer
TS-AMID10/20/40

Attachment #8 

Pt. 2, Sec. B, End 

Worker/Occupational Exposure and Environmental Release Information on the New 

Chemical Substances at Industrial Sites Controlled by Others
# Official Journal C 112/2011

| | ISSN 1725-2423
  doi:10.3000/17252423.C_2011.112.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 112 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 549 April 2011 |

ISSN 1725-2423

doi:10.3000/17252423.C_2011.112.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 112

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 549 April 2011

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Parliament |
| 2011/C 112/01 | Decision of the Bureau of the European Parliament of 29 March 2004 laying down the procedures for implementing Regulation (EC) No 2004/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the regulations governing political parties at European level and the rules regarding their funding | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Parliament

2011/C 112/01

Decision of the Bureau of the European Parliament of 29 March 2004 laying down the procedures for implementing Regulation (EC) No 2004/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the regulations governing political parties at European level and the rules regarding their funding

1

---

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

EN
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JANUARY 8, 2021

NO. 03

- 19

- 00040

- CR

Chad Allen Kelley, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 207TH DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES TRIANA, KEL LY, AND SMITH

MODIFIED AND, AS MODIFIED, AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE SMITH

This is an appeal from the judgment adjudicating guilt entered by the tr i a l court. Having

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court ho lds that there was no error in the

court’s jud gment adjudicating guilt requiring reversal

. Howe ver, there was error in the judgment

adjudicating guilt that requires correction. Therefore, the Court modifies the trial court’s written

judgment adjudicating guilt as follows: to delete the order o f $ 18 0 restitution to th e Texas

Department of Public Safety and to reflect that the “ Time Credited ” is “ FROM 01/09/15 TO

04/09/15 02/04/16 TO 07/ 1 9/16 02/07/18 TO 12/20/18

. ” The judgment adjudicating guilt , as

modified , is affirmed

. Because appellant i s indigent and u nable to pay cos ts, no adjudica t i on of

costs is made.
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 192 (Thursday, October 3, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 80576]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-22876]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis 
Panel; Aging Primate.
    Date: November 18, 2024.
    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institute on Aging, 5601 Fishers Lane, 
Rockville, MD 20892, (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Dario Dieguez, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, 
Scientific Review Branch, National Institutes of Health, 5601 
Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20814, (301) 827-3101, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#95f1f4e7fcfabbf1fcf0f2e0f0efd5fbfcfdbbf2fae3"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5e3a3f2c3731703a373b392b3b241e30373670393128">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging 
Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: September 30, 2024.
Miguelina Perez,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2024-22876 Filed 10-2-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### COBB v. STATE.

No. 20352.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 5, 1939.

Wallace B. Moore, of Dallas, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

The offense is theft; the punishment, confinement in jail for 30 days.

The record is .before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. No question is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
#### In the Matter of Roger C. Lamm et al., Petitioners, against Robert C. Weaver, as State Rent Administrator, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County,

February 25, 1958.

*745
      *Sidney Grossman*for petitioners.

*Nathan Heller*for respondent.

Edward Gr. Baker, J.

Proceeding to review the determination of respondent denying a certificate of eviction.

In May, 1957 petitioners, owners of a five-family dwelling, filed an application for a certificate of eviction to obtain possession of the tenant’s five-room apartment. The basis for the application was that petitioners purchased the premises in October, 1956 to supplement their income and to provide a home for themselves. Petitioners alleged, and it is not denied, that petitioner husband is 59 years of age, that he sustained a compound fracture of the skull some years ago, was injured again in an accident in 1955 which left him with a disabled leg; that by reason of said injuries he is only able to do light work and that his wife has been compelled to return to work. Petitioner further alleges he must go to the premises (some 11 blocks from petitioner’s present residence) to put out the garbage, tend the furnace, clean the halls, sidewalks, etc.; that he has to walk to and from his home and the building because he is unable to drive an automobile due to the fact that he suffers ‘‘ blackouts.” A doctor’s certificate was submitted attesting to the fact that petitioner husband is suffering from Jacksonian epilepsy and from frequent blackouts and that, by reason thereof, it is dangerous for him to walk back and forth.

