alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
McLAUGHLIN, et al. v. BAILEY, et al.

No. 163A15-1.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Oct. 7, 2015.

Harvey L. Kennedy, Winston-Salem, for McLaughlin, Ivan, et al.

Harold L. Kennedy, III, Winston-Salem, for McLaughlin, Ivan, et al.

Sean F. Perrin, Charlotte, for Bailey, Daniel, et al.

William G. Simpson, Jr., Chapel Hill, for N.C. Advocates for Justice.

Jon Ward, for N.C. Advocates for Justice.

**Opinion**

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 6th of October 2015 by N.C. Advocates for Justice for Leave to File Amended Amicus Curiae Brief:

> "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 7th of October 2015."

Ervin, J. recused.
Exhibit 32.1
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
      In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of LIN TV Corp. for the three monthsended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), the undersigned, Gary R. Chapman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Vincent L.Sadusky, Chief Financial Officer of the Company each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, that:
      (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and
      (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.        Dated: May 6, 2005 /s/ Gary R. Chapman   Gary R. Chapman   Chief Executive Officer           Dated: May 6, 2005 /s/ Vincent L. Sadusky   Vincent L. Sadusky   Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
----

(2004/C 65 E/121)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2003/03

by Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 June 2003)

Subject:   Free circulation of euro notes

Almost from the outset, the free circulation of euro notes has been hampered by an obstacle that, though expected, is none the less tiresome and worrying, namely the fact that some notes, particularly those above EUR 50, are not accepted by some traders.

Signs marked ‘notes above EUR 50 not accepted’ are a common sight in shops and other sales outlets.

Are there any provisions which allow traders to refuse to accept euro notes of whatever denomination and, if not, do prospective purchasers have any legal recourse against measures which restrict the circulation of specific denominations?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(23 July 2003)

According to Article 106 (1), 3rd sentence, of the EC Treaty and Article 10 of Council Regulation (EC) No 974/98 of 3 May 1998 on the introduction of the euro (1) all denominations of euro banknotes have legal tender status. While this Regulation introduces a further limitation (see Article 11) on the maximum number of coins which any party is obliged to accept, no further rules are laid down in relation to banknotes. The different banknote denominations are specified in a decision of the European Central Bank (ECB) Governing Council. The concept of legal tender is undefined in Community law, and should therefore be interpreted against the background of national rules and practices.

There is no European legislation, which provides legal recourse against the restricted acceptance of certain banknotes. Different legal provisions may apply according to the monetary and civil laws of Member States.

----

(1)OJ L 139, 11.5.1998.

----
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Small Business Administration [Disaster Declaration #10178 and #10179]
 AGENCY: Small Business Administration.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Mississippi (FEMA-1604-DR), dated 08/29/2005. *Incident:*
                         Hurricane Katrina. *Incident Period:*
                         08/29/2005 and continuing.
 Dates: *Effective Date:*
                         08/29/2005. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         10/28/2005. *EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         05/29/2006.
 ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to:  U.S. Small Business Administration, Disaster Area Office 3, 14925 Kingsport Road Fort, Worth, TX 76155.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the President's major disaster declaration on 08/29/2005, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:* Amite, Forrest, George Greene, Hancock, Harrison, Jackson, Lamar, Marion, Pearl River, Perry, Pike, Stone, Walthall, Wilkinson. *Contiguous Counties:* Mississippi: Adams, Covington, Franklin, Jefferson Davis, Jones, Lawrence, Lincoln, Wayne. Alabama: Mobile, Washington. Louisiana: Concordia, East Feliciana, St. Helena, St. Tammany, Tangipahoa, Washington, West Feliciana. The Interest Rates are: PercentHomeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere
5.375Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.687Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere
6.557Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit Available Elsewhere
4.000Other (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit Available Elsewhere
4.750Businesses and Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere
4.000
 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 101788 and for economic injury is 101790. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Herbert L. Mitchell, Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.


