alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Matthew Nereim v. Ryan Cummins ; City Chevrolet Automotive Company; Hendrick Luxury Collision Center, LLC; National General Insurance Company; and Each of Them

No. 270P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 8, 2016

Lawrence Brian Serbin, Attorney at Law, Jason E. Taylor, Attorney at Law, Hickory, for Nereim, Matthew.

Lawrence J. Goldman, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Cummins, Ryan, et al.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 19th of July 2016 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 8th of December 2016."
STATE v. Don Christopher HAWES.

No. 12P16-1.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 17, 2016.

Don Christopher Hawes, Terre Haute, for Hawes, Don Christopher.

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

Howard S. Boney, Jr., District Attorney, for State of N.C.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 11th of January 2016 by Defendant for Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis and Post Conviction Relief:

> "Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 17th of March 2016."
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Western Ohio Financial
Corporation (the "Company") for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, John W. Raisbeck, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
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 result of operations of
        the Company.



By: /s/ John W. Raisbeck
Name: John W. Raisbeck
Chief Executive Officer
March 25, 2003
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       1,198,567
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   69,762
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    122,875
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,454,037
<PP&E>                                         512,164
<DEPRECIATION>                                 351,982
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,171,678
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          396,443
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       132,225
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,643,010
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,171,678
<SALES>                                        305,327
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               902,280
<CGS>                                          541,266
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  541,266
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,981,981
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             158,119
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,702,581)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (3,702,581)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,702,581)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.29)


</TABLE>
# C_2008327EN.01000501.xml

| 20.12.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 327/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 327/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 6 November 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État — France) — Association nationale pour la protection des eaux et rivières — TOS v Ministère de l'écologie, du développement et de l'aménagement durables

(Case C-381/07) (1)

1

(Pollution of the aquatic environment - Directive 2006/11/EC - Article 6 - Dangerous substances - Discharges - Prior authorisation - Fixing of emission standards - Declaratory scheme - Fish farms)

(2008/C 327/07)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d'État

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Association nationale pour la protection des eaux et rivières — TOS

Applicant:

Defendant: Ministère de l'écologie, du développement et de l'aménagement durables

Defendant:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Conseil d'État — Interpretation of Article 6 of Directive 2006/11/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 February 2006 on pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment of the Community (OJ 2006 L 64, p. 52) — Need for prior authorisation, laying down emission standards, for all discharges into water which may contain dangerous substances — Compatibility of national rules replacing prior authorisation with a mere declaratory scheme in respect of fish farms coupled, however, with a reference to the applicable environmental quality standards and a right for the competent administrative authority to object to the commencement of operations or to impose limits on discharges specific to the facility concerned

Operative part of the judgment

Article 6 of Directive 2006/11/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 February 2006 on pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment of the Community cannot be interpreted as allowing the Member States, once programmes to reduce water pollution including environmental quality standards have been adopted under that article, to introduce a declaratory scheme, in respect of facilities regarded as being low-polluting in nature, subject to a reference to those standards and a right for the administrative authority to object to the commencement of the operations or to impose limits on discharges specific to the facility concerned.

---

(1)  OJ C 269, 10.11.2007.

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 amended Quarterly Report of Triangle Petroleum Corporation
      (the "Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending July 31, 2007, as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
      I, Shaun Toker, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
      18
      U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      to my
      knowledge 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 result of operations of the Company.





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





/s/
                Shaun TokerShaun
                TokerChief
                Financial OfficerApril
                30, 2008
Exhibit 32

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 Form 10-K/A of Alternative Resources Corporation (the "Company") for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that based on their knowledge:

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

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

|/s/ ROBERT P. STANOJEVRobert P. Stanojev, Chief Executive Officer |  | January 28, 2004Date
|----------------------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------
|/s/ STEVEN PURCELLSteven Purcell, Chief Financial Officer         |  | January 28, 2004Date

---

QuickLinks
**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 amended Quarterly Report of Triangle Petroleum Corporation
      (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ending April 30, 2006, as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
      I, Shaun Toker, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
      18
      U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      to my
      knowledge 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 result of operations of the Company.





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




/s/
                SHAUN TOKERShaun
                TokerChief
                Financial OfficerMarch
                6, 2008
The KIMBERLEY RICE KAESTNER 1992 FAMILY TRUST v. N.C. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

307PA15-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 3, 2017

Peggy S. Vincent, Assistant Attorney General, Tenisha S. Jacobs, Assistant Attorney General, Matthew Sawchak, Solicitor General, James W. Doggett, Deputy Solicitor General, for North Carolina Department of Revenue.

