alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Elba Falto, Respondent, v Skill-Man Contracting, Inc., et al., Appellants, and Luis A. Lopez et al., Respondents.

[801 NYS2d 378]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Skill-Man Contracting, Inc., and Erik Torres appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.), dated February 9, 2005, which granted the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability against them and granted the cross motion of the defendants Luis A. Lopez and Israel Nunez for summary judgment dismiss*986ing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order as granted that branch of the cross motion of the defendants Luis A. Lopez and Israel Nunez which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them is dismissed, as the appellants are not aggrieved by that portion of the order *(see*CPLR 5511); and it is further,

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as reviewed, on the law, the motion is denied, and that branch of the cross motion of the defendants Luis A. Lopez and Israel Nunez which was for summary judgment dismissing the appellants’ cross claims insofar as asserted against them is denied; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the appellants.

In opposition to the respondents’ prima facie showing that the appellants’ vehicle was operated negligently and that such negligence was a proximate cause of the accident, the appellants raised a triable issue of fact as to whether the vehicle owned by the defendant Luis A. Lopez and operated by the defendant Israel Nunez was also operated negligently and whether such negligence may also have been a proximate cause of the accident. Accordingly, the motion and that branch of the cross motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the appellants’ cross claims should have been denied *(see King v Washburn,*273 AD2d 725 [2000]; *Walker v Dartmouth Plan Leasing Corp.,*180 AD2d 952, 953-954 [1992]; *see generally Jablonski v Rapalje,*14 AD3d 484, 486 [2005]; *cf. Persaud v Darbeau,*13 AD3d 347 [2004]; *Torro v Schiller,*8 AD3d 364 [2004]; *Agin v Rehfeldt,*284 AD2d 352 [2001]). Florio, J.P., H. Miller, Ritter and Rivera, JJ., concur.
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 925/2014Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 925/2014 of 26 August 2014 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 925/2014                     

# of 26 August 2014

# establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations,                              the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products                              and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 26 August 2014.

*For the Commission,*                            

*On behalf of the President,*                            

Jerzy Plewa                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 173/2014Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 173/2014 of 24 February 2014 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 173/2014                     

# of 24 February 2014

# establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations,                              the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products                              and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 24 February 2014.

*For the Commission, On behalf of the President,*                            

Jerzy Plewa                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
STATE v. Jerome PETERS.

No. 477P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 6, 2008.

Catherine F. Jordan, Assistant Attorney General, Valerie M. Asbell, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 19th day of September 2007 by Defendant for "Notice of Appeal":

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 6th day of March 2008."
Exhibit 32.1





Certifications Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


(18 U.S.C. 1350)





In connection with the Annual Report of NovaDel Pharma Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), Steven B. Ratoff, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Craig A. Johnson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, respectively, do each hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. ss. 1350), that to his knowledge:





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





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





Date:  April 25, 2011
By:
/s/ Steven B. RatoffSteven B. RatoffPresident and Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer)Date:  April 25, 2011
By:
/s/ Craig A. JohnsonCraig A. JohnsonChief Financial Officer

(principal financial and accounting officer)








A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





This certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Securities Exchange Act.
NOTE
  Company BMW
FINANCIAL SERVICES NA, LLC Lender Credit Agreement
 Section 2.04(f)
   [Remainder of page left blank intentionally; signature page follows.]




---



##### 



SONIC AUTOMOTIVE, INC.By:
    /s/ DAVID P. COSPERName:
    David P. CosperTitle:
    Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer




---



##### 



LOANS AND PAYMENTS WITH RESPECT THERETO
 Amount ofPrincipal or
    
    OutstandingEnd of
    
    Interest
    
    PrincipalType of
    
    Amount of
    
    Interest
    
    Paid This
    
    BalanceDate
    
    Loan Made
    
    Loan Made
    
    Period
    
    Date
    
    This Date
    
    Notation Made By
Report of Independent Accountants on Management's Assertion on
          Compliance with Minimum Servicing Standards Set Forth in the
             Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers


To the Members
Companion Servicing Company, L.L.C.

We have examined  management's  assertion  included in the  accompanying  report
titled Report of Management  that  Companion  Servicing  Company,  L.L.C.  (CSC)
complied with the minimum servicing  standards set forth in the Mortgage Bankers
Association of America's Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers
(USAP) during the year ended December 31, 1997.  Management is  responsible  for
CSC's compliance with those  requirements.  Our  responsibility is to express an
opinion  on  management's   assertion  about  CSC's   compliance  based  on  our
examination.

Our  examination  was  made in  accordance  with  standards  established  by the
American  Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,  accordingly,  included
examining,  on  a  test  basis,  evidence  about  CSC's  compliance  with  those
requirements and performing such other procedures as we considered  necessary in
the circumstances.  We believe that our examination  provides a reasonable basis
for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on CSC's
compliance with specified requirements.

In our opinion, management's assertion that CSC complied with the aforementioned
requirements  during the year ended December 31, 1997, is fairly stated,  in all
material respects.


                                             /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
                                             ---------------------


February 13, 1998
# C_2023223EN.01001001.xml

| 26.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 223/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/10

---

Appeal brought on 17 January 2023 by Arne-Patrik Heinze against the judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) delivered on 9 November 2022 in Case T-610/21, L’Oréal v EUIPO — Heinze (K K WATER)

(Case C-15/23 P)

(2023/C 223/13)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Arne-Patrik Heinze (represented by: N. Dauskardt, Rechtsanwalt)

Other parties to the proceedings: L'Oréal, European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

By order of 11 May 2023, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) held that the appeal was not allowed to proceed and that Mr Arne-Patrik Heinze should bear his own costs.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                       1,555,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,045,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,097,000
<INVENTORY>                                  2,867,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            14,174,000
<PP&E>                                       5,165,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,282,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              26,119,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       15,659,000
<BONDS>                                      9,218,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     66,000
<COMMON>                                         2,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,174,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                26,119,000
<SALES>                                      2,693,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,693,000
<CGS>                                        2,130,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,130,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,144,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                35,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             147,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,763,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,763,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,763,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.30)
        

</TABLE>
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-14-0001141 30-MAR-2016 08:10 AM
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 176 (Tuesday, September 13, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 53973]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-17959]


========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 13, 2005 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 53973]]



DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

26 CFR Part 1

[REG-156518-04]
RIN 1545-BE10


Section 411(d)(6) Protected Benefits; Correction

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Correction to notice of proposed rulemaking and notice of 
public hearing.

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

SUMMARY: This document contains a correction to a notice of proposed 
rulemaking and notice of public hearing that was published in the 
Federal Register on Friday, August 12, 2005 (70 FR 47155) relating to 
the anti-cutback rules under section 411(d)(6) of the Internal Revenue 
Code.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pamela R. Kinard at (202) 622-6060 
(not a toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The notice of proposed rulemaking and notice of public hearing 
(REG-156518-04) that is the subject of this correction is under section 
411(d)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Need for Correction

    As published, REG-156518-04 contains an error that may prove to be 
misleading and is in need of clarification.

Correction of Publication

    Accordingly, the publication of the notice of proposed rulemaking 
and notice of public hearing (REG-156518-04), which was the subject of 
FR Doc 05-15960, is corrected as follows:
    On page 47155, column 2, in the preamble, under the caption 
ADDRESSES, line 17, the language, ``156581-04). The public hearing will 
be'' is corrected to read ``156518-04). The public hearing will be.''.

Cynthia Grigsby,
Acting Chief, Publications and Regulations, Legal Processing Division, 
Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration).
[FR Doc. 05-17959 Filed 9-12-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
# Commission Regulation (EU) No 1346/2013Show full title

Commission Regulation (EU) No 1346/2013 of 12 December 2013 establishing a prohibition of fishing for blue marlin in the Atlantic            Ocean by vessels flying the flag of Spain         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Regulation (EU) No 1346/2013                     

# of 12 December 2013

# establishing a prohibition of fishing for blue marlin in the Atlantic Ocean by vessels flying the flag of Spain

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring                           compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy(1), and in particular Article 36(2) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Council Regulation (EU) No 40/2013 of 21 January 2013 fixing for 2013 the fishing opportunities available in EU waters and,                              to EU vessels, in certain non-EU waters for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks which are subject to international                              negotiations or agreements(2), lays down quotas for 2013.

(2)According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation                              by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for                              2013.

(3)It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

## Article 1U.K.Quota exhaustion

The fishing quota allocated to the Member State referred to in the Annex to this Regulation for the stock referred to therein                     for 2013 shall be deemed to be exhausted from the date set out in that Annex.                  

## Article 2U.K.Prohibitions

Fishing activities for the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in                     the Member State referred to therein shall be prohibited from the date set out in that Annex. In particular it shall be prohibited                     to retain on board, relocate, tranship or land fish from that stock caught by those vessels after that date.                  

## Article 3U.K.Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 12 December 2013.

*For the Commission, On behalf of the President*,                           

Lowri Evans                            

*Director-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries*                            

## ANNEXU.K.

1

OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 23, 25.1.2013, p. 54.
IN RE L.F.

No. COA07-1253.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed April 15, 2008.

Certification Date May 5, 2008.

Appeal from Craven (06JA51, 06JA52, 06JA53).

Cases reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
IN RE TR. D.

No. COA08-483.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed September 2, 2008.

Certification Date September 22, 2008.

Appeal from Iredell (06JA195, 07JA173, 07JA174, 07JA175).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.