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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS INCLUDED
IN THE TRIGON HEALTHCARE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES FORM 10-K FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS
ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           7,010
<SECURITIES>                                 1,363,858
<RECEIVABLES>                                  360,941
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,739,416
<PP&E>                                         126,098
<DEPRECIATION>                                  82,186
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,928,820
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          747,819
<BONDS>                                         90,147
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           423
<OTHER-SE>                                     958,314
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,928,820
<SALES>                                      1,934,873
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,063,620
<CGS>                                        1,554,556
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,914,348
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,602
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                144,670
<INCOME-TAX>                                    49,617
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             95,053
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    95,053
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joe Stewart, Appellant.

— Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Jerome Hornblass, J.), rendered on April 25, 1985, and judgment of said court (Murray Koenig, J.), also rendered on April 25, 1985, unanimously affirmed. The case is remitted to the Supreme Court, Bronx County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5). No opinion. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Kassal, Rosenberger and Wallach, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
Win-Gate Equity Group, Inc.'s Balance Sheet, Statement of Income and Statement
of Changes in Stockholders' Equity for the year ended December 31, 1998 and is
qualified in it's entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 Jan-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   Dec-31-1998
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 64,400
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          20,092
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    2,000
<COMMON>                                       4,900
<OTHER-SE>                                     64,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   64,400
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               26,354
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (26,354)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (26,354)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (26,354)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (.005)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.005)



</TABLE>
# C_2022347EN.01023201.xml

| 9.9.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 347/232 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.9.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 347/232

---

P9_TA(2022)0061

Rates of value added tax *

European Parliament legislative resolution of 9 March 2022 on the draft Council directive amending Directive 2006/112/EC as regards rates of value added tax (14754/2021 — C9-0456/2021 — 2018/0005(CNS))

(Special legislative procedure — renewed consultation)

(2022/C 347/25)

The European Parliament,

| — | having regard to the Council draft (14754/2021), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the Council draft (14754/2021),

| — | having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2018)0020), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2018)0020),

| — | having regard to its position of 3 October 2018 (1), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to its position of 3 October 2018 (1),

| — | having regard to Article 113 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament again (C9-0456/2021), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Article 113 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament again (C9-0456/2021),

| — | having regard to Rules 82 and 84 of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rules 82 and 84 of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A9-0036/2022), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A9-0036/2022),

| 1. | Approves the Council draft; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament; |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the text approved by Parliament; |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments. |
| --- | --- |

4.

---

(1)  OJ C 11, 13.1.2020, p. 211.

---
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 5, 2019

No. 04

- 18

- 00473

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF B.W.C., A CHILD

,

From the County Court, Jim Wells County, Texas

Trial Court No. 11

- 06

- 50160

- CV

Honorable David A. Sanchez, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief J ustice

Rebeca C. Martinez , Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Just ice

Luz Elena D. Cha pa, J ustice

Ir ene Rios, Justice

Beth Watkins, Justice

Liza A. Rodr iguez, Justice

The court has considered the appellant ’ s motion for en banc reconsideration and the

motion is DENIED.

_________________________________ Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the s aid

court on this 5th day of March, 2019

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court
<PAGE>   1

                                                                     EXHIBIT 23



                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Post-Effective Amendment No.
6 to the Registration Statement on Form S-4 (Registration No. 333-12319) and
related Prospectus of Service Experts, Inc. related to $50,000,000 aggregate
amount of shares of its $.01 par value common stock, warrants to purchase its
common stock ("Common Stock Warrants") and the shares of its common stock issued
thereunder upon the exercise of such Common Stock Warrants or debt securities
("Debt Securities"), and the shares of common stock issued thereunder upon the
conversion of the Debt Securities; in the shelf Registration Statement on Form
S-3 (Registration No. 333-43917) and related Prospectus pertaining to the resale
of up to 500,000 shares of the Company's Common Stock issued without
registration under the Securities Act of 1933; in the Registration Statement on
Form S-8 (Registration No. 333-11791) pertaining to the Service Experts, Inc.
1996 Incentive Stock Plan, 1996 Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan, and
1996 Employee Stock Purchase Plan; in the Registration Statement on Form S-8
(Registration No. 333-59711) pertaining to the Service Experts, Inc. Amended
1996 Incentive Stock Plan, Amended 1996 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, 1997
Nonqualified Stock Option Plan, Amended 1997 Nonqualified Stock Purchase Plan
and Amended Service Center Stock Option Plan; of our report dated February 22,
1999 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Service Experts,
Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31,
1998.


                                          /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
 
Nashville, Tennessee
March 23, 1999
#### RACH’S MASHING PROCESS CO., Respondent, v. SEITZ, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

October 20, 1896.)

Action by the Rach’s Mashing Process Company against Michael Seitz.

J. J. Bennett, for appellant.

Fred. W. & Alfred E. Hinrichs, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Assuming that the contract of sale contains a warranty of quality of the beer to be manufactured by the cooking process, defendant, by his pleading, does not present that issue. The answer, at considerable length and in much detail, makes specific denials of the allegations of the complaint, and makes affirmative allegation of breach of contract in several respects; but it nowhere alleges that there was a warranty in the quality of the beer which the cooker should produce, or that there was a breach of warranty in this respect. Consequently there was no issue raised which required a determination by the jury. Chambers v. Lancaster, 3 App. Div. 215, 38 N. Y. Supp. 253. The answer is also silent respecting any defect in the boiler, and the evidence offered to establish such defect was properly excluded, for the reason that no such issue was present to be tried. Linton v. Fire-Works Co., 124 N. Y. 533, 27 N. E. 406. In all other-respects it was not controverted but that the cooker complied with the contract. There was. therefore, no controverted question of fact to be decided, and the court was clearly right in directing the verdict which it did. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.
#### Davis, *Appellant,*v. Morgan, *Administrator.*

Mon-survival of Action for Personal Injuries: practice. An action for personal injuries cannot, after the death of the defendant, be revived in the name of his' administrator. (R. S. 187&, secs. 96, 97).

*Appeal from Scotland Circuit*Court.-*-IIon. B. E. Turner, Judge.

Stricken from the docket.

*McKee & Jayne*for appellant.

*Smoot*& *Pettengill*and *Shelton & Dysart*for respondent.

*80Sherwood, J.

This action was brought for personal injuries caused to plaintiff by the fall of a house owned by Robert Gf. Shaw. Such proceedings were had in the circuit court as compelled plaintiff to take a nonsuit and he has appealed here. During the present term, the death of the defendant has been suggested, and by consent, the administrator has been made a party to the action.

The merits of this cause cannot be discussed, since the action was for personal injuries, and judgment for the defendant, who, since appeal taken, has died. -The action, by reason of defendant’s death, abated, and could not be revived in the name of his administrator. R. S. 1879, secs. 96, 97. The maxim, “ *actio personalis moritur cum persona”*applies, and our statute, so far as concerns this case, is only declaratory of the common law. *Stanley v. Bircher's Ex’r,*78 Mo. 245; 1 Chitty Pl. 77, and cas. cit.

Inasmuch as the -action has abated, the cause will be stricken from the docket.

All concur.
Fourth Department,

November, 1986

(November 10, 1986)

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Lillie Mae Higgins, Appellant.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment of conviction for two counts of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [2], [4]), defendant’s primary claim is that an oral statement she gave the police should have been suppressed because the police unlawfully entered her home in violation of *Payton v New York*(445 US 573). Our review of the evidence adduced at the suppression hearing, however, reveals that the hearing court properly concluded that the police entry was consensual.

The trial court also properly refused defendant’s request to charge assault in the third degree as a lesser included offense of assault in the first degree as charged in the indictment because there was no reasonable view of the evidence that the victim of the assault suffered only physical, but not serious physical injury *(People v Glover,*57 NY2d 61; *People v Green,*56 NY2d 427). On the contrary, the evidence established that the victim suffered third degree burns over a third of his body resulting in serious and protracted disfigurement (Penal Law § 10.00 [10]). Defendant’s remaining claims are without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Reed, J. — assault, second degree.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Den-man, Green, Pine and Balio, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 233 Engrossed in House (EH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 233

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
    To allow reviews of certain families' incomes every 3 years for 
   purposes of determining eligibility for certain Federal assisted 
                           housing programs.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Tenant Income Verification Relief 
Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. REVIEWS OF FAMILY INCOMES.

    (a) In General.--The second sentence of paragraph (1) of section 
3(a) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(a)(1)) 
is amended by inserting before the period at the end the following: ``; 
except that, in the case of any family with a fixed income, as defined 
by the Secretary, after the initial review of the family's income, the 
public housing agency or owner shall not be required to conduct a 
review of the family's income for any year for which such family 
certifies, in accordance with such requirements as the Secretary shall 
establish, which shall include policies to adjust for inflation-based 
income changes, that 90 percent or more of the income of the family 
consists of fixed income, and that the sources of such income have not 
changed since the previous year, except that the public housing agency 
or owner shall conduct a review of each such family's income not less 
than once every 3 years''.
    (b) Housing Choice Voucher Program.--Subparagraph (A) of section 
8(o)(5) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 
1437f(o)(5)(A)) is amended by striking ``not less than annually'' and 
inserting ``as required by section 3(a)(1) of this Act''.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 23, 2015.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
114th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 233

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

    To allow reviews of certain families' incomes every 3 years for 
   purposes of determining eligibility for certain Federal assisted 
                           housing programs.
```
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2462 

To restore the application of the Federal antitrust laws to the business 

of health insurance to protect competition and consumers. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 20, 2015 

Mr. DEFAZIO (for himself and Ms. SLAUGHTER) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To restore the application of the Federal antitrust laws to 

the business of health insurance to protect competition 

and consumers. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Health Insurance In5 dustry Fair Competition Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. RESTORING THE APPLICATION OF ANTITRUST 

7 LAWS TO HEALTH SECTOR INSURERS. 

8 (a) AMENDMENT TO MCCARRAN-FERGUSON ACT.— 

9 Section 3 of the Act of March 9, 1945 (15 U.S.C. 1013), 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2462 IH

1 commonly known as the McCarran-Ferguson Act, is 

2 amended by adding at the end the following: 

3 ‘‘(c) Nothing contained in this Act shall modify, im4 pair, or supersede the operation of any of the antitrust 

5 laws with respect to the business of health insurance. For 

6 purposes of the preceding sentence, the term ‘antitrust 

7 laws’ has the meaning given it in subsection (a) of the 

8 first section of the Clayton Act, except that such term in9 cludes section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act to 

10 the extent that such section 5 applies to unfair methods 

11 of competition.’’. 

12 (b) RELATED PROVISION.—For purposes of section 

13 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 45) 

14 to the extent such section applies to unfair methods of 

15 competition, section 3(c) of the McCarran-Ferguson Act 

16 shall apply with respect to the business of health insurance 

17 without regard to whether such business is carried on for 

18 profit, notwithstanding the definition of ‘‘Corporation’’ 

19 contained in section 4 of the Federal Trade Commission 

20 Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-40693

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ANGEL ANTONIO CAMACHO, also known as Angel Antonio Camacho Arciga,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:10-CR-1166-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, GARZA, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Angel Antonio Camacho raises

arguments that he concedes are foreclosed by United States v. Betancourt, 586

F.3d 303, 308-09 (5th Cir. 2009), which reaffirmed the holding in United States

v. Gamez-Gonzalez, 319 F.3d 695, 700 (5th Cir. 2003), that knowledge of drug

type and quantity is not an element of the offense under 21 U.S.C. § 841. The

appellant’s unopposed motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and the

judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

February 17, 2012

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 11-40693 Document: 00511761477 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/17/2012
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 Biotech Holdings Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the year ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "REPORT"), I, Robert B. Rieveley, 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 to the best of my knowledge:

1. The Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated:   September __12___, 2005





/s/ Robert B. Rieveley

______________________________________

Robert B. Rieveley, President and C.E.O.



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 Biotech Holdings Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the year ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "REPORT"), I, Lorne D. Brown, Chief Financial 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 to the best of my knowledge:

1. The Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated:   September _12__, 2005



/s/ Lorne D. Brown

______________________________________

Lorne D. Brown, C.F.O.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          38,237
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,464
<ALLOWANCES>                                       461
<INVENTORY>                                      6,279
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                58,341
<PP&E>                                         354,660
<DEPRECIATION>                                  69,369
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 350,061
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           48,292
<BONDS>                                        193,107
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            15
<OTHER-SE>                                      96,941
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   350,061
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                72,379
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   47,235
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                22,545
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,480
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,954)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (861)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,093)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,093)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.40)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>