alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Earl BUTLER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-3526

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

September 26, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mandamus is dismissed.
Elizabeth B. AUGUSTUS, former wife, Appellant, v. Joseph R. AUGUSTUS, former husband, Appellee.

No. 1D16-4078

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 6, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                                      <C>

<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                             JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         1,863
<SECURITIES>                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 54,847
<ALLOWANCES>                                   1,062
<INVENTORY>                                        0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   0<F1>
<PP&E>                                       220,727<F2>
<DEPRECIATION>                                65,659
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               559,557
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              0<F1>
<BONDS>                                      227,189
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                         243
<OTHER-SE>                                   251,166
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 559,557
<SALES>                                       68,498
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              68,498
<CGS>                                          3,207
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  3,207
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             6,241
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                8,094
<INCOME-TAX>                                   3,723
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            4,371
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                   4,371
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    .18

<FN>
<F1> The Company does not present a classified balance sheet; therefore, current
     assets and current liabilities are not reflected in the Company's financial
     statements.

<F2> PP&E does not include  seismic data bank assets with a cost of $667,456,000
     and related accumulated amortization of $325,153,000.


</FN>


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
financial statements included in the Form 10-Q of American Safety Razor Company
for the quarter ended September 30, 1997 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                            1432
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    46039
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      53377
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                106196
<PP&E>                                          111222
<DEPRECIATION>                                   39594
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  256307
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            39652
<BONDS>                                         127646
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           121
<OTHER-SE>                                       54292
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    256307
<SALES>                                         217847
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                217847
<CGS>                                           145309
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   145309
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                9191
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  17219
<INCOME-TAX>                                      6842
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              10377
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     10377
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .86
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .86
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 4.1

  
EXHIBIT 4.1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
PARTNERSHIP'S STATEMENTS OF EARNINGS AND BALANCE SHEETS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         852,271
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               852,271
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 852,271
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           86,832
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                (11,594,476)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   852,271
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               248,278
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               142,303
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             109,250
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,275)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,275)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,275)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Marlon GRANT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-3473

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[January 25, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
----

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 12 May 2005

in Case C-452/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice (England and Wales), Chancery Division RAL (Channel Islands) Ltd and Others v Commissioners of Customs and Excise (1)

(VAT - Sixth Directive - Article 9(1) and (2) - Slot gaming machines - Entertainment or similar activities - Supplier of services established outside the territory of the Community - Determination of the place where services are supplied)

(2005/C 182/21)

Language of the case: English

In Case C-452/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the High Court of Justice (England and Wales), Chancery Division (United Kingdom), made by decision of 17 October 2003, received at the Court on 27 October 2003, in the proceedings between RAL (Channel Islands) Ltd, RAL Ltd, RAL Services Ltd, RAL Machines Ltd, on the one hand, and Commissioners of Customs and Excise, on the other — the Court (First Chamber), composed of P. Jann, President of the Chamber, K. Lenaerts (Rapporteur), N. Colneric, K. Schiemann and E. Juhász, Judges; M. Poiares Maduro, Advocate General, K. Sztranc, Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 12 May 2005, in which it ruled:

The supply of services consisting of enabling the public to use, for consideration, slot gaming machines installed in amusement arcades established in the territory of a Member State must be regarded as constituting entertainment or similar activities within the meaning of the first indent of Article 9(2)(c) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, so that the place where those services are supplied is the place where they are physically carried out.

----

(1)OJ C 7 of 10.01.2004.

----
Exhibit 31.1 

CERTIFICATION 

I, James W. Landrum, President,certify that: 

1.    I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Golden Chief Resources, Inc.; 

2.     Based onmy knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect tothe period covered by this quarterly report; 

3.     Based onmy knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisquarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented inthis quarterly report; 

4.     I amresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have: 

            a)       designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant is made known to us by others within the Corporation,particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared; 

            b)       evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and 

            c)       disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

5.     I havedisclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

            a)       all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and 

            b)       any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

Date: July 29, 2004 

By:/s/ James W. Landrum
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           14690
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      940
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 16000
<PP&E>                                           33128
<DEPRECIATION>                                   13643
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   35703
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              648
<BONDS>                                          22503
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       12128
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     35703
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 35511
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     4770
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  1793
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                2848
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  26100
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              26100
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 (1473)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     24627
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   294.82
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   294.82
        

</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David Brian PUGH, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 03-31027

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

May 21, 2004.

*491Camille Ann Domingue, Assistant US Attorney, Lafayette, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Wayne Joseph Blanchard, Lafayette, LA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before SMITH, DEMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

David Brian Pugh pleaded guilty to one conspiracy charge and one fraud charge. The district court upwardly departed at sentencing and sentenced Pugh to 96 months in prison and a three-year term of supervised release. Pugh now appeals his sentence, arguing only that the extent of the district court’s departure was unreasonable. Because Pugh challenges only the extent of the district court’s departure, we need not analyze the recent changes to review of upward departures set out in amended 18 U.S.C. § 3742(e). *See United States v. Lee,*358 F.3d 315, 326-29 (5th Cir.2004). Rather, we need only consider whether the extent of the departure was reasonable. *See Williams v. United States,*503 U.S. 193, 203, 112 S.Ct. 1112, 117 L.Ed.2d 341 (1992); *United States v. Ashburn,*38 F.3d 803, 807 (5th Cir.1994) (en banc).

A review of this court’s jurisprudence controverts Pugh’s arguments and shows that the extent of the district court’s departure, although substantial, was not unreasonable. *See United States v. Daughenbaugh, 49*F.3d 171, 173-74 (5th Cir.1995); *Ashburn,*38 F.3d at 806; *United States v. Rosogie,*21 F.3d 632, 633 (5th Cir.1994). Accordingly, there is no abuse of discretion, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
Zachary Taylor ZEMAN, Appellants, v. STATE of Florida, Appellees.

