alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-06-00256-CV

MCI SALES AND SERVICE, INC., F/K/A HAUSMAN BUS SALES, INC., 

AND MOTOR COACH INDUSTRIES MEXICO, S.A. DE C.V., 

F/K/A DINA AUTOBUSES, S.A. DE C.V.,

Appellants

v.

JAMES HINTON, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE 

ESTATE OF DOLORES HINTON, DECEASED, DAVID HINTON,

ROBERT KURYLA, KAREN KURYLA, HATTIE BINNS, RETA HAYNES, 

MELINDA GREGER, ALAN HORTON, ELAINE HORTON, RUTH POWELL, 

JUDY BENSON, JAMES L. FREEMAN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS 

PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF JO CATHERINE 

FREEMAN, DECEASED, JAMES F. FREEMAN, MELANIE JO BROOKS, 

SUSAN AKERS BILLS, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS EXECUTRIX OF THE 

ESTATES OF ROBERT MELVIN AKERS, DECEASED, AND MILDRED

DELOIS AKERS, DECEASED, ROBERT MELVIN AKERS, JR., PATSY 

BEASLEY, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF 

WAYNE BEASLEY, DECEASED, SHIRLEY SOMMER, AND PEGGY 

ARMSTRONG,

Appellees

From the 170th District Court

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2003-2308-4

DISSENTING OPINION

The events of this case are tragic. But the state law crashworthiness design 
MCI Sales and Service, Inc. v. Hinton Page 2

claims being made by the plaintiffs against the manufacturer of the bus are pre-empted 

by federal law. And in recognition of the benefits of a single regulatory entity for all 

states in the United States, the expanse of preemption is widening. See Riegel v. 

Medtronic, Inc., ___ U.S. ___, 128 S.Ct. 999, 1011, 169 L.Ed.2d 892, 906-907, 2008 U.S. 

LEXIS 2013, *29-30 (2008) (tort claims challenging safety & effectiveness of catheter); 

Carden v. General Motors Corp., 509 F.3d 227, 230-232 (5th Cir. 2007) (tort claims 

challenging design of seat belts); Bic Pen Corp. v. Carter, 251 S.W.3d 500, 504-509 (Tex. 

2008) (common law challenge of design defect of BIC lighter). See also Delta Air Lines, 

Inc. v. Black 116 S.W.3d 745 (Tex. 2003) (challenge of airline passenger boarding 

procedures). The judgment of the trial court should be reversed and rendered. 

I respectfully dissent.

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

Dissenting opinion delivered and filed September 10, 2008
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 745 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 745

To provide for increased export assistance staff in areas in which the 
President declared a major disaster as a result of Hurricane Katrina of 
                    2005 and Hurricane Rita of 2005.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 1, 2007

 Ms. Landrieu introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
    referred to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide for increased export assistance staff in areas in which the 
President declared a major disaster as a result of Hurricane Katrina of 
                    2005 and Hurricane Rita of 2005.

    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 ``Gulf Coast Export Recovery Act of 
2007''.

SEC. 2. ADDITIONAL STAFF FOR NEW ORLEANS UNITED STATES EXPORT 
              ASSISTANCE CENTER.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of Commerce shall hire 1 additional 
full-time international trade specialist, to be located in the New 
Orleans, Louisiana, United States Export Assistance Center.
    (b) Responsibilities.--The international trade specialist hired 
under subsection (a) shall provide service to the parishes of East 
Baton Rouge, West Baton Rouge, Pointe Coupee, Iberville, St. Martin, 
St. Landry, and Iberia, Louisiana, and any other parish selected by the 
Secretary of Commerce.

SEC. 3. GULF COAST EXPORT ASSISTANCE.

    (a) Increase in Small Business International Trade Staff.--The 
Administrator shall hire an additional full-time international finance 
specialist to the Office of International Trade of the Administration.
    (b) Location and Service Area.--The international finance 
specialist hired under subsection (a) shall--
            (1) be located in the New Orleans, Louisiana United States 
        Export Assistance Center;
            (2) help to carry out the export promotion efforts 
        described in section 22 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
        649); and
            (3) provide such services in the States of Louisiana, 
        Mississippi, and Alabama.
    (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--
            (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
        the Administration such sums as are necessary to carry out this 
        section.
            (2) Availability of funds.--Amounts made available under 
        this subsection shall remain available until expended.

SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

    For purposes of this Act, the terms ``Administration'' and 
``Administrator'' mean the Small Business Administration and the 
Administrator thereof, respectively.
                                 <all>
```
State of North Carolina v. Teddy Joe Moore, Defendant.

No. COA16-136

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: August 16, 2016

AFFIRMED.
STATE v. Dennis O'Keith BLACKWELL.

No. 525P13-3.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Dec. 15, 2015.

Joseph L. Hyde, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Dennis O'Keith Blackwell, Norlina, for Blackwell, Dennis O'Keith.

Wallace W. Bradsher, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

*294The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 30th of October 2015 by Defendant to Appoint Counsel:

> "Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 15th of December 2015."
1410.

#### COX *v.*FLETCHER & ADAMS.

A summary lien foreclosure is to be strictly construed. It must show upon its face a complete right in the plaintiff to maintain that form of action. One who seeks to assert lien for labor alleged to have been performed by him under an employment as “superintendent and general manager” of a sawmill does not show a right to maintain a laborer’s lien foreclosure.

*298Certiorari, from Morgan, superior, court — Judge Lewis. September 12, 1908.

Argued November 27,

Decided December 8, 1908.

Cox sued out a laborer’s lien against Fletcher & Adams, alleging that they owed him a named sum for “work and labor . as general superintendent and manager at the [saw] mill of the defendant.” The defendant moved to disniiss the case, on the ground that the foreclosure showed on its face that the plaintiff was not entitled to a laborer’s lien; that as a general superintendent and manager he was not a laborer within contemplation of the law relating to laborers’ liens. There are in the record other matters, which we do not deem it necessary to set forth with particularity. There was a verdict for the plaintiff, which the judge of the superior court set aside on certiorari.

*M. C. Few,*for plaintiff. *Ii. W. Dent,*for defendant.

Powell, J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.)

Some of the points involved in this record are controlled by the case of *Cox*v. *Adams,*ante, 296 (63 S. E. 60). A summary lien foreclosure must contain every allegation necessary to show a right-to the action in that form; it is to be strictly construed. *Mabry*v. *Judkins,*66 *Ga.*732; *Howell*v. *Atkinson,*3 *Ga. App.*58 (59 S. E. 316). Whether a person is to be entitled to a lien as a laborer is to be determined by the contract of employment, and not merely by what he actually did after being employed. *Howell*v. *Atkinson,*supra. A superintendent and general manager of a sawmill is prima facie not a common laborer. The words “superintendent- and general manager” denote such -a degree of discretion and. necessity for the exercise of mental functions as to distinguish the person so designated from a common laborer whose work is-chiefly manual. The motion to dismiss the foreclosure should have prevailed; and the judge of the superior court therefore did not err in sustaining the certiorari. *Judgment affirmed.*
_________________________________________ 

 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 17, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 136394 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, JUSTIN FULLER, Personal Justices 

Representative of the Estate of

Robert M. Fuller,

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 136394 

 COA: 271368 

Genesee CC: 2001-070920-NH 

ALI A. ESFAHANI, M.D.,

GENESYS REGIONAL MEDICAL 

CENTER, WILLIAM V.

ZEMNICKAS II, D.O., and

SURGICAL SPECIALISTS, P.C.,

 Defendants-Appellees, 

and 

WALTER F. BARKEY, M.D. and

McLAREN HEALTH CARE CORP.,

 Defendants. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 27, 2008 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

CAVANAGH and KELLY, JJ., would grant leave to appeal. 

d0910 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

September 17, 2008 

 Clerk
RECKSON OPERATING PARTNERSHIP, L.P.

                                  EXHIBIT 99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED
STATES CODE

I, Donald Rechler, CO-CEO of Reckson Associates Realty Corp. the sole general
partner of Reckson Operating Partnership, L.P. (the "Company"), certify pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

         1)   The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly
              period ended March 31, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the
              requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
              Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); 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:  May 9, 2003

                RECKSON OPERATING PARTNERSHIP, L.P.
                  By:  Reckson Associates Realty Corp., its sole general partner


                       By            /s/ Donald Rechler
                          ------------------------------------------------------
                                      Donald Rechler, Co-Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Reckson Operating Partnership, L.P. and will be furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
----

(2004/C 65 E/210)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2692/03

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(2 September 2003)

Subject:   Budgetary accounts

When will the Commission start to use double-entry bookkeeping in its budgetary accounts?

Answer given by Mrs Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(2 October 2003)

The use of double-entry bookkeeping in the budgetary accounts is not required by Article 137 of the Financial Regulation (1), nor under the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS). Nevertheless, the Commission is examining whether it is feasible to introduce double-entry booking for the budgetary accounts within its project for the modernisation of its accounting system by 2005. If it proves feasible, and of demonstrated added value, it will be introduced in 2005.

The Commission's general accounts are kept by double-entry bookkeeping, in accordance with the requirements of Article 134 of the Financial Regulation.

----

(1)  Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities, OJ L 248, 16.9.2002.

----
IN RE B.G.R.

No. COA08-938.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed January 6, 2009.

Certification Date January 26, 2009.

Appeal from Catawba (07JT100).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
Document Headings

                    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.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service 

Under the authority granted to me as Chief Counsel of the Internal Revenue Service by the General Counsel of the Department of the Treasury by General Counsel Order No. 21 (Rev. 4), pursuant to the Civil Service Reform Act, I have appointed the following persons to the Legal Division Performance Review Board, Internal Revenue Service Panel: 

1. Chairperson, Donald T. Rocen, Deputy Chief Counsel (Operations) 

2. William D. Alexander, Associate Chief Counsel (Corporate) 

3. Peter Labelle, Division Counsel (Large and Mid-Size Business) 

4. Catherine Livingston, Assistant Chief Counsel (Exempt Organizations/Employment/ Tax/Government Entities) 

5. Patricia Donahue, Area Counsel, Division Counsel (Small Business/Self-Employed) This publication is required by 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4). 

Dated: September 13, 2005. 

Donald L. Korb, 

Chief Counsel, Internal Revenue Service. 

[FR Doc. 05-18803 Filed 9-20-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
STATE of North Carolina v. Clyde Gary WHISENANT, Defendant.

No. COA15-607.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Dec. 15, 2015.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

Vacated in Part and Remanded.
* P ursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the Court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________ No. 98-50662 Summary Calendar

_____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ARTURO CERINO-RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

(EP-98-CR-289-ALL)

_________________________________________________________________ December 31, 1998 Before KING, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Court-appointed counsel for Arturo Cerino-Ramirez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Cerino-Ramirez was convicted

on a guilty plea of being an alien who was unlawfully in the United
States after being excluded, deported, and removed; he has not filed a response. Cerino-Ramirez directed his couns el to appeal only his
sentence. Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, the motion to- 2 -

withdraw is GRANTED ; counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein; and the appeal is DISMISSED
. 5 T H C IR . R. 42.2. MOTION GRANTED; APPEAL DISMISSED
# C_2023314EN.01000301.xml

| 4.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 314/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 314/3

---

Appeal brought on 1 May 2023 by Canai Technology Co. Ltd against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 1 March 2023 in Case T-25/22, Canai Technology v EUIPO — Trend Fin (HE&ME)

(Case C-280/23 P)

(2023/C 314/03)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Canai Technology Co. Ltd (represented by: J. F. Gallego Jiménez E. Sanz Valls, P. Bauzá Martínez and Y. Hernández Viñes, abogados)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office, Trend Fin BV

By order of 17 July 2023, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) held that the appeal was not allowed to proceed and that Canai Technology Co. Ltd should bear its own costs.

---
# C_2008079EN.01002305.xml

| 29.3.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.3.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/23

---

Order of the President of the Court of 24 January 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-192/07) (1)

1

(2008/C 79/43)

Language of the case: German

Language of the case: German

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 117, 26.5.2007.

1

---
EXHIBIT 32.2


                            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 Alliance Towers, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 operation of the Company.

Date:    March 28, 2005                      By:      /s/Michael Delin
                                                      ----------------
                                             Name:    Michael Delin
                                             Title:   Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authentications, 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 Alliance Towers, Inc.
and will be retained by Alliance Towers, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
      This Schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Baron
Capital Trust financial statements for the twelve months ended December 31, 1999
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                  DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         85,863
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  60,645
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              146,508
<PP&E>                                      7,502,769
<DEPRECIATION>                            (1,453,177)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              7,336,198
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       1,435,400
<BONDS>                                     4,370,486
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                    6,616,806
<OTHER-SE>                                (5,086,494)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                7,336,198
<SALES>                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              585,402
<CGS>                                               0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               1,024,209
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            2,728,120
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (3,166,927)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 0
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                              (3,166,927)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (5.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (5.12)




</TABLE>
**Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber) of 10 July 2009 – Italy v Commission**

**(Case T-373/05)**

EAGGF – Guarantee Section – Expenditure excluded from Community financing – Raw tobacco – Obligation to state reasons – Article 7(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1258/1999

1.                     *Acts of the institutions – Statement of reasons – Obligation – Scope (see paras 50-51)*

2.                     *Agriculture – EAGGF – Clearance of accounts (see paras 65-67)*

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | APPLICATION for annulment in part of Commission Decision 2005/579/EC of 20 July 2005 excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (OJ 2005 L 199, p. 84), in so far as it excludes certain expenditure incurred by the Italian Republic in the sector of raw tobacco. |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Dismisses the action; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs. |