[FR Doc. 05-17685 Filed 9-6-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
IiiIilisFicilCAIUIIYNWRRiIIIjisliciSIJAVII)L.BRIlMhlSMgiVRANCISUiliiiASS.lAN(hIEIIiiAIiI:III,\Nc;—Fv1LIiIlsRohliRlNI.FlilMOliliLANAMYIRSDAVIDLVANSDAVIDLI:wisADABROWNCRAIGSnEDDiRIlIlaWillIll(ILLDAVLDJSciiiNCRjfiftljitrictofexaataIIa600COMMERCES[RELF,SillIL200DALlAS,IEXAS75202(214)712-3401)LISAMAR’CiERR(II[LIECi)iiiiF(214)712-3450thecIcrk@5thLxcUurts.gOV(iA\iEIlllviPAIIIISINISSAOMINISIRAlOil(214)712-3434gayIchumpa5thLxcourts.govlASCIMLI.1(214)745-1083IN)IRNEFWWW.IXC(llRiS.c1v/SIIICc)A.ASI’XMichelleLynnSmithTDCJNo.1619020CramUnitApril24,20151401StateSchoolRoadGatesville,Tx.76599RE:CourtofAppealsNumber:TrialCourtCaseNumber:Style:Smith,MichelleV.05-09-01557-CRTheStateofTexasI.Thecasehasbeensubmittedandispendingconsideration.2.TheCourtofCriminalAppealshasjurisdictionoverpost-convictionwritsandhabeascorpus.PleasecontacttheCourtofCriminalAppealsforanyformsorinformation.3.TheCourthasnorecordofanappealontileintheabovereferencednameortrialcourtnumber4.Enclosedisacopyoftheopinioninyourappeal.5.ThisCourtdoesnotappointcounsel6.NeitherthejudgesnorthestaffofthisCourtcangivelegaladvice.Therefore,youmaywishtocontactyourattorney;thetrialcourt;ortheStateCounselforOffenders,TexasDepartmentofCriminalJustice.P.O.Box4005,Huntsville,TX,QotirtofZ1ppcaI77342forfurtherinformationorassistance.7.TheCourtdoesnothavejurisdictiontocompelthetrialcourttoprovideyouwithfreecopiesofanyofyourtrialcourtrecords.ThisCourtdoesnotprovidefreecopiesofanydocumentswithoutprepaymentofcosts.Ourchargeis5.10perpagepayableinadvancebycashier’scheckormoneyorder.8.Yourcasehasbeensetforsubmissionon9.Ourrecordsreflectthatthe10.Enclosedpleasefindthecopiesyourequested.xII.Thecostforthecopiesyourequestedis(clerkrecordIvolume20$pages,supplementalclerkrecords2volumes18pages,reporterrecords9volumes939pages,totalcosttocopy&shipS125.00wedonothaveatranscriptoforalargument,itwasrecorded,andaftertheopinionandmandateareissued,therecordingaredestroyed.Respectfrilly,Is!LisaMatz,ClerkoftheCourt2
EXHIBIT 32.1


CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORTS


Each of the undersigned hereby certifies that this Quarterly Report on Form
  10-QSB complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
  Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information contained in such report
  fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
  of operations of the Company.November 7, 2005By:/s/ JEFFREY L MINCH
  Jeffrey L. Minch 
  President and Chief Executive Officer/s/ TROY D. ZINN
  Troy D. Zinn
  Secretary and Treasurer
  (Chief Financial Officer)
STATE v. JONES.

No. COA08-338.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed November 4, 2008.

Certification Date November 24, 2008.

Appeal from Wake (06CRS48148).

Case reported without published opinion. No error; Motion for Appropriate Relief Dismissed without Prejudice.
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**

June 3, 2014
N o. 04

- 14

- 00175

- CV IN THE INTEREST OF A.J.P., a Child, From the 407th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2012

- PA

- 02469 Honorable Janet P. Littlejohn, Judge Presiding 

### ORDER In this accelerated appeal of an order terminating Appellant’s parental rights , Appellant ’ s court

- appointed attorney filed a n Anders brief in which counsel asserts there are no meritorious issues to raise on appeal. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); In re R.R. , No. 04

- 03

- 00096

- CV, 2003 WL 21157944, at *4 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio May 21, 2003, no pet.) (applying Anders procedure in a parental rights termination appeal ). Couns el has informed A ppellant of her right to file a pro se brief. The State has filed a letter waiving its right to file an appellee ’ s brief unless A ppellant files a pro se brief. If A ppellant desires to file a pro se brief, we ORDER Appellant to d o so within TWENTY DAYS of the date of this order

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.6(a). If A ppellant files a pro se brief, the State may file a responsive brief no t later than TWENTY DAYS after the date A ppellant ’ s pro se brief is filed in this court. See id. R. 38.6(b). C ounsel’s motion to withdraw is HELD IN ABEYANCE pen ding further order of this court

.

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 3rd day of June, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court
#### Thomas Muller, Respondent, v George Applebee et al., Appellants, and Potlatch Corporation, Appellant-Respondent.

[801 NYS2d 178]

Appeal from an amended order of the Supreme Court, Steuben County (Marianne Furfure, A.J.), entered July 6, 2004 in a personal injury action. The amended order, among other things, denied in part the motion of defendant Potlatch Corporation for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against it.

It is hereby ordered that the amended order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in decision at Supreme Court. Present— Pigott, Jr., PJ, Green, Hurlbutt, Kehoe and Pine, JJ.
31.1

CERTIFICATION OF

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER





I, Ralph M. Amato, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly  report on Form 10-QSB of BoysToys.com, Inc.
2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report.
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial information included in this Quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results from operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report.
4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the Registrant and have:



(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 which this report is being prepared; and



(b) 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; and



(c) Disclosed in this Report any change in the Registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the Registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and



5. 	The Registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrant's auditors and the audit committee of Registrant's Board of Directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



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; and



b) Any fraud, whether or material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.





|Dated: | August 13, 2004                                         
|------ | --------------------------------------------------------
|       |                                                         
|By:    | /s/ Ralp M. Amato
Ralph M. Amato
Chief Executive Officer
```

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 176 (Tuesday, September 13, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 54028]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18162]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

The Manufacturing Council: Meeting of the Manufacturing Council

AGENCY: International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Manufacturing Council will hold a full Council meeting to 
discuss topics related to the state of manufacturing. The Manufacturing 
Council is a Secretarial Board at the Department of Commerce, 
established to ensure regular communication between Government and the 
manufacturing sector. This will be the fourth meeting of The 
Manufacturing Council and will include updates by the Council's three 
subcommittees. For information about the Council, please visit the 
Manufacturing Council Web site at: http://www.manufacturing.gov/council.

DATES: September 27, 2005.
    Time: 9:45 a.m.

ADDRESSES: Gateway Building, 200 NE., Water Street, Peoria, Illinois 
61602. This program is physically accessible to people with 
disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other 
auxiliary aids should be submitted no later than September 19, 2005, to 
The Manufacturing Council, Room 4043, Washington, DC 20230.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Manufacturing Council Executive 
Secretariat, Room 4043, Washington, DC 20230 (Phone: 202-482-1369). 
Interested parties are encouraged to visit The Manufacturing Council 
Web site (http://www.manufacturing.gov/council) for the most up-to-date 
information about the meeting and the Council.

    Dated: September 8, 2005.
Sam Giller,
Executive Secretary, The Manufacturing Council.
[FR Doc. 05-18162 Filed 9-12-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DR-P
```
NC ASS'N OF EDUCATORS, INC., et al. v. STATE of NC.

No. 228A15-1.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Nov. 3, 2015.

Melissa L. Trippe, Special Deputy Attorney General, for the State of North Carolina.

Burton Craige, Raleigh, for North Carolina Association of Educators, Inc., et al.

Narendra Ghosh, Chapel Hill, for North Carolina Association of Educators, Inc., et al.

Philip A. Hostak, for North Carolina Association of Educators, Inc., et al.

John F. Maddrey, Solicitor General, for the State of North Carolina.

Elizabeth A. Fisher, Assistant Attorney Geneal, for the State of North Carolina.

**Opinion**

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 2nd of November 2015 by Plaintiffs:

> "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd of November 2015."
August 20 2008
QUALITY BUILT HOMES INCORPORATED and Stafford Land Company, Inc. v. TOWN OF CARTHAGE.

No. 315PA15.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Nov. 5, 2015.

James E. Scarbrough, Concord, Quality Built Homes Incorporated, et al.

James R. Demay, Concord, for Quality Built Homes Incorporated, et al.

Susan K. Burkhart, Raleigh, for Town of Carthage.

Jennifer Welch.

James M. Carpenter, General Counsel, for N.C. Home Builders Association, Inc.

John T. Benjamin, Jr., Raleigh, for Leading Builders of America.

William E. Hubbard, Raleigh, for Leading Builders of America.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the conditional petition filed on the 21st of September 2015 by Defendant 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:

> "Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of November 2015."

Therefore the case is docketed as of the date of this order's certification. Briefs of the respective parties shall be submitted to this Court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 15(g)(2).
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MARCH 1, 2022

NO. 03

- 21

- 00567

- CV

Scott D. McHenry , Appellant

v.

Lonnie S. Jones , Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 98TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES GOODWIN, BAKER, A ND TRIAN A

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE TRIANA

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by t he tr i a l court on October 5, 2021 . Having

reviewed the record , the Court holds that Scott D. McHenry has not prosecuted his appeal and

did not comply with a notice from the C lerk of this C ourt

. Therefore, the Court dismisses the

appeal for want of prosec ution. The appellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in

this Court and in the court below.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                  1
<CURRENCY>                    US DOLLARS


<S>                                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         1,270,065
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  4,626,890
<ALLOWANCES>                                   1,874,717
<INVENTORY>                                    4,411,507
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               9,370,436
<PP&E>                                         8,063,360
<DEPRECIATION>                                 322,602
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 22,973,283
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          6,690,276
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       100,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     757,212
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   22,873,283
<SALES>                                        32,906,742
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               32,906,742
<CGS>                                          9,347,775
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  9,347,775
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               32,171,942
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             8,635,018
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                106,144,688
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            106,144,688
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   106,144,688
<EPS-BASIC>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0


</TABLE>
# C_2023173EN.01004002.xml

| 15.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 173/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 173/40

---

Action brought on 29 March 2023 — RT France v Council

(Case T-169/23)

(2023/C 173/53)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: RT France (Boulogne-Billancourt, France) (represented by: E. Piwnica, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

| — | annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/191 of 27 January 2023 amending Decision 2014/512/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/191 of 27 January 2023 amending Decision 2014/512/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine;

| — | order the Council of the European Union to pay the entirety of the costs; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council of the European Union to pay the entirety of the costs;

with all the legal consequences that entails.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that the defendant infringed the freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the defendant infringed the freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant infringed the freedom to conduct a business protected by Article 16 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant infringed the freedom to conduct a business protected by Article 16 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging that the defendant infringed the principle of non-discrimination under Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging that the defendant infringed the principle of non-discrimination under Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

---