alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-2846

_____________________________

WILLIAM SAMUEL STAPLETON,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

_____________________________

Petition for Belated Appeal—Original Jurisdiction.

May 23, 2018

PER CURIAM.

The petition for belated appeal is denied. See Fla. R. App. P. 

9.141(c)(5)(A).

WETHERELL, RAY, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

William Samuel Stapleton, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
# C_2009032EN.01003402.xml

| 7.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 32/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/34

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 26 November 2008 — Makhteshim-Agan Holding and Others v Commission

(Case T-393/06) (1)

1

(Action for annulment - Action for failure to act - Directive 91/414/EEC - Plant protection products - Active substance azinphos-methyl - Inclusion in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC - Absence of a new Commission proposal after opposition by the Council - Article 5(6) of Decision 1999/468/EEC - Non-actionable measure - Absence of a request to act - Inadmissibility)

(2009/C 32/65)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Makhteshim-Agan Holding BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands); Makhteshim-Agan Italia Srl (Bergamo, Italy); and Magan Italia Srl (Bergamo) (represented by: K. Van Maldegem and C. Mereu, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: L. Parpala and B. Doherty, Agents)

Defendant:

Party intervening in support of the applicants: European Crop Protection Association (ECPA) (Brussels, Belgium)(represented by: D. Waelbroeck and N. Rampal, lawyers)

Party intervening in support of the applicants:

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission decision, alleged to be contained in a letter of 12 October 2006, not to submit a proposal with a view to inclusion of the active substance azinphos-methyl in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market (OJ 1991 L 230, p. 1), or, in the alternative, application for a declaration that the Commission has failed to act in unlawfully failing to submit such a proposal.

Operative part of the order

The Court hereby orders:

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | Makhteshim-Agan Holding BV, Makhteshim-Agan Italia Srl and Magan Italia Srl shall bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Makhteshim-Agan Holding BV, Makhteshim-Agan Italia Srl and Magan Italia Srl shall bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the Commission.

| 3. | The European Crop Protection Association shall bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The European Crop Protection Association shall bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 20, 27.1.2007.

1

---
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

FORT WORTH 

NO. 02-14-00494-CR 

Rodney Chase Pettigrew 

v. 

The State of Texas 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

From the 415th District Court 

of Parker County (CR11-0767) 

December 22, 2016 

Opinion by Justice Gardner 

(nfp) 

JUDGMENT 

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of 

the trial court is affirmed. 

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By _/s/ Anne Gardner__________________ 

 Justice Anne Gardner
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          10,950
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               19,079,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   433,996
<INVENTORY>                                 20,510,700
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            41,077,062
<PP&E>                                       9,700,263
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,073,034
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              48,430,271
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       19,501,495
<BONDS>                                     25,395,189
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        69,143
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,206,173
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                48,430,271
<SALES>                                     17,502,604
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            17,502,604
<CGS>                                       13,814,105
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               13,814,105
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,999,148
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                88,512
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             577,454
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 89,310
<INCOME-TAX>                                    32,300
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             57,010
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    57,010
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.01


</TABLE>
i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-08-00398-CV

Loann The TRINH, D.O.,

Appellant

v.

Maria Zamora RODRIGUEZ,

Appellee

From the 111th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2007CVQ001492-D2

Honorable Raul Vasquez, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Delivered and Filed: September 10, 2008

DISMISSED

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal. The motion contains a certificate of

service to appellee, who has not opposed the motion. Therefore, we grant the motion and dismiss

the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a). Costs of appeal are taxed against appellant. See id. 42.1(d).

PER CURIAM
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON

ROSS DAY, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) SC S50866 ) HARDY MYERS, Attorney General, ) State of Oregon, ) ) ORDER CERTIFYING Respondent. ) BALLOT TITLE

Upon consideration by the court. Petitioner’s request for oral argument is denied. Petitioner’s arguments that the Attorney Gener al’s certified ballot title for Initiative Petition 81 (2004) does not comply substant ially with ORS 250.035 are not well taken. The court certifies to the Secretary of St ate the Attorney General’s certified ballot title for the proposed measure. Dated this 16th day of December 2003.

