alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                                 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                 
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                         
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                   
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                   
|View History:                                                                    
|                                                                                 
|Fort Lauderdale, FL Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Jamaica (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                 
|                                                                                 
|Fort Lauderdale, FL Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Jamaica (Million 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     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 1      | 214    | 1,340  | 403    |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

ARTHUR CHRISTOPHER SAMUEL, JR., ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-1414 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ___________________________________) Opinion filed March 27, 2019. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Sarasota County; Charles E. Roberts, Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

SILBERMAN, MORRIS, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
|                                                                           
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                           
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                   
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                             
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                             
|View History:                                                              
|                                                                           
|Cameron, LA Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Singapore (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                           
|                                                                           
|Cameron, LA Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Singapore (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                           

|Year                                                                                                                              | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May   | Jun | Jul   | Aug | Sep | Oct   | Nov | Dec
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ----- | --- | ----- | --- | --- | ----- | --- | ---
|2021                                                                                                                              |     |     |     |     | 3,089 |     |       |     |     |       |     |    
|2022                                                                                                                              |     |     |     |     |       |     | 3,293 |     |     | 3,227 |     |    
|2024                                                                                                                              |     |     |     |     | 3,663 |     |       |     |     |       |     |    
|                                                                                                                                 
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY RESTATED FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31,
1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           4,058
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,611
<ALLOWANCES>                                        50
<INVENTORY>                                        960
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,797
<PP&E>                                             634
<DEPRECIATION>                                     124
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  13,395
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,194
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0 
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            42
<OTHER-SE>                                      17,626
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    13,395
<SALES>                                          1,432
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,432
<CGS>                                              637
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      637
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  46
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     53
<INCOME-TAX>                                        10
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        43
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .02
        

</TABLE>
#### Amar J. Singh et al., Respondents, v Brunswick Hospital Center, Inc., et al., Defendants, and MD Stat, LLC, et al., appellants.

[767 NYS2d 839]

*434In an action, inter alia, for specific performance and to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendants MD Stat, LLC, and Ted Doukas appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohalan, J.), dated August 21, 2002, as granted the plaintiffs’ separate motions to stay a certain summary proceeding and consolidate it with this action to the extent of placing certain real property with a receiver, and denied their cross motion, inter alia, to vacate a restraining order.

Ordered the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The instant case involves a dispute over the rightful ownership of Brunswick Hospital Center, Inc. (hereinafter the hospital), located in Amityville. The plaintiffs had entered into a series of agreements with the owners, the defendants Benjamin, Claire, and Douglas Stein, and Amityville Physicians Realty, whereby those defendants agreed to convey their 100% ownership of the hospital and the land on which it is situated to the plaintiffs. However, those defendants apparently conveyed the real property to the defendant MD Stat, LLC, controlled by the defendant Ted Doukas, and shortly thereafter rescinded the agreements with the plaintiffs, allegedly for just cause. After the plaintiffs commenced the instant action, inter alia, for specific performance, the Supreme Court appointed a receiver to oversee the hospital. Subsequently, the Supreme Court granted the plaintiffs’ separate motions to stay a certain summary proceeding and consolidate it with this action to the extent of placing the real property with the receiver, and denied the appellants’ cross motion, inter alia, to vacate a restraining order barring them from commencing eviction proceedings against the hospital or its tenants. We affirm.

Pursuant to CPLR 6401 (a), the Supreme Court has the discretion, upon a motion by a party with an “apparent interest” in the “property which is the subject of an action,” to appoint a temporary receiver of the property “where there is danger that the property will be . . . lost, materially injured or destroyed” *(see Domansky v Berkovitch,*259 AD2d 331 [1999]). In this case, the documentary evidence sufficiently established that the plaintiffs have an “apparent interest” in the subject property. In addition, the unilateral actions and conduct of the *435various defendants in apparent willful disregard of the agreements and prior orders of the Supreme Court indicate a danger of material injury to the property unless a receiver was appointed *(see Chaline Estates v Fureraft Assoc.,*278 AD2d 141 [2000]; *Beatty v Williams,*227 AD2d 912 [1996]; *64 B Venture v American Realty Co.,*194 AD2d 504 [1993]; *Gimbel v Reibman,*78 AD2d 897 [1980]).

