alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SCIGRIP, INC. f/k/a IPS Structural Adhesives Holdings, Inc. and IPS Intermediate Holdings Corporation v. Samuel B. OSAE and Scott Bader, Inc.

No. 139A18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 24, 2018

K. Edward Greene, Attorney at Law, Benjamin Thompson, Attorney at Law, Tobias S. Hampson, Attorney at Law, J. Blakely Kiefer, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for SciGrip, Inc., et al.

George B. Mast, Attorney at Law, Charles D. Mast, Attorney at Law, Lily VP. Tuttle, Attorney at Law, Smithfield, for Osae, Samuel B.

Philip Strach, Attorney at Law, Brodie D. Erwin, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Scott Bader, Inc.

***ORDER***

The following order has been entered on the joint motion filed on the 3rd of July 2018 for Leave to File Under Seal:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 24th of October 2018."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiffs on the 3rd of July 2018 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina Business Court, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Business Court:

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 24th of October 2018."

Therefore the case is docketed as of the date of this order's certification. Unless already submitted, briefs of the respective parties shall be submitted to this Court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 15(g)(2).
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-87,440-01

EX P ARTE CANTRELL NIMOY SASH , Appli cant
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 241-1511-13 IN THE 241 DISTRICT COURT ST F ROM SMITH COUNTY
Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisi o n s o f Ar t icle 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1 9 6 7 ). Applicant was convicted of the offense of
arson and sentenc ed to imprisonment for forty -eig ht y ear s. The Twelfth Court of Appea ls aff irmed his conviction. Sash v. State , No. 12-14-00058- CR (Tex. App.—T y le r M a y 1 3 , 2 0 1 5 ) ( n o t d esig nated for publica tion). On September 12, 2016, an order desig nating issues was signe d by the trial court. The habea s
rec ord has been proper ly forwa rded to this Court by the district cle rk p u rs u an t t o T E X . R. A P P . P. 73.4(b)( 5). Howeve r, t h e re co rd has been forwa rded without the trial court having resolved thedesig nated issue(s) in this case . We rema nd this application to the 2 4 1 District Court of Smit h st County to allow the trial judge to complete an evidentiar y investiga

tion and enter finding s of fac t and conclusions of law
. This application will be held in abey ance until the trial court has resolved the fac t issues. The issues shall be resolved within 9 0 d ay s o f this order
. A supplemental transcr ipt containing all aff idavits and int err og atories or the t ransc ription of t he court repor ter’s notes from any hear ing or deposition, along with the trial court’ s supplemental finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law, shall be for war ded to this Court within 120 day s of the date of this order. A ny extensions of ti me must be re quested by

the trial cour

t and shall be obtaine d from this Court.

Filed: Oc tober 18, 2017 Do not publish
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4641 

To reauthorize the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Act. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 9, 2014 

Mr. HIGGINS (for himself, Mr. GIBSON, Mr. TONKO, Mr. MAFFEI, Ms. 

SLAUGHTER, Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York, Mr. NADLER, Mr. RANGEL, 

Mr. KING of New York, Ms. MENG, Mr. OWENS, Mrs. CAROLYN B. 

MALONEY of New York, Mr. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY of New York, Mr. 

REED, Mr. ENGEL, Mr. CROWLEY, Mr. SERRANO, Mr. COLLINS of New 

York, Mr. GRIMM, Mr. BISHOP of New York, and Mr. JEFFRIES) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural 

Resources 

A BILL 

To reauthorize the Erie Canalway National Heritage 

Corridor Act. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ERIE CANALWAY NATIONAL HERITAGE COR4 RIDOR. 

5 Section 804(j) of the Erie Canalway National Herit6 age Corridor Act (16 U.S.C. 461 note; Public Law 106– 

7 554) is amended by striking ‘‘15’’ and inserting ‘‘30’’. 

Æ 


dlhill on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 13.2



Certification

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title
18, United States Code)



Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Empresa Brasileira de Telecomunicações S.A.  Embratel (the Company), does hereby
certify, to such officers knowledge, that:



The Annual Report on Form
20-F for the year ended December 31, 2003 of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Date: June 9, 2004



/s/    Jorge Luis RodriguezName:

Jorge Luis RodriguezTitle:

Chief Executive Officer




Date: June 9, 2004



/s/    Norbert GlattName:

Norbert GlattTitle:

Chief Financial Officer
Darrell T. PRICE v. Gregory C. DOZIER, Commissioner.

A18A1722

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

October 24, 2018 Reconsideration Denied November 21, 2018

Darrell T. Price, Norcross, for Appellant.

Christopher Michael Carr, Meghan Robson Davidson, Atlanta, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

On March 27, 2018, this Court granted Darrell Price's application for discretionary appeal from the trial court's order denying his petition for mandamus. See Case No. A18D0355 (decided March 27, 2018). The order directed that the appellant file a notice of appeal within 10 days of the date of the order. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (g). Price filed his notice of appeal on April 10, 2018, fourteen days after the entry of the order.

