alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Celia STOWE and Donald Stowe, Appellants, v. KINGDOM HOUSE, Respondent, Jim May, Defendant.

No. ED 81914.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

May 13, 2003.

Motions for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied July 3, 2003.

Application for Transfer Denied Aug. 26, 2003.

Paul C. Hetterman, Clayton, MO, for appellant.

John A. Michener, St. Louis, MO, for respondent.

*464Before ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., P.J., MARY K. HOFF, J., and GEORGE W. DRAPER III, J.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Celia and Donald Stowe (hereinafter and collectively, “Stowe”) bring this personal injury case against Kingdom House for damages arising from injuries Celia Stowe sustained while working as a volunteer for Kingdom House. The trial court granted Kingdom House’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction in that Stowe’s exclusive remedy is under the Missouri Workers’ Compensation Act.

Stowe claims that the trial court committed three errors in granting Kingdom House’s motion. Stowe alleges the trial court: (1) should not have applied Section 287.090(2) RSMo (1998) retroactively since it eliminates Donald Stowe’s common law cause of action; (2) improperly found Kingdom House elected to extend compensation coverage to volunteers because its insurance policy did not state specifically volunteers were covered; and (3) should have estopped Kingdom House from raising the Missouri Workers’ Compensation Act as a defense.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. There is no genuine issue of material fact which would preclude entry of summary judgment. Rule 74.04(c)(3). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion, only for the use of the parties, setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
State of North Carolina v. Corey L. Hendricks-Bey

No. 238P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 18, 2016

Corey L. Hendricks, for Hendricks, Corey L.

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

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 20th of June 2016 in this matter for a writ of mandamus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Wake County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 18th of August 2016."
RIGGSBEE v. JONES, et al.

237P16-3

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 3, 2017

Avery M. Riggsbee, for Riggsbee, Avery M.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 11th of April 2017 by Plaintiff for Grant of Nonstop Payout by Defendants:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd of May 2017."
Exhibit 31.2**CERTIFICATIONS**I, W. Todd Steele, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of WPT Enterprises, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statements of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statement made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this quarterly report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presentedin this quarterly report; 4. WPT Enterprises, Inc.’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for WPT Enterprises, Inc., and have: a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to WPT Enterprises, Inc., including its subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly reportis being prepared;  b. evaluated the effectiveness of WPT Enterprises, Inc.’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  c. disclosed in this report any change in WPT Enterprises, Inc.’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during WPT Enterprises, Inc.’s most recent fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, WPTEnterprises, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting;5. WPT Enterprises, Inc.’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to WPT Enterprises, Inc.’sauditors and the audit committee of WPT Enterprises, Inc.’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectWPT Enterprises, Inc.’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in WPT Enterprises, Inc.’s internal control over financialreporting.     Date: November 15, 2005 /s/W. Todd Steele    W. Todd Steele    Chief Financial Officer
# Official Journal C 202/2015

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 202 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5819 June 2015 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 202

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5819 June 2015

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2015/C 202/01 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2015/C 202/01

Euro exchange rates

1

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2015/C 202/02 | Communication from the Commission published pursuant to Article 27(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 in Case AT.39767 — BEH Electricity | 2 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2015/C 202/02

Communication from the Commission published pursuant to Article 27(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 in Case AT.39767 — BEH Electricity

2

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
|   | (i) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | Date: March 20, 2013 |                                |
|--------|----------------------|-------------------------------------|
|   |                 |                                |
|   | By:                  | /s/ Antonio Carlos Valente da Silva |   |
|   |                 | Name:                               | Antonio Carlos Valente da Silva |   |
|   |                 | Title:                              | Chief Executive Officer |   |
**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 quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of GuruNet Corporation (the
“Company”) for the period ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Steven
Steinberg, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:
 
 a.
    the
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 b.
    the
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.
 
 
 /s/
      Steven SteinbergDate:
      May 11, 2005
    Steven
      Steinberg
      Chief
      Financial Officer
      (Principal
      Financial and Accounting Officer)
 
 A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request .
 
 27
Exhibit 32(b)

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of NewMarket Corporation (the
Company) for the period ending September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David A. Fiorenza, 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, 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.



|                                              |  |                   
|--------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------
|                                              | 
|By:                                           |  | /s/ D. A. Fiorenza
|David A. Fiorenza                            
|Vice President and Treasurer October 31, 2007
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.2

                         Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-3 No. 33-94782), the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-22211), the
Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-43267), the Registration Statement
(Form S-3 No. 333-39282), the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-65592) of
Liberty Property Trust and Liberty Property Limited Partnership and in the
related Prospectus of our report dated February 6, 2004, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements and schedule of Liberty Property Limited
Partnership included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 2003.

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania                         /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
March 8, 2004
Argued and submitted January 29,

affirmed March 20, 2003

#### TERRENCE JASON SCHEHEN, *Appellant, v.*Joan PALMATEER, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary, *Respondent.*

00C-16025; A115839

66 P3d 540

Michael E. Rose argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Steenson, Schumann, Tewksbury & Rose, P.C.

Ryan Kahn, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, and Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General.

Before Edmonds, Presiding Judge, and Deits, Chief Judge, and Kistler, Judge.

PER CURIAM

Affirmed. *Smart v. Maass,*148 Or App 431, 435, 939 P2d 1184, *rev den,*326 Or 62 (1997).
clth_ex1030.htm


Exhibit 10.30


 


AMENDMENT No. 9 TO PROMISSORY NOTE







This Amendment No. 9 to the Promissory Note, originally dated September 1, 2010 (the “Note”), previously amended February 11, 2011, May 31, 2011, July 29, 2011, November 7, 2011, March 27, 2012, July 31, 2012, November 1, 2012 and January 9, 2013 (the “Amendments”), is entered into as of the 8th day of May, 2013, by and between CMS Acquisition, LLC (“CMS”) and CleanTech Biofuels, Inc. (“CTB”).







WHEREAS, the Note is secured by the CTB owned U.S. Patent No. 6,306,248 pursuant to a Security Agreement dated as of September 1, 2010, between CMS and CTB (the “Security Agreement”);


 


WHEREAS, a payment of $25,000 was made on February 11, 2011 for interest to date and principal, by CTB on the Note;


 


WHEREAS, as of May 16, 2011, the rate to accrue interest increased to 10.0% per annum (from 9.0% per annum);


 


 WHEREAS, as of November 7, 2011, Warrant A1 issued with the original Note on September 1, 2010 was re-dated to November 7, 2011; and


 


WHEREAS, the parties wish to amend the terms of the Note as set forth below.


 


NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows:


 



	
1.

	
The Maturity Date, as defined in the Amendments, shall be changed to March 8, 2014 from April 30, 2013.







 



	
2.

	
Warrant A1 issued with the original Note on September 1, 2010 is re-dated as of the date of this amendment – May 8, 2013.







 



	
3.

	
An additional Warrant (A2) will be issued as of May 8, 2013 for 150,000 shares of the Company’s Common Stock, par value $0.001, with an exercise price of $0.05 and an expiration date of May 8, 2018.







 



	
4.

	
All remaining terms and conditions of the Note, Security Agreement and Warrant A1 shall continue in full force and effect.







 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CTB and CMS have caused this Amendment No. 9 to the Note to be executed and delivered by their duly authorized officers as of the day and year set forth above.


 



	CLEANTECH BIOFUELS, INC.:	By:	 	 
	 	 	

Name: Edward P. Hennessey

	 
	 	 	Title: CEO	 
	 	 	 	 
	
CMS Acquisition, LLC:

	
By:

	 	 
	 	 	Name:	 
	 	 	Title:
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

CERTIFICATION

 

I, Robert Earl, certify that:

 

1.             I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of BH/RE, LLC, a Nevada Limited-Liability Company;

 

2.             Based on myknowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;

 

3.             Based on my knowledge,the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisquarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

 

4.             The registrant’sother certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a)   designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisquarterly report is being prepared;

 

(b)   evaluated the effectiveness ofthe registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

(c)   disclosed in this report anychange in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting (as definedin Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarterin the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and

 

5.             The registrant’sother certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):

 

(a)   all significant deficienciesand material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

(b)   any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 

Date:  November 15, 2004

 
|   | /s/ Robert Earl |   |
|--------|-----------------|--------|
|   | Robert Earl     |
|   | Manager         |

 

----
Annah AWARTANI; Gilma Varinia Bonilla; Crystal Kim Parker, individually and for others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. The MOSES H. CONE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL OPERATING CORPORATION, Defendant.

No. COA17-1300

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: August 7, 2018

AFFIRMED.
STATE of North Carolina v. Titus Germaine WILLIAMS

No. 118P09-3

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 1, 2018

Teresa M. Postell, Assistant Attorney General, Ben R. David, District Attorney, for State of NC

J. Clark Fisher, Attorney at Law, for Williams, Titus Germaine

Titus G. Williams

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by on the 4th of December 2017 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, New Hanover County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 1st of March 2018."

Ervin, J., recused
CRAZIE OVERSTOCK PROMOTIONS, LLC v. James MCVICKER, in his personal and official capacity as Sheriff for Bladen County North Carolina; Jeffery Tyler, in his personal and official capacity as a Captain in the Bladen County Sheriff's Department

No. 49P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 7, 2018

Mr. Christopher J. Geis, Winston-Salem, Attorney at Law, for McVicker, James, et al

Mr. William J. Brian, Jr., Raleigh, Attorney at Law, for Crazie Overstock Promotions, LLC

Mr. Keith P. Anthony, Durham, Attorney at Law, for Crazie Overstock Promotions, LLC

Mr. Patrick G. Spaugh, Charlotte, Attorney at Law, for McVicker, James, et al

Mr. Matthew L. Boyatt, Assistant Attorney General

Mr. Sonny S. Haynes, Winston-Salem, Attorney at Law, for McVicker, James, et al

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 20th of February 2018 by Defendants 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 7th of June 2018."
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7073

ERIC WILLIAM OWENS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus T. C. SMILEY, Superintendent, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CA-99-508-3-MU) Submitted: November 30, 2000 Decided: December 6, 2000 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eric William Owens, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on June 22, 2000, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on June 26,2000. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 2 PER CURIAM: Eric William Owens seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we denyhis motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Owens v. Smiley , No. CA-99-508-3-MU (W.D.N.C. June 26, 2000). * We also deny his motion to proceed in forma pauperis. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### Damon Mock, *Plaintiff in Error,*v. State of Florida, *Defendant in Error.*

Division B.

Decision Filed May 25, 1928.

*J. T. Wiggins,*for Plaintiff in Error;

*Fred II. Davis,*Attorney General, and *II. E. Carter,*Assistant, for the State.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court .that there is no error in the said judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said judgment of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0555

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

STEPHANIE LYNN LEDOUX,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including June 23, 2023, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Beth Baker

Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 16 2023

05/16/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0555
#### In the Matter of Roger Clark PETERMAN.

No. 758 Disciplinary Docket No. 3.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

June 30, 2003.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 30th day of June, 2003, a Rule having been entered upon Roger Clark Peterman by this Court on February 28, 2003, to show cause why he should not be disbarred and, upon consideration of the response filed, it is hereby

ORDERED that the Rule is made absolute, Roger Clark Peterman is disbarred from the Bar of this Commonwealth retroactive to August 1, 2002, and he shall comply with all the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E.

Justice CASTILLE and SAYLOR respectfully dissent from the imposition of disbarment and would only impose reciprocal discipline as announced by the Supreme Court of New Jersey.
STATE of North Carolina v. Alquan De'Shawn HILL, Defendant.

No. COA17-993

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: June 5, 2018

NO ERROR, REMANDED FOR NEW SENTENCING HEARING.