The appellants’ remaining contentions are without merit. Santucci, J.P., Luciano, Schmidt and Adams, JJ., concur.
#### Brian Marren, Appellant, v Betsey Nathan et al., Respondents.

[770 NYS2d 293]

*231Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Judith Gische, J.), entered on or about June 4, 2002, which, in an action for reformation of a stipulation of settlement incorporated but not merged in a judgment of divorce, against plaintiffs ex-wife and the attorney who represented the latter in the divorce action, inter alia, granted the attorney’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against her and for sanctions pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1, and, upon a search of the record, dismissed the complaint as against the ex-wife as well, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff’s claim for reformation of the stipulation was properly dismissed as based on allegations of fraud that are utterly devoid of evidentiary content (CPLR 3016 [b]; *see Chimart Assoc. v Paul,*66 NY2d 570, 574 [1986]). At most, plaintiff shows only that he misunderstood the terms of the stipulation, i.e., a unilateral mistake insufficient to support a claim for reformation *(see id.*at 573). Since the complaint fails to show fraud, the cause of action for conspiracy, alleging in similarly conclusory language that defendants conspired to defraud plaintiff, and the claim for punitive damages based on such conduct were also properly dismissed. To the extent that the complaint claims that the stipulation is ambiguous, that claim was previously rejected in postjudgment proceedings brought by plaintiff in the divorce action, and is therefore barred by collateral estoppel *(see Youkelsone v Federal Natl. Mtge. Assn.,*309 AD2d 655 [2003]). It does not avail plaintiff that he did not seek reformation in the prior proceedings *(see O’Brien v City of Syracuse,*54 NY2d 353, 357-358 [1981]). The record supports the imposition of sanctions. The action is based on the frivolous premise that plaintiff relied on his ex-wife’s attorney’s representation as to the meaning of the stipulation, even though plaintiff was represented by counsel in the negotiation of the stipulation and acknowledged on the record that he was satisfied with such representation. The record also shows that the instant action is a continuation of a pattern by plaintiff of instituting numerous proceedings seeking relief on previously decided issues. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Rosenberger, Williams and Lerner, JJ.
Exhibit 13.1


                            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 Annual Report of Mer Telemanagement Solutions Ltd. (the
"Company") on Form 20-F/A for the period ending December 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Eytan Bar, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the
Company.


/s/Eytan Bar
------------
Eytan Bar
Chief Executive Officer

October 7, 2005

* The originally executed copy of this Certification will be maintained at the
Company's offices and will be made available for inspection upon request.
**Exhibit32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,****AS ADDED BY****SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

Inconnection with the Annual Report of HD Partners Acquisition Corporation (the “Company”)on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Eddy W. Hartenstein,Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as added by §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:

1.                                       TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.                                       Tomy knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany as of and for the period covered by the Report. 
| Date: March 30, 2007 | By:    | /s/ Eddy W. Hartenstein.                        |
|---------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------|
|                      |   | Eddy W. Hartenstein                             |
|                      |   | Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
<PAGE>

                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT

                                       OF

                            ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION
                            (After Issuance of Stock)


                           VENTURI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.


     We the undersigned, John M. Hopkins, President, and Randy K.Johnson,
Secretary of Venturi Technologies, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the
"Corporation") do hereby certify:

     That on October 29, 1999, the Board of Directors of said corporation duly
adopted a resolution to amend the Corporation's Articles of Incorporation as
follows:

          ARTICLE VI -- CAPITAL STOCK:

          Section 1. AUTHORIZED SHARES. The total number of shares which this
          Corporation is authorized to issue is 32,000,000 shares of Capital
          Stock at $.001 par value per share as set forth in subsections (a) and
          (b) of this Section 1 of Article VI.

          (a)  The total number of shares of common stock which this Corporation
               is authorized to issue is 27,000,000 shares at $0.001 par value
               per share.

          (b)  The total number of shares of Preferred Stock which this
               Corporation is authorized to issue is 5,000,000 shares at $0.001
               par value per share. The Board of Directors shall have authority
               to establish, by resolution, one or more series of the authorized
               preferred stock and to prescribe classes, series and the number
               of each class or series of preferred stock and the voting powers,
               designations, preferences, limitations, restrictions and relative
               rights of each class or series of preferred stock.

