alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SCWC-13-0000182

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI ʻ I

KILAKILA ʻ O HALEAKAL Ᾱ , Petitioner/Plaintiff/Appellant-Appellant,

vs.

UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI ʻ I and DAVID LASSNER, in his official capacity as Chancellor of the University of Hawai ʻ i at Manoa; BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES, SUZANNE CASE, in her capacity as the Chairperson of the Board of Land and Natural Resources; and DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES, Respondents/Defendants/Appellees-Appellees.

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS (CAAP-13-0000182; CIVIL NO. 10-1-2510)

ORDER OF CORRECTION (By: Pollack, J.)

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Opinion of the Court,

filed on October 6, 2016, is corrected as follows:

On page 28, footnote 28, line 1, insert at the

beginning of the footnote, “Under HRS § 91-14(f),” and delete

“The.”

On page 29, footnote 29, line 1, replace “The limited”

with “A statutory.” Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-13-0000182 27-OCT-2016 10:02 AM2 On page 29, footnote 29, line 2, replace “27” with

“28.”

The Clerk of the Court is directed to take all

necessary steps to notify the publishing agencies of this

change.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, October 27, 2016.

/s/ Richard W. Pollack Associate Justice
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM LIN
TELEVISION CORPORATION CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH LIN
TELEVISION CORPORATION QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q SEPTEMBER 31, 1996.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          25,930
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   55,613
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,201
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                92,998
<PP&E>                                         169,310
<DEPRECIATION>                                  62,109
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 597,007
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           44,856
<BONDS>                                        365,000
<COMMON>                                           297
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     120,169
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   597,007
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               231,927
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  135,253
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   701
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              20,576
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 46,374
<INCOME-TAX>                                    16,836
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             29,538
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    29,538
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .98
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .98
        

</TABLE>
**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.

| May 1, 2006                |   | May 1, 2006                   |
|----------------------------|--------|-------------------------------|
|                       |   |                          |
|                       |   |                          |
| ***/s/ Jeffrey L. Minch*** |   | ***/s/ Troy D. Zinn***        |
| Jeffrey L.   Minch,        |   | Troy D. Zinn,                 |
| President   and Chief      |   | Secretary   and Treasurer and |
| Executive   Officer        |   | Chief   Financial Officer     |
Exhibit 31.2

**CERTIFICATION**

          I,Gerald Tucciarone, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Form10-Q of Hauppauge Digital, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge,this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report; 

3. Based on my knowledge,the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisreport, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the issuer as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;

4. The issuer’s othercertifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15-(e)) for the issuer and have:

          a)Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the issuer, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

          b)Evaluated the effectiveness of the issuer’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

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

5. The issuer’s othercertifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the issuer’s auditors and theaudit committee of the issuer’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):

          a)All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

          b)Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the issuer’s internal control over financialreporting.
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 14, 2006                                      November 14, 2006


/s/ Jeffrey L. Minch                                   /s/ Richard  S. Chilinski
Jeffrey L. Minch,                                      Richard S. Chilinski,
President and Chief Executive Officer                  Chief Financial Officer



                                       25
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 Annual Report of RAIT Financial Trust (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Scott F. Schaeffer, 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:



|(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.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/    Scott F. SchaefferName:

Scott F. SchaefferTitle:

Chief Executive Officer and President


Date: March 2, 2009
COPPER, et al. v. DENLINGER, et al.

No. 526A08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 2, 2009.

Ann L. Majestic, Raleigh, for School Board, et al.

Frances P. Solari, for Copper, et al.

Dan M. Hartzog, Jr., Raleigh, for Denlinger.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 29th day of December 2008 by Defendant for Extension of Time to File Brief:

"Motion Allowed. Defendant (Denlinger Individually) shall have up to and including thirty days after the ruling upon the co-defendants Petition for Discretionary Review to file and serve his/her brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 2nd day of January 2009."
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000931006
<NAME> ENSERCH EXPLORATION, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           6,595
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   56,264
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                71,447
<PP&E>                                       2,473,851
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,102,912)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,453,292
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          109,845
<BONDS>                                         80,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          150,000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       126,178
<OTHER-SE>                                     583,435
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,453,292
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                85,147
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  440,493
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   (30)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,927
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (361,243)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (126,513)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (234,730)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (234,730)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.86)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.86)
        

</TABLE>
Donnie R. SPRINKLE, Employee v. LILLY INDUSTRIES, INC., Employer Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Carrier.

No. 556P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 5, 2009.

Daniel S. Walden, Winston-Salem, for Sprinkle.

Shannon Beach, Winston-Salem, for Lilly Industries.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 668 S.E.2d 378.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 19th day of December 2008 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 5th day of February 2009."
The ESTATE OF Jerry JACOBS, The Estate of Ann Shepard, the Estate of Connie Tindall, and The Estate of Joe (William Dallas) Wright v. STATE of North Carolina.

No. 316P15.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Nov. 5, 2015.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 8th of September 2015 by Plaintiffs 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 5th of November 2015."
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   4-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         174,809
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  988,661
<ALLOWANCES>                                    11,051
<INVENTORY>                                  1,765,172
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                11,118
<PP&E>                                         829,560
<DEPRECIATION>                                 700,625
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,165,707
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,949,520
<BONDS>                                         52,511
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        10,684
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,152,992
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,165,707
<SALES>                                      1,173,911
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,173,911
<CGS>                                          658,712
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  774,632
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               285,067
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 4,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              48,195
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 62,017
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             62,017
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    62,017
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.01
        

</TABLE>
STATE of North Carolina v. Rahul Rumar MACK.

No. 258P15.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Sept. 24, 2015.

Douglas W. Corkhill, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Rahul Rumar Mack, for Mack, Rahul Rumar.

Rick Shaffer, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 23rd of July 2015 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina 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 24th of September 2015."

ERVIN, J. recused
----

(2004/C 65 E/160)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2412/03

by Charlotte Cederschiöld (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 July 2003)

Subject:   Network and information security

The European Parliament together with industry have welcomed the Commission proposal for a Regulation establishing the European Network and Information Security Agency.

What other steps is the Commission envisaging in order to accelerate the Union's network and information security agenda? Can we expect any initiatives taking a global approach to these issues?

Can we expect the dialogue between policy-makers and parties with an interest in the field to continue and even intensify, e.g. within such fora as the Cybercrime Forum?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 2003)

The Commission thanks the Honourable Member for the interest in the network and information security agenda. As she is aware, the Commission's proposal to establishing a European Network and Information Security Agency will be discussed shortly in the Parliament. The Commission hopes it can count on the Honourable Member's support for a swift adoption of the Regulation.

Already a substantial amount of activities have been deployed in the area of network and information security and cybercrime following the Commission's Communications ‘Network and Information Security: proposal for a European policy approach’ from June 2001, and ‘Creating a Safer Information Society by Improving the Security of Information Infrastructures and Combating Computer-related crime’ from January 2001.

These activities range from an increased emphasis on security within the eEurope 2002 and 2005 action plans, through sustained research efforts in the Information Society Technology (IST) research programmes and the review of existing legislation (e.g. the new electronic communications legal framework and the Electronic Signatures Directive (1)) to supporting standardisation efforts at European level and increased security requirements for the exchange of data between public administrations, and a proposal for a Framework Decision on attacks against information systems (2).

The broader approach on cyber-security mentioned by the Honourable Member consists in the Commission's view of the three categories of actions conducted respectively in the areas of the electronic communications and data protection legal framework, the network and information security activities and the policy on cyber-crime and information infrastructure protection.

Concerning cyber-crime related activities, the Commission intends to intensify the discussions on the security and protection of information infrastructures between involved parties of the public and private sector through the organisation of workshops and expert meetings in fora such as the Forum on the prevention of organised crime. An initial workshop with the private sector is scheduled to take place in October 2003.

----

(1)  Directive 1999/93/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 1999 on a Community framework for electronic signatures, OJ L 13, 19.1.2000.

(2)OJ C 203 E, 27.8.2002.

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM (A) LIN
HOLDINGS CORP. CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND CONSOLIDATED BALANCE
SHEET AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH (B) LIN HOLDINGS
CORP. QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q DATED SEPTEMBER 30, 2000.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>  0001062707
<NAME>  LIN HOLDINGS CORP.
<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>                                          15,980
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   58,790
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,791
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                96,667
<PP&E>                                         206,431
<DEPRECIATION>                                  45,785
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,055,335
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           75,377
<BONDS>                                        556,186
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     463,404
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,055,335
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               209,166
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  175,947
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                67,668
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  (85)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              68,070
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (34,449)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,054
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (36,503)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (36,503)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-08-271-CR

MICHAEL COLEMAN BLANTON					        APPELLANT

A/K/A MICHEAL COLEMAN BLANTON

	V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

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

	FROM CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 1 OF TARRANT COUNTY

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

	Appellant Michael Coleman Blanton a/k/a Micheal Coleman Blanton appeals the judgment adjudicating his guilt for unlawful restraint with risk of serious bodily injury.  According to the written confession signed by Blanton and the trial court’s judgment, Blanton was convicted pursuant to a plea bargain, and his punishment was assessed in accordance with the plea bargain at three years’ confinement.  The trial court’s certification states that the case “is a plea-bargained case and the defendant has NO right of appeal” and that “the defendant has waived the right of appeal.”  

	Accordingly, on August 5, 2008, we informed Blanton by letter that this court would dismiss this appeal unless he or any party desiring to continue this appeal filed a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal.  We received no response.

	Rule 25.2(a)(2) limits the right to appeal in a plea-bargain case to those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial or to those cases in which the appellant obtained the trial court’s permission to appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2)(A), (B).  Blanton has not indicated that either of these exceptions apply in these cases.  Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 43.2(f).

									PER CURIAM

PANEL:  WALKER, J.; CAYCE, C.J.; and MCCOY, J.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED:  August 26, 2008