No. 4D17-2995

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[March 7, 2018]

Robert A. Herce of Herce & Herce, P.A., Tampa, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Mitchell A. Egber, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

We reverse the trial court's order summarily denying appellant's motion for postconviction relief and remand for further proceedings. We agree with appellant that the trial court erred in summarily denying his claim of newly discovered evidence without conducting an evidentiary hearing. *See**Nordelo v. State* , 93 So.3d 178 (Fla. 2012). We express no opinion on the merits.

*Reversed and remanded.*

Gerber, C.J., Gross and Conner, JJ., concur.
Phillip C. BLACKWELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1985

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed November 22, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
STATE of Louisiana v. Michael ROBERTSON

NO. 2018-KK-0381

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 11, 2018

Denied.

WEIMER, J., would grant and docket.

HUGHES, J., would grant and docket.
Elizabeth JENKINS, Appellant, v. Brent LAARTZ, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-4586

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed December 15, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
# Official Journal L 9/2011

| | ISSN 1725-2555
  doi:10.3000/17252555.L_2011.009.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 9 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5413 January 2011 |

ISSN 1725-2555

doi:10.3000/17252555.L_2011.009.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 9

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5413 January 2011

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | | Commission Regulation (EU) No 21/2011 of 12 January 2011 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables | 1 |
| | | Commission Regulation (EU) No 22/2011 of 12 January 2011 amending the representative prices and additional import duties for certain products in the sugar sector fixed by Regulation (EU) No 867/2010 for the 2010/11 marketing year | 3 |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | | 2011/12/EU |
| | * | Commission Decision of 12 January 2011 amending Decision 2007/134/EC establishing the European Research Council | 5 |
| | | 2011/13/EU |
| | * | Commission Decision of 12 January 2011 on certain types of information about biofuels and bioliquids to be submitted by economic operators to Member States
  (notified under document C(2011) 36) | 11 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

Commission Regulation (EU) No 21/2011 of 12 January 2011 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

Commission Regulation (EU) No 22/2011 of 12 January 2011 amending the representative prices and additional import duties for certain products in the sugar sector fixed by Regulation (EU) No 867/2010 for the 2010/11 marketing year

3

DECISIONS

2011/12/EU

*

Commission Decision of 12 January 2011 amending Decision 2007/134/EC establishing the European Research Council

5

2011/13/EU

*

Commission Decision of 12 January 2011 on certain types of information about biofuels and bioliquids to be submitted by economic operators to Member States
  (notified under document C(2011) 36)

(notified under document C(2011) 36)

11

| 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.
1

Ogulei, David

From: Garnett, Kim

Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 11:59 AM

To: Ogulei, David

Subject: FW: Xact mm CEMS

Per your request! 

From: John Cooper [mailto:jacooper@cooperenvironmental.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 12:01 PM 

To: Garnett, Kim 

Cc: Bivins, Dan; andreag@cooperenvironmental.com; kragp@cooperenvironmental.com 

Subject: Xact mm CEMS 

Kim, 

As you know, I have responded to yours and Dan’s earlier questions concerning the feasibility of using the Xact multimetals CEMS on hazardous waste incinerators (HWI) such as the Veolia HWI in Sauget, IL. The details of my responses 

are in these earlier emails (May 28th and June 14th), as well as Eli Lilly and Company’s Alternative Monitoring Petitions 

submitted in 2005. Of particular relevance are the “Method 301 Evaluation of Candidate Conditional Methods” and 

more specifically Section 7.0 “Range of Method Application.” This previously sent material demonstrates the robustness 

of the Xact methodology and instrumentation over a broad range of source conditions. In addition, CES’ conditions of 

sale are no different than those of other manufacturers of pollution control and monitoring instrumentation. These 

results plus those in the material I sent previously clearly show that the Xact has demonstrated its ability to operate 

accurately and reliably for extended periods of time (6+ years) under a wide range of stack conditions that included 

those likely to be found in the Veolia stack, and that such monitors are commercially available from Cooper 

Environmental Services LLC. 

Let me emphasize that it should be clear from this material previously sent that the Xact multi-metals CEMS has 

demonstrated its applicability under a wide range of conditions including the conditions expected at the Sauget Veolia 

HWI; i.e. both wet and dry conditions and temperatures exceeding 350°F. It should also be clear that Cooper 

Environmental Services LLC is a viable commercial supplier of the Xact CEMS, having developed them and sold them 

commercially prior to licensing the Pall Corp. to build and sell the units. CES has all the same staff and facilities that that 

were used to build them before licensing the technology to Pall and worked closely with Pall over the past two years 

helping them learn to build Xacts. In addition, even though the Pall Corp. announced just last February that they were 

vacating the license agreement, CES took its first new order for an Xact in March and shipped it to China in June, three 

and a half months later. In addition, even though each facility has its own unique set of probe, transport, data 

acquisition and data handling requirements, these are typically handled simultaneously with the building of the Xact or 

any other CEMS. As such, CES should have no problem delivering, installing and starting up an Xact-based multi-metal 

CEMS within six months of receiving a purchase order and down payment. 

John 

John A. Cooper, Ph. D. 

President 

Cooper Environmental Services LLC 

10180 SW Nimbus Ave. 

Suite J6 

Portland, OR 97223
**Exhibit32.2**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with theAnnual Report of Southern Heritage Bancshares, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Steven W.Ledbetter, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

(1)                                  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)                                  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|        | /s/ Steven W. Ledbetter            |
|--------|------------------------------------|
|   | Steven W. Ledbetter                |
|   | Chief Financial Officer            |
|   | Southern Heritage Bancshares, Inc. |
|   | April 23, 2007                     |

 

----