The tenant’s answer admits that petitioners asked for possession of his apartment when they took title and that he promised the landlord he would vacate as soon as he was able to find an apartment. The local rent administrator denied the application on the ground of failure to establish an immediate and compelling necessity.

The sole question for review is whether petitioners have shown an immediate and compelling necessity rather than a mere convenience. Respondent has found the latter and cites cases which allegedly support this finding. In *Hammond*v. *Marcely*(58 N. Y. S. 2d 565), cited by respondent, the court stated: “ Necessity means a state or condition imperatively *746demanding relief. It is something quite different from *mere*convenience” (emphasis supplied). The other cases cited by respondent are to the same effect.

On this record I am of the opinion, and so hold, that petitioners have shown an immediate, compelling necessity even under the strict definitions quoted in the cases cited by respondent, and that the determination of respondent is arbitrary and capricious. Certainly, to require that the words ‘ ‘ immediate, compelling necessity ’ ’ be construed to mean solely a matter of life or death is to strain the ordinary and natural meaning of those words.

The petition is granted and the proceeding remitted to respondent with direction to issue a certificate of eviction to petitioners.

Settle order on notice.
# C_2023048EN.01000101.xml

| 8.2.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 48/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.2.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 48/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10964 – WILMAR / CLARIANT / CLARIANT QUATS BUSINESS JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 48/01)

On 27 January 2023, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal 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 English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ 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 policy’ 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/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32023M10964. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32023M10964. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

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

---
##### 



Exhibit 10.4
 PRIDE INTERNATIONAL, INC.
SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN
 PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
       Reference to Plan
 Definitions




---



##### 



Benefit Percentage
 Vesting
 (a) Normal or Early Retirement Date
 (b) Termination Under the Employment Agreement
 (c) Death or Disability
 (d) Change in Control
 (e) Cause
 -2-




---



##### 



Effect of Termination on SERP Benefit
 (a) Normal Retirement Date
 (b) Early Retirement Date
 (c) Termination Under the Employment Agreement
 (d) Death
 (e) Disability
 (f) Change in Control
 -3-




---



##### 



(g) Cause
 Retiree Medical Benefits
 Tax Provisions
 Status of Participation Agreement
 -4-




---



##### 



Entire Agreement
 Severability
 Governing Law
 -5-




---



##### 



PRIDE INTERNATIONAL, INC.By
    
    /s/ Louis A. RaspinoATTEST:
    
    
    
    Louis A. RaspinoPresident and Chief Executive Officer/s/ W. Gregory Looser
    
    Date:
    
    March 15, 2007W. Gregory LooserSecretary/s/
Kevin C. RobertEXECUTIVEDate:
    
    March 15, 2007
 -6-
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of WhiteHorse Finance, Inc. and Subsidiaries (the Company) for the annual period ended
December 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Alastair G. C. Merrick, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge 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.



|       |  |                           
|------ |  | --------------------------
|       |  | /s/ Alastair G. C. Merrick
|Name:  |  | Alastair G. C. Merrick    
|Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer   

Date: March 5, 2013



96
#### Sidney ADAMI, Jr., Alias Sidney Adams, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee (two cases).

Nos. 20756, 20757.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 18, 1939.

McLean & Daly, of Fort Worth, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge.

Upon appellant’s plea of guilty of the offense of burglary, and the waiver of a trial by jury, the court assessed hh penalty *1116at six years confinement in the penitentiary.

Upon the written request of the appellant, duly verified by his affidavit, the appeal is dismissed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

CLEAN AIR GENERATION, LLC ANTHRACITE RIDGE, LLC,

Petitioners

v.

SCHUYLKILL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, SCHUYLKILL COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY,

Respondents :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 557 MAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the

Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 10th day of May, 2023

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
No. ____________

In the

Court of Criminal Appeals

At Austin





### No. 04-14-00878-CR

No. 04-14-00879-CR

In the



### Court of Appeals

for the



### Fourth District of Texas

at San Antonio





### No. 2013CR10841W

No. 2013CR10842W

In the 437 th District Court

Bexar County, Texas





### MATTHEW DOUGLAS HAYES

Appellant

V.