                                  . . . . . . .

<PAGE>

     Pursuant to Sections 78.320 and 78.390 of the Nevada Revised Statutes, the
foregoing Amendments to the Articles of Incorporation for the Corporation were
approved by a written consent dated October 29, 1999 by the holders of 3,635,030
shares of common stock and the holders of 2,303,738 shares of Series D Preferred
Stock (each share of which is entitled to two votes on every matter coming
before the shareholders for vote), constituting 52.7% of the 15,627,482 shares
of voting capital stock issued and outstanding.



                                    ---------------------------------------
                                    John M. Hopkins
                                    President



                                    ---------------------------------------
                                    Randy K. Johnson
                                    Secretary


STATE OF UTAH           )
                        )ss.
COUNTY OF SALT LAKE     )

     On October ___, 1999, John Hopkins personally appeared before me, a Notary
Public, who acknowledged that he executed the above instrument.



                                    ---------------------------------------
                                    Signature of Notary

----------------------------
Notary Seal
Order filed May 7, 2020 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-20-00044-CV

____________

IN THE INTEREST OF G.M., A CHILD

On Appeal from the 246th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2015-13128

ORDER

We have determined this case is appropriate for referral to mediation, an 

alternative dispute resolution process. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §§ 154.021—

.073. Any party may file a written objection to mediation with the clerk of this court 

within 15 days of the date of this order. Id. § 154.022. If this court finds there is a 

reasonable basis for the objection, the objection shall be sustained and the appeal 

will not be abated for mediation.

If no objection is filed, or if the court overrules the objection, the court will 

issue an order of abatement for a period of 90 days. If the case is referred to 

mediation, any party may file a motion to extend the abatement period for 

completion of mediation or to finalize a settlement. 

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Jewell, and Hassan.
# L_2010264EN.01001601.xml

| 7.10.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 264/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.10.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 264/16

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 1 October 2010

appointing one Italian alternate member of the Committee of the Regions

(2010/601/EU)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal of the Italian Government,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU and 2010/29/EU appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU and 2010/29/EU appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015 (1).

1

| (2) | An alternate member’s seat has become vacant following the end of mandate of Mr Salvatore MANGIAFICO, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

An alternate member’s seat has become vacant following the end of mandate of Mr Salvatore MANGIAFICO,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following is hereby appointed to the Committee of the Regions as alternate member for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2015:

| — | Mr Samuele BALDINI,

  Consigliere, Provincia di Firenze |
| --- | --- |

—

Mr Samuele BALDINI,

Consigliere, Provincia di Firenze

Consigliere, Provincia di Firenze

Article 2

This Decision shall take effect on the day of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 1 October 2010.

For the Council

The President

S. VANACKERE

---

(1)  OJ L 348, 29.12.2009, p. 22 and OJ L 12, 19.1.2010, p. 11.

1

---
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 93 (Thursday, May 14, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 26792]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-12782]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP97-142-009]


K N Interstate Gas Transmission Co.; Notice of Tariff Filing

May 8, 1998.
    Take notice that on May 5, 1998, K N Interstate Gas Transmission 
Co. (KNI), tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, of the 
following actual tariff sheets, to be effective November 1, 1997:

Third Revised Volume No. 1-B
    1st Rev Original Sheet No. 24
First Revised Volume No. 1-D
    1st Rev Original Sheet No. 21
    1st Rev First Revised Sheet No. 4

    KNI states that the above referenced actual tariff sheets are being 
filed in compliance with the Commission's May 1, 1998 letter order, to 
be effective November 1, 1997. On April 28, 1998, KNI filed actual 
tariff sheets, which included those referenced above, as a result of 
the July 2, 1997 order approving ProForma sheets KNI filed on May 1, 
1997.
    KNI states the three tariff sheets referenced in this filing were 
submitted inadvertently with incorrect pagination. Therefore, KNI is 
submitting for acceptance and approval these corrected tariff sheets, 
to be effective November 1, 1997.
    KNI states that copies of the filing were served upon KNI's 
jurisdictional customers, interested public bodies and all parties to 
the proceeding.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceedings. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission 
and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-12782 Filed 5-13-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M