WALLACE P. CARSON, JR. CHIEF JUSTICE
# C_2010288EN.01001302.xml

| 23.10.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 288/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.10.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 288/13

---

Order of the Court of 9 June 2010 — European Commission v Schneider Electric SA, Federal Republic of Germany, French Republic

(Case C-440/07 P) (1)

(Appeal - Partial annulment of the judgment under appeal - Where the state of the proceedings so permits - Non contractual liability of the Community - Evaluation of the loss)

(2010/C 288/20)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: European Commission (represented by: M. Petite, F. Arbault, T. Christoforou, R. Lyal and C-F Durand, Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Schneider Electric SA (represented by: M. Pittie and A. Winckler, lawyers), Federal Republic of Germany, French Republic

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) in case T-351/03 Schneider Electric v Commission, by which the Court ordered the European Commission to make good, first, the expenses incurred by Schneider Electric SA in respect of its participation in the resumed merger control procedure which followed delivery of the judgments of the Court of First Instance on 22 October 2002 in Cases T-310/01 and T-77/02 Schneider Electric v Commission and, second, two thirds of the loss sustained by Schneider Electric as a result of the reduction in the transfer price of Legrand SA which Schneider Electric had to concede to the transferee in exchange for the postponement of the effective date of sale of Legrand until 10 December 2002 — Conditions governing the establishment of non contractual liability on the part of the Community — Concepts of wrongful act, damage and direct causal link between the wrongful act and the damage suffered — ‘Sufficiently serious’ breach of Community law vitiating the procedure for examination of the compatibility of a concentration with the common market

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The amount of the loss to be made good in point 3 of the operative part of the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 16 July 2009 in Case C-440/07 P Commission v Schneider Electric [2009] ECR I-6413 is fixed at EUR 50 000. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The amount of the loss to be made good in point 3 of the operative part of the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 16 July 2009 in Case C-440/07 P Commission v Schneider Electric [2009] ECR I-6413 is fixed at EUR 50 000.

| 2. | Schneider Electric SA’s claim relating to the costs is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Schneider Electric SA’s claim relating to the costs is dismissed.

---

(1)  OJ C 22 of 26.01.2008.

---
Richard Antonio Jefferson, Petitioner, v. State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

July 21, 2016

**92*579ORDER

Petitioner filed a motion on November 19, 2015 for resentencing pursuant to Aiken v. Byars , 410 S.C. 534, 765 S.E.2d 572 (S.C. 2014). Now, therefore, pursuant to SC CONST. Art. V, § 4,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Honorable DeAndrea G. Benjamin be vested with exclusive jurisdiction over the Petitioner's Motion for Resentencing in the above-captioned matter.

Judge Benjamin shall at all times be vested with concurrent jurisdiction in all circuits of the state to dispose of matters relating to this case, and shall decide all matters pertaining to the Petitioner's Motion, and shall retain jurisdiction over this matter regardless of where she may be assigned to hold court, and may schedule such hearings as may be necessary at any time without regard as to whether there is a term of court scheduled.

If necessary, to resolve issues related to the appointment of counsel, a hearing shall be conducted within thirty (30) days of this order.

Within sixty (60) days of the date of this order, Judge Benjamin shall issue a scheduling order setting forth the schedule that shall be followed in this matter, including the date of the hearing on the merits. The scheduling order may be amended as necessary.

s/Costa M. Pleicones

Costa M. Pleicones

Chief Justice
Exhibit 10.19
Videonics Inc.

                 This loan amends the note dated April 16, 1999.

March 22, 2000

Carl Berg
10050 Bandley Drive
Cupertino, CA 95014

BORROWER: Videonics, Inc.
LENDER:   Carl Berg

This letter is our promise to repay.................................. $1,035,000
cash  loaned to  Borrower.  This loan is due and  payable on January  16,  2002.
Interest will be due on the outstanding  balance for the actual days outstanding
from January 16, 1999 at an annual interest rate of 8.0%.  Interest will be paid
at maturity on January 16, 2002.

       DEFAULT. Borrower will be in default if any of the following happens: (a)
       Borrower fails to make any payment when due. (b) Borrower  defaults under
       any loan,  extension  of credit,  security  agreement,  purchase or sales
       agreement,  or any other  agreement,  in favor of any other  creditor  or
       person  that  may  materially  affect  any  of  Borrower's   property  or
       Borrower's ability to repay this loan or perform  Borrower's  obligations
       under this loan. (c) Borrower becomes insolvent,  a receiver is appointed
       for any part of Borrower's property, Borrower makes an assignment for the
       benefit of creditors,  or any proceeding is commenced  either by Borrower
       or against Borrower under any bankruptcy or insolvency laws.