### THE STATE OF TEXAS

Appellee



APPELLANT’S FIRST MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

WITHIN WHICH TO FILE

PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

 PD-0885&0886-15

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

Transmitted 7/16/2015 7:11:30 AM

Accepted 7/17/2015 2:42:42 PM

ABEL ACOSTA

CLERKTO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS:

APPELLANT, pursuant to T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 68.2(c) moves for an extension of

time within which to file its petition for discretionary review. In support of its

motion, appellant submits the following:

1. Appellant was charged with two felony offenses of aggravated robbery.

2. Appellant pled guilty to the charged offenses and submitted to a presentence investigation. There was an agreement that the court’s

sentence could not exceed ten years confinement in the Institutional

Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. After a hearing

was held, appellant was sentenced to seven years confinement in the

Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice on September 9, 2014.

3. A motion for new trial was timely filed. It was overruled by operation of

law. Appellant filed a notice of appeal and subsequently filed a brief

with the Fourth Court of Appeals.

3. In a Per Curium decision, the Fourth Court of Appeals dismissed

appellant’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction on June 10, 2015.

4. By appellant’s calculation, a petition for discretionary review would be

due in this Court on July 10, 2015. However, CaseMail indicates that the

petition is due on July 27, 2015.

5. Out of an abundance of caution, and in the event a mistake was made in

calculating the time, appellant seeks an extension, in accordance with

TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2(c), until July 27, 2015, to file its petition for

discretionary review.

2WHEREFORE, the Appellant prays that this Court will grant the requested

extension until July 27, 2015.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/M ANDY M ILLER

Attorney for appellant

2910 Commercial Center Blvd., Ste. 103-201

Katy, TX 77494

SBN 24055561

PHONE (832) 900-9884

FAX (877) 904-6846

mandy@mandymillerlegal.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Pursuant to T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 9.5, this certifies that on July 16, 2015

, a copy of

the foregoing was delivered to the following addresses:

Amanda Byrd

Amanda.Byrd@bexar.org

Bexar County District Attorney’s Office

Lisa McMinn

State Prosecuting Attorney

lisa.mcminn@spa.state.tx.us

/ S /M ANDY M ILLER

3
# Official Journal L 15/2020

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 15 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6320 January 2020 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 15

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6320 January 2020

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/41 of 13 January 2020 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Αρσενικό Νάξου’ (Arseniko Naxou) (PDO)) | 1 |
| | * | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/42 of 17 January 2020 amending Regulation (EU) No 37/2010 to classify the substance bambermycin as regards its maximum residue limit (
  1
  ) | 2 |
| | * | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/43 of 17 January 2020 amending Regulation (EU) No 37/2010 to classify the substance ciclesonide as regards its maximum residue limit (
  1
  ) | 5 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/41 of 13 January 2020 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Αρσενικό Νάξου’ (Arseniko Naxou) (PDO))

1

*

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/42 of 17 January 2020 amending Regulation (EU) No 37/2010 to classify the substance bambermycin as regards its maximum residue limit (
  1
  )

1

2

*

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/43 of 17 January 2020 amending Regulation (EU) No 37/2010 to classify the substance ciclesonide as regards its maximum residue limit (
  1
  )

1

5

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3341 

To designate the portion of Moffett Federal Airfield, California, containing 

the 129th Rescue Wing of the California Air National Guard as Moffett 

Air National Guard Base. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 29, 2015 

Ms. ESHOO introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To designate the portion of Moffett Federal Airfield, California, containing the 129th Rescue Wing of the California Air National Guard as Moffett Air National Guard 

Base. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF PORTION OF MOFFETT FED4 ERAL AIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA, AS MOFFETT 

5 AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASE. 

6 (a) DESIGNATION.—The 111-acre cantonment area 

7 at Moffett Federal Airfield, California, utilized by the 

8 129th Rescue Wing of the California Air National Guard 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3341 IH

1 shall be known and designated as ‘‘Moffett Air National 

2 Guard Base’’. 

3 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in any law, regula4 tion, map, document, paper, other record of the United 

5 States to the cantonment area at Moffett Federal Airfield 

6 described in subsection (a) shall be considered to be a ref7 erence to Moffett Air National Guard Base. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS