alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Commission Implementing Decision of 13 June 2014 on the compliance of European standards series EN 957 (parts 2 and 4-10)            and EN ISO 20957 (part 1) for stationary training equipment and of ten European standards for gymnastic equipment with the            general safety requirement of Directive 2001/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and publication of the references            of those standards in the Official Journal of the European Union (Text with EEA relevance) (2014/357/EU) (repealed)         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Decision

# of 13 June 2014

# on the compliance of European standards series EN 957 (parts 2 and 4-10) and EN ISO 20957 (part 1) for stationary training                        equipment and of ten European standards for gymnastic equipment with the general safety requirement of Directive 2001/95/EC                        of the European Parliament and of the Council and publication of the references of those standards in the *Official Journal of the European Union*

# (Text with EEA relevance)

# (2014/357/EU) (repealed)

F1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                        

Textual Amendments

F1Repealed by Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/1698 of 9 October 2019 on European standards for products drafted in support of                                 Directive 2001/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on general product safety (Text with EEA relevance).
EXHIBIT
32(b)





Certification
of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350


As
Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002








I, James
M. Sullivan, Chief Financial Officer of Solutia Inc. (the “Company”), certify,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, that to the best of my knowledge:





(1)
            the
      Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the
      fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934; and





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





Dated:
March 18, 2008





/s/ James M.
Sullivan


James M. Sullivan


Chief Financial Officer














A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to Solutia Inc. and will be retained by
Solutia Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
#### Plashette Richards et al., Appellants, v Paul C. Miller, Respondent.

[801 NYS2d 353]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Sproat, J.), dated August 9, 2004, which, upon a jury verdict, in favor of the defendant and against them on the issue of liability, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contention, under the facts of this case, the Supreme Court properly charged the jury on the emergency doctrine *(see*PJI 2:14; *Ferrer v Harris,*55 NY2d 285 [1982]; *Rosario v Morias,*8 AD3d 108 [2004]; *Coleman v Pizza Hut of Am.,*235 AD2d 451 [1997]; *Waugh v Johns,*206 AD2d 525 [1994]). Where some reasonable view of the evidence establishes that an actor was confronted by a sudden and unforseen occurrence not of his or her own making, then the reasonableness of the conduct in the face of the emergency is for the jury *(see Caristo v Sanzone,*96 NY2d 172, 175 [2001]; *Kuci v Manhattan & Bronx Surface Tr. Operating Auth., 88**1024NY2d 923, 924 [1996]; *Rivera v New York City Tr. Auth.,*77 NY2d 322, 327 [1991]; *Ferrer v Harris, supra).*Here, the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the defendant, was sufficient to establish that the defendant was faced with a sudden and unforeseen occurrence not of his own making *(see Frank v Lufsey,*243 AD2d 538 [1997]). Schmidt, J.P., S. Miller, Mastro and Rivera, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AT DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND THE RELATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE YEAR
ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001043236
<NAME> ELDER TRUST
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           3,605
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   50,343
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,302
<PP&E>                                         181,861
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,180
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 266,482
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,743
<BONDS>                                         20,211
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            71
<OTHER-SE>                                     103,369
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   266,482
<SALES>                                         28,141
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                28,141
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,912
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 5,301<F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              13,136
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    180
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                180
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  1,210<F2>
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,030)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.14)
<FN><F1> Includes $2.8 million recorded in connection with a separation
         agreement with an officer of the Company.
    <F2> Loss on extinguishment of debt.</FN>



</TABLE>
Exhibit 31 (b)
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(A) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT
      a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;b)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such
internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and
the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles;c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; andd)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants fiscal quarter that
has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrants internal control over financial reporting; and
  a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely
to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting.
  /s/ John A. MarazzaChief Financial Officer 51
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

ASHLEE J. STRAKER,

Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

,

Appellee. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 14

- 00111

- CR

Appeal from the

Criminal District Court No. 3

of Tarrant County, Texas

(TC# 1310222D)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court belo w. This decision shall be certified

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2016.

STEVEN L. HUGHES, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
Mary Louise DIGGS v. NOVANT HEALTH, INC., Novant Health Triad Region, L.L.C., Forsyth Memorial Hospital, Inc., All d/b/a Forsyth Medical Center, Sheila Crumb, Joseph McConville, M.D., and Piedmont Anesthesia & Pain Consultants, P.A.

No. 299P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 27, 2007.

Richard V. Bennett, Roberta B. King, Joshua H. Bennett, Winston-Salem, for Forsyth Medical Center.

Harold L. Kennedy, III, Harvey L. Kennedy, Annie Brown Kennedy, Winston-Salem, for Mary Diggs

Linwood Jones, Raleigh, for N.C. Hospital Association.

Harvey L. Cosper, Jr., William B. Cannon, Charlotte, for NCADA.

James R. Morgan, Jr., Winston-Salem, Ronald W. Burris, Albemarle, for NC Chapter Am. Society.

Mr. Attorney at Law, For NC Chapter of Am. Society

Prior report: 177 N.C.App. 290, 628 S.E.2d 851.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 6th day of June 2006 by Defendant (Forsyth Memorial Hosp.) in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 27th day of June 2007."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant (Forsyth Memorial Hosp.) on the 27th day of October 2006 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 27th day of June 2007."
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                              58
<SECURITIES>                                         5
<RECEIVABLES>                                      585
<ALLOWANCES>                                        16
<INVENTORY>                                        236
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  1165
<PP&E>                                             899
<DEPRECIATION>                                     370
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    2498
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              670
<BONDS>                                            704
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           193
<OTHER-SE>                                         813
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      2498
<SALES>                                           1299
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  1299
<CGS>                                              303
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      303
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   179
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  29
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    360
<INCOME-TAX>                                       117
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                243
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       243
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .81
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .78


</TABLE>
STATE v. MITCHELL

No. COA06-1466.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed June 19, 2007

Certification Date July 9, 2007.

Appeal from Wake (05CRS9423).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
# Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed June 5, 2024

. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D 2 3

- 0 431 Lower Tribunal No. F1 2

- 20826

________________

Felix Antonio Silva

- Martinez ,

Appellant
,

vs.

The State of Florida , Appellee

.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.315(a) from the Circuit Court for Miami

- Dade County, Carmen Cabarga , Judge.

Felix Antonio Silva

- Martinez
, in proper person

. Ashley Moody , Attorney General , for appellee

.

Before SCALES, MILLER and GO R DO , JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
STATE v. HERNANDEZ.

No. COA06-1591.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed November 6, 2007.

Certification Date November 26, 2007.

Appeal from Pender (05CRS52426, 05CRS700947, 05CRS4229).

Cases Reported Without Published Opinion. Reversed and remanded.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>         5
<CIK>             000929540
<NAME>            SELKIRK COGEN PARTNERS, L.P.
<MULTIPLIER>      1,000

<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   Dec-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                      Jan-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                        Sep-30-2000
<CASH>                              30120
<SECURITIES>                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                       20272
<ALLOWANCES>                        1404
<INVENTORY>                         6771
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                    57145
<PP&E>                              372400
<DEPRECIATION>                      84021
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      382312
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               34740
<BONDS>                             367816
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>               0
<PREFERRED>                         0
<COMMON>                            0
<OTHER-SE>                          (36475)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>        382312
<SALES>                             156956
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    156956
<CGS>                               103778
<TOTAL-COSTS>                       103778
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    4210
<LOSS-PROVISION>                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                  23497
<INCOME-PRETAX>                     25471
<INCOME-TAX>                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                 25471
<DISCONTINUED>                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                     0
<CHANGES>                           7866
<NET-INCOME>                        33337
<EPS-DILUTED>                       0
<EPS-BASIC>                         0


</TABLE>
Exhibit



Exhibit 10.1








July 25, 2016
Dave Boennighausen 
Noodles & Company
Dear Dave:
We are excited to have you serve as the interim Chief Executive Officer of Noodles & Company (the “Company”).  In recognition of this new position, the Company will pay to you a nondiscretionary bonus payment of $15,000 per month, payable monthly, while you serve as interim CEO.  This nondiscretionary bonus is in addition to the base salary you currently receive from the Company, which will remain unchanged.
We are very excited to have you in a leadership role during this exciting time for the Company.  Please confirm your agreement to the terms specified in this letter by signing below.
Sincerely,


___/s/ Scott Dahnke_______ 
For the Board of Directors


AGREED AND ACKNOWLEDGED:


___/s/ Dave Boennighausen__ 
Dave Boennighausen
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 164 (Thursday, August 25, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 49944]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-16868]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[AK964-1410-HY-P; AA-9206-A, SEA-3]


Alaska Lands Conveyance

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of decision.

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

SUMMARY: As required by 43 CFR 2650.7(d), notice is hereby given that 
an appealable decision directing conveyance of lands pursuant to the 
Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act will be issued to Shee 
Atika, Incorporated, for certain lands in T. 47 S., R. 66 E., Copper 
River Meridian, located in the vicinity of Sitka, Alaska, containing 
approximately 20 acres. Notice of the decision will also be published 
four times in the Ketchikan Daily News.

DATES: The time limits for filing an appeal are:
    1. Any party claiming a property interest which is adversely 
affected by the decision shall have until September 26, 2005 to file an 
appeal.
    2. Parties receiving service of the decision by certified mail 
shall have 30 days from the date of receipt to file an appeal.
    Parties who do not file an appeal in accordance with the 
requirements of 43 CFR part 4, subpart E, shall be deemed to have 
waived their rights.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the decision may be obtained from: Bureau of Land 
Management, Alaska State Office, 222 West Seventh Avenue, <greek-i>13, 
Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7599.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Eileen Ford, by phone at 907-271-
5715, or by e-mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a2c7cbcec7c7ccfdc4cdd0c6e2c3c98cc0cecf8cc5cdd4"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="294c40454c4c47764f465b4d694842074b4544074e465f">[email protected]</span></a>. Persons who use a 
telecommunication device (TTD) may call the Federal Information Relay 
Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8330, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to 
contact Ms. Ford.

Eileen Ford,
Land Law Examiner, Branch of Adjudication II.
[FR Doc. 05-16868 Filed 8-24-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-$$-P


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

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3238 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3238

   To prohibit the importation of ruminants and swine, and fresh and 
 frozen meat and products of ruminants and swine, from Argentina until 
the Secretary of Agriculture certifies to Congress that every region of 
    Argentina is free of foot and mouth disease without vaccination.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                July 10 (legislative day, July 9), 2008

  Mr. Johnson (for himself, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Tester, Mr. Barrasso, Mrs. 
 McCaskill, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Allard, Mr. Salazar, and Mr. 
Nelson of Nebraska) introduced the following bill; which was read twice 
 and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To prohibit the importation of ruminants and swine, and fresh and 
 frozen meat and products of ruminants and swine, from Argentina until 
the Secretary of Agriculture certifies to Congress that every region of 
    Argentina is free of foot and mouth disease without vaccination.

    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 ``Foot and Mouth Disease Prevention 
Act of 2008''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON IMPORTATION OF ARGENTINE RUMINANTS AND SWINE 
              UNTIL ARGENTINA IS FREE OF FOOT AND MOUTH DISEASE WITHOUT 
              VACCINATION.

    The Secretary of Agriculture shall prohibit the importation into 
the United States of any ruminant or swine, or any fresh (including 
chilled or frozen) meat or product of any ruminant or swine, that is 
born, raised, or slaughtered in Argentina until the Secretary certifies 
to Congress that every region of Argentina is free of foot and mouth 
disease without vaccination.
                                 <all>
```
#### Barbara Goddard, Respondent, v City of New York et al., Respondents, and Brooklyn Union Gas, Appellant.

[801 NYS2d 342]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Brooklyn Union Gas appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Flug, J.), dated March 22, 2001, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the complaint and all cross claims are dismissed insofar as asserted against the appellant, and the action against the remaining defendants is severed.

The defendant Brooklyn Union Gas (hereinafter Brooklyn Union) sustained its burden of demonstrating its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting evidentiary proof that it was not performing work in the vicinity of the subject intersection on the date of the accident and that it did not own the construction equipment that allegedly contributed to the accident by obstructing a driver’s view of oncoming traffic *(see Robertson v City of New York,*21 AD3d 939 [2005] [decided herewith]). The evidence submitted by the plaintiffs and the codefendants in opposition to the motion was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether Brooklyn Union owned the construction equipment claimed to have obstructed the driver’s view, or whether any other negligence on Brooklyn Union’s part contributed to the accident *(see Robertson v City of New York, supra).*Krausman, J.P., Mastro, Spolzino and Fisher, JJ., concur.
Louisa B. WHITAKER v. John C. WHITAKER, Jr., Elizabeth N. Whitaker, II, and William A. Whitaker.

No. 120P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 3, 2007.

J. Clark Fischer, Winston-Salem, for Louisa Whitaker.

William K. Davis, Alan M. Ruley, for John C. Whitaker, et al.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 8th day of March 2007 by Plaintiff in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd day of May 2007."