LENDER'S  RIGHTS.  Upon default,  Lender may declare the entire unpaid principal
balance of this loan and all accrued unpaid interest  immediately  due,  without
notice, and then Borrower will immediately pay that amount.  Lender may delay or
forgo  enforcing  any of its rights or remedies  under this loan without  losing
them.

GENERAL:  This note has been  delivered  to Lender and accepted by Lender in the
State of  California.  If there is a  lawsuit,  Borrower  agrees  upon  Lender's
request to submit to the  jurisdiction of the courts of Santa Clara County,  the
State of California.  This loan shall be governed by and construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of California.


LENDER: Carl Berg                         BORROWER: Videonics, Inc.

By: /s/ Carl Berg                         By: /s/ Gary Williams
    ----------------------                    ----------------------
Carl Berg                                 Gary L. Williams
                                          V.P. of Finance and CFO
ex10_1.htm


Exhibit 10.1


 



The Serbian Writers Association from Belgrade, Francuska no.7, represented by Milan Djordjevic,  the General Manager of the Association (hereinafter referred to as the “ Association”) and the “Elite Books Inc.” a Nevada Company with an office at, Toplicin Venac no. 17, represented by Vesna Pesic, the CEO (hereinafter referred to as the “Merchant”), have  agreed on a collaboration and produced this


 







 


Agreement on Professional and Technical Collaboration


 







 


Article 1


 


Association agrees that a Merchant will offer for sale the Association’s magazine, “The Serbian Literary Magazine.”


 


Article 2


 


The objective of the magazine is to promote the Balkan literature, the Balkan languages and the scientific research in the realm of languages and literature, in the Balkans as well as further abroad. With that in mind, the works published in the Magazine will be offered both in Cyrillic and in other languages.


 


Article 3


 


Association and Merchant will work together on bringing the Magazine into the category of international magazines.


 


Article 4


 


Association and Merchant will select the editorial staff together, making sure that a sufficient number of international members are included, and only after the editor in chief had been elected.


 


Article 5


 


Merchant will receive compensation of 20% from gross sales made.


 


Article 6


 


The commission rate will stay the same regardless of sales volume.


 


Article 7


 


Association and Merchant will settle all concerns and disputes by mutual agreement and in accordance with professional and moral principles of their mutual collaboration.


 


Article 8


 


This Agreement is printed in 4 (four) copies. Each party keeps 2 (two) copies.


 


Date: May 1, 2014


 


 




	
Elite Books Inc.

	 	
The Serbian Writers Association


	 	 	 
	
Vesna Pesic

	 	
Milan Djordjevic


	 	 	 
	
CEO

	 	
General Manager
EXHIBIT 10.10


 


ENDORSEMENT TO 10% SENIOR SECURED CONVERTIBLE NOTE


 


Precision Optics Corporation, Inc.

New York, New York

December 3, 2010


 


The
10% Senior Secured Convertible Note dated June 25, 2008 and amended
December 11, 2008, June 25, 2010, July 26, 2010, September 15,
2010, October 15, 2010, November 15, 2010, November 30, 2010 and
December 1, 2010 (the “Note”) of Precision Optics
Corporation, Inc., a Massachusetts corporation (the “Company”),
payable to the order of Arnold Schumsky (the “Holder”) in an aggregate
principal amount of $50,000 and to which this Endorsement is affixed is hereby
amended in the following respects:


 


1.                                       The term “Stated
Maturity Date” is hereby restated to be “December 17, 2010.”


 


2.                                       Except as
expressly amended by this Endorsement, the Note remains in full force and
effect and the Company hereby reconfirms its obligations thereunder.


 


IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Endorsement to be duly executed,
and the Holder has caused this Endorsement to be duly accepted, by their
respective duly authorized representatives as of the day and year first above
written.


 


 


	
   

  	
  PRECISION
  OPTICS CORPORATION, INC.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By

  	
  /s/
  Richard E. Forkey

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Name:
  Richard E. Forkey

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Title:
  Chief Executive Officer

  



 


	
  Accepted:

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  /s/ Arnold Schumsky 

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Arnold Schumsky
STATE v. Sulyaman Alisia WASALAAM.

No. 435P15-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 17, 2016.

Sulyaman Alislam Wasalaam, Lumberton, for Wasalaam, Sulyaman Alisla.