Thomas D. Myrick, Attorney at Law, Neil T. Bloomfield, Attorney at Law, Kara N. Bitar, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, Robert F. Orr, Attorney at Law, Asheville, for The Kimberley Rice Kaestner 1992 Family Trust.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 2nd of May 2017 by Plaintiff:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd of May 2017."

Plaintiff shall have up to and including the 12th day of June 2017 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4184 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to clarify the manner in which 

an advance payment of initial educational assistance paid by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs is charged against the entitlement of a veteran 

to such assistance. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 6, 2014 

Ms. TITUS (for herself, Mr. COOK, Ms. JACKSON LEE, Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio, 

Mr. HONDA, Mr. O’ROURKE, Ms. BROWNLEY of California, Mr. MEEKS, 

Mrs. KIRKPATRICK, Mr. BENTIVOLIO, and Mr. MCNERNEY) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to clarify the manner 

in which an advance payment of initial educational assistance paid by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs is 

charged against the entitlement of a veteran to such 

assistance. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4184 IH

1 SECTION 1. CLARIFICATION OF ADVANCE PAYMENT OF INI2 TIAL EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE OR SUB3 SISTENCE ALLOWANCE. 

4 (a) CLARIFICATION.—Section 3680(d)(2) of title 38, 

5 United States Code, is amended by inserting after the 

6 third sentence the following new sentence: ‘‘For purposes 

7 of the entitlement to educational assistance of the veteran 

8 or person receiving an advance payment under this sub9 section, the advance payment shall be charged against the 

10 final month of the entitlement of the person or veteran 

11 and, if necessary, the penultimate such month. In no event 

12 may any veteran or person receive more than one advance 

13 payment under this subsection during any academic 

14 year.’’. 

15 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

16 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to an advance pay17 ment of educational assistance made after the date that 

18 is 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

October 1, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

136787 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. KNIGHT ENTERPRISES, INC., Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices 

v SC: 136787 

 COA: 276838 
 Wayne CC: 05-515075-CK

FAIRLANE CAR WASH, INC., PPJ

ENTERPRISES, L.L.C., JOHN MASOURAS, and 

JAMES MASOURAS,

Defendants-Appellants. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 8, 2008 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in 

lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE in part the April 8, 2008 judgment of the 

Court of Appeals. Paragraph 8 of the Credit Card Participating Agreement limits 

defendants’ liability to “service charges assessed by CITGO/KNIGHT on credit card 

sales tickets [defendants] submit ....” No provision imposes liability for credit card sales 

tickets submitted by other parties. The trial court and Court of Appeals interpreted 

paragraph 12 of that agreement, which provides that “[defendants] will be billed on a 

monthly basis per month for ... all credit card fees,” as requiring that defendants pay 

service charges regardless whether they were for credit card sales tickets that defendants 

submitted. Thus, neither court considered whether the credit card fees at issue were 

comprised of service charges only for credit card sales tickets that defendants submitted. 

The lower courts’ interpretation of paragraph 12 renders paragraph 8’s limitation 

surplusage or nugatory. “[C]ourts must ... give effect to every word, phrase, and clause 

in a contract and avoid an interpretation that would render any part of the contract 

surplusage or nugatory.” Klapp v United Ins Group Agency, Inc, 468 Mich 359, 468 

(2003) (internal citations omitted). Interpreting paragraph 12 to provide that defendants 

will be billed monthly only for service charges for which they are liable under paragraph 

8 gives effect to both paragraphs 8 and 12. We REMAND this case to the Wayne Circuit 

Court for further proceedings to determine what portion of the credit card fees at issue 

constituted service charges on credit card sales tickets that defendants submitted. Based 

upon that determination, the circuit court shall reconsider plaintiff’s request for case 
 _________________________________________ 

 

2 

evaluation sanctions. In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are 

not persuaded that the remaining questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

 CAVANAGH, J., not participating due to a familial relationship with counsel of 

record. 

s0924 

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. 

October 1, 2008 

 Clerk
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 of Clean Power Technologies Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended February 29, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Abdul Mitha, President and Principal Executive Officer, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







Date:  April 17, 2008

By:  /s/ Abdul Mitha

Name: Abdul Mitha

Title:    President (Principal Executive Officer)
LILLIE v. CARVER

421P10-6

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 17, 2017

Ms. Anne M. Middleton, Special Deputy Attorney General, Mr. Patrick Nadolski, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

Mr. Robert Alan Lillie, for Lillie, Robert Alan.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 26th of July 2017 by Petitioner for Judgment on the Pleading:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 17th of August 2017."
EX-4.14



 English Translation 

Exhibit 4.14 
 Form of
Power of Attorney 
 Principal: A 
 ID Card Number:
 
 Domicile: B 
 Party A: [One of our PRC
subsidiaries] 
 Domicile: 
 Legal Representative: 

I, C, a Chinese citizen, hereby irrevocably authorize Party A to exercise the following rights within the valid term hereof: 

Authorize Party A or a qualified Chinese citizen designated by it (hereinafter referred to as the “Agent”) to act as the exclusive and sole agent of
Principal in respect of the following matters: 
 Exercise all the voting power and other rights of Principal as a shareholder of [One of our SPEs]
(Party B), including but not limited to acting as the authorized representative of Principal in appointing and electing officers of Party B (e.g. directors, general manager, etc) at the shareholders’ meeting of Party B. 

Party A or Agent shall have the right to act for and on behalf of Principal within the scope of authorization in signing all the transfer documents necessary
for performing all the obligations of Principal under the Equity Pledge Agreement and the Call Option and Cooperation Agreement executed on the date of this Power of Attorney. 

Any act taken or document executed by Party A or Agent regarding Party B shall be regarded as taken or executed by Principal. Principal hereby acknowledges,
recognizes and approves any such act taken or document executed by Party A or Agent. 







 The above authorization and entrustment is based on the precondition that the “Agent” is a Chinese
citizen and an employee of Party A and that the controlling shareholder of Party A agrees to such authorization and entrustment. Once the “Agent” no longer holds any position in Party A or Party A issues a notice for
replacing the “Agent”, Principal will immediately revoke the authorization and entrustment made hereby to the “Agent”, and will designate/authorize another Chinese citizen who is an employee of and designated by Party A to
act for and on behalf of Principal in exercising the above-mentioned voting power and other rights at the shareholders’ meeting of Party B. 

Party A or the Agent shall cautiously, diligently and legally perform entrusted obligations within the scope of authorization and hold the Principal
harmless against all losses / damages (except those resulting from any intentional or material negligence on the part of the Principal) that may arise as a result of such authorization and entrustment, failing which Party A or the Agent shall
legally bear all the legal liabilities and economic consequences to the Principal and Party B. 
 The valid term of this Power of Attorney is 20 years
and will begin on and from the date of execution hereof. 
 Principal: D 

Signature: E 

Date: E
# C_2009055EN.01002603.xml

| 7.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 55/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 55/26

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 16 December 2008 — Italy v Parliament and Commission

(Case T-285/07) (1)

1

(Procedural step - Objection of inadmissibility - Partial inadmissibility of the action - Non-attributability of the contested measure to the Parliament)

(2009/C 55/49)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Italian Republic (represented by: I. Bruni, acting as Agent, assisted by P. Gentili, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendants: European Parliament (represented by A. Lukošiūtė, R. Ignătescu and G. Mazzini, acting as Agents) and Commission of the European Communities (represented by: J. Currall and A. Aresu, acting as Agents)

Defendants:

Intervener in support of the applicant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: S. Vodina and M. Michelogiannaki, acting as Agents)

Re:

Annulment of the notice of open competition EPSO/AD/95/07 to constitute a reserve pool for 20 posts of Administrator (AD5) in the field of ‘Information Science (Library/Documentation)’, published in the Official Journal of the European Union of 8 May 2007 (OJ 2007 C 103 A, p. 7)

Official Journal of the European Union

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible in so far as it is directed against the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible in so far as it is directed against the Commission.

| 2. | The Italian Republic shall pay the costs incurred by the Commission, in addition to bearing the costs which it has itself incurred in this action in so far as it is directed against the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Italian Republic shall pay the costs incurred by the Commission, in addition to bearing the costs which it has itself incurred in this action in so far as it is directed against the Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 116, 9.5.2008.

1

---
STATE of North Carolina v. Mason W. HYDE

No. 88P15-3

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 22, 2016

Mason W. Hyde, James R. Grant, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Hyde, Mason White.

Kimberly N. Callahan, Assistant Attorney General, Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of N.C.

***ORDER***

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 2nd of June 2016 by Defendant for Notice in Advance:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 22nd of September 2016."

Ervin, J. recused

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 2nd of June 2016 by Defendant for Notice of Request for Assistance:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 22nd of September 2016."

Ervin, J. recused

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 12th of July 2016 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:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 22nd of September 2016."

Ervin, J. recused