Robert C. Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of N.C.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 12th of January 2016 by Defendant to Proceed In Forma Pauperis:

> "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 17th of March 2016."
# C_2009153EN.01000901.xml

| 4.7.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 153/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.7.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 153/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 30 April 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria)) — Fachverband der Buch- und Medienwirtschaft v LIBRO Handelsgesellschaft mbH

(Case C-531/07) (1)

1

(Free movement of goods - National provisions on the obligation to sell imported books at fixed price - Measure having equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction on imports - Justification)

2009/C 153/17

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Fachverband der Buch- und Medienwirtschaft

Applicant:

Defendant: LIBRO Handelsgesellschaft mbH

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) — Interpretation of Articles 3(1) EC, 10 EC, 28 EC, 30 EC, 81 EC and 151 EC — National legislation requiring importers of German language books to fix a retail sales price which cannot be lower than that fixed for the country of origin

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | National provisions which prohibit importers of German-language books from fixing a price lower than the retail price fixed or recommended by the publisher in the State of publication constitute a ‘measure having equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction on imports’ within the meaning of Article 28 EC. |
| --- | --- |

1.

National provisions which prohibit importers of German-language books from fixing a price lower than the retail price fixed or recommended by the publisher in the State of publication constitute a ‘measure having equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction on imports’ within the meaning of Article 28 EC.

| 2. | National provisions which prohibit importers of German-language books from fixing a price lower than the retail price fixed or recommended by the publisher in the State of publication cannot be justified under Articles 30 EC and 151 EC or by overriding requirements in the public interest. |
| --- | --- |

2.

National provisions which prohibit importers of German-language books from fixing a price lower than the retail price fixed or recommended by the publisher in the State of publication cannot be justified under Articles 30 EC and 151 EC or by overriding requirements in the public interest.

---

(1)  OJ C 37, 9.2.2008.

1

---
1184.

#### Geer *et al. v.*Cowart.

Complaint, from city court of Miller county — Judge Bush. February 25, 1908.

Submitted July 14,

Decided November 25, 1908.

*William I. Geer,*for plaintiffs in error.

*Bush & Stapleton,*contra.

Hill, C. J.

1. In this State the statutory right of set-off is confined to demands or claims of a similar nature; and a claim arising ex delicto can not he set off against a claim arising ex contractu. Civil Code, §§4944, 3996; *Ingram*v. *Jordan, 55 Ga.*356; *Smith*v. *Printup,*59 *Ga.*610.

2. Except as above limited, the right of set-off, if it exists, is purely an equitable right, cognizable only in a court of equity jurisdiction.. *Hecht*v. *Snook,*114 *Ga.*923 (41 S. E. 74).

3. The superior courts of this State have exclusive jurisdiction in equity-causes. Civil Code, §5842.

4. The city court of Miller county is without equity jurisdiction, and,, therefore, where a suit was brought in that court on a promissory note and the defendants filed a plea of set-off, claiming damages for a tort not in any manner connected with the note, and requiring for its. maintenance affirmative equitable relief, the court was without any jurisdiction to entertain such defense, and the plea was properly-stricken. *Hecht*v. *Snook,*supra.

5. The want of jurisdiction was apparent on the face of the pleadings,, and could he taken advantage of at any time. Civil Code, § 5046.

6. No error of law appears, and the evidence demanded the verdict.

*Judgment affirmed.*
# C_2008022EN.01005403.xml

| 26.1.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/54 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.1.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/54

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 13 December 2007 — Sundholm v Commission

(Case F-27/07) (1)

1

(Staff case - Officials - Appraisal - Career development report - Appraisal year 2001/2002 - Absence on medical grounds - Enforcement of a judgment of the Court of First Instance - Article 233 EC)

(2008/C 22/104)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Asa Sundholm (Auderghem, Belgium) (represented by S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by C. Berardis-Kayser and M. Velardo, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Annulment of the applicant's career development report for the period from 1 July 2001 to 31 December 2002, made in compliance with the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 20 April 2005 in Case T-86/04 Sundholm v Commission. Claim for damages.

Sundholm

Commission

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

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

1.

Dismisses the action.

| 2. | Orders the parties to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the parties to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 117 of 29.5.2007, p. 37.

1

---
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 22, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

136833 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, 

Justices 

v SC: 136833 

 COA: 273686 

Washtenaw CC: 05-000337-FH 

SHERARD MAURICE DALTON, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 13, 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. 

0915 

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 22, 2008 

 Clerk