The timely filing of a notice of appeal is an absolute requirement to confer jurisdiction on this Court. *White v. White* , 188 Ga. App. 556, 556, 373 S.E.2d 824 (1988). Because Price failed to file a notice of appeal within 10 days of our order granting the discretionary application, the notice of appeal is untimely. Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. See OCGA § 5-6-48 (b) (1) ; *Barnes v. Justis* , 223 Ga. App. 671, 671-672, 478 S.E.2d 402 (1996).

*Appeal dismissed. Division Per Curiam.*

All Judges concur, McFadden, P. J., concurs fully and specially.

I concur fully. I write separately to acknowledge the harsh and unfair result of the settled law we must apply.

Appellant Price is incarcerated. He filed a pro se application for discretionary review with this court. Most of the pro se inmate applications we see are without merit, often patently so. But we granted Price's application. That grant reflects our initial determination *567that his arguments have at least arguable merit. See Court of Appeals Rule 31 (b).

As required by the Appellate Practice Act, our order granting Price's application directed him to file his notice of appeal within ten days. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (g).

Our order granting the application was issued on March 27, 2018. The copy of our order attached to the notice of appeal is stamped "Received" at the Coffee Correctional Facility on April 2, 2018. Price's notice of appeal and attached certificate of service are dated the next day, April 3, 2018. But the notice of appeal was file-stamped by the Fulton County Superior Court on April 10, 2018. So it appears from the record that although Price acted promptly after receiving our order, his filing did not get to the superior court on time, meaning that we cannot exercise jurisdiction over his appeal.

This is a recurring issue. It appears to arise, not from anyone's neglect or misconduct, but from ordinary delay in mail delivery to and from our correctional facilities and from necessary security precautions.
#### AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY, INC. and Affiliated Corporations; Aep Service Corporation; Appalachian Power Company; Central Ohio Coal Company; Columbus Southern Power Company; Conesville Coal Preparation; Indiana Michigan Power Company; Kingsport Power Company; Ohio Power Company; Southern Ohio Coal Company Plaintiffs-Appellants v. UNITED STATES of America Defendant-Appellee

No. 01-3495.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

July 9, 2003.

Before: NELSON, COLE and GILMAN, Circuit Judges.

Upon consideration of the petition for rehearing filed by the appellants’,

It is ORDERED that the petition for rehearing be, and it hereby is, DENIED.

It is further ORDERED that Judge Nelson’s separate concurring opinion has been withdrawn.
KENNETH CRISSUP PLAINTIFF V. WILLIAM STEPHENS,ET AL Defendants IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS TWELFTH DISTRICT § § § CAUSE NO.

INMATE DECLARATION TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: PREVIOUS LAWSUITS 

### Pursuant to §14.004 Texas Civil Practice andRemedies Code, 

## Appellant,KennethCrissup,TDCJ #1258732,currentlyresidingas an inmate at the Michaels Unit in Anderson County,hereby declares as follows: 1. 

### Kenneth CrissupV. Pamela Kirkpatrick,L. Garrett,WilliamMotal, Todd Foxworth,D. Dewberry,"Unknown Officer",Brad Thaler,Cause No. 

### Pending.Mailed to the 87th District Court on October 22,2012.Nature 

### of suit propertydamage and loss,personal injuryand civil rights violations. 

### 12thCourtofAppeaisDistrict

Kenneth Crissup V. William Stephens,ET AL.Filed in the 200th District Court CauseNo- D-l-GN-13-001702 onNovember 12,2012. 

### This cause wasmisfiled due to a clerks error inthe 3rd Court of 

### Appeals under Cause NO. 03-12-00761.Venue was transferred to Anderso Countyunder Cause NO.349-7261.Plaintiff moved to consolidate the previously filed cause in the 87th District Court that was never assigned a filenumber.Plaintiff then amended the original complaint that is subject to this appeal.The complaint claims Due Process violations,civil rights violations,breach of contract claims and seeks monetary and injunctive relief. I,Kenneth crissup,Appellant,TDCJ # 1258732,and being currently incarcerated in the Michaels Unitof the Texas Department of Criminal Justice in Anderson County,declare under Penalty of Perjury that according to my belief the facts stated in the above declaration are true and correct. 

### S ^Xf\ DAYYOFJANUARY ,2015. EXECUTED THI

Kenneth Crissup #1258732

2.
EXHIBIT 23.1

                              ACCOUNTANTS' CONSENT


The Board of Directors
theglobe.com, inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos.
333-36788, and 333-36144) on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-79677, 333-75503 and 333-67217)
and on Form S-8 of theglobe.com, inc. of our report dated March 25, 2002,
relating to the consolidated balance sheet of theglobe.com, inc. and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 2001, and the related consolidated statements of
operations, stockholders' equity and comprehensive loss, and cash flows for each
of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2001, which report
appears in the December 31, 2002, Annual Report on Form 10-K of theglobe.com,
inc.

Our report dated March 25, 2002, contains an explanatory paragraph that states
that the Company has suffered recurring losses from operations since inception,
that raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.
The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might
result from the outcome of that uncertainty.



                                                /s/ KPMG LLP


New York, New York
March 31, 2003


<PAGE>
STATE v. Timonthy Neal PRINCE

151P15-3

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 24, 2018

Elizabeth N. Strickland, Assistant Attorney General, N. Lorrin Freeman, District Attorney, for State of N.C.

Timothy Prince, for Prince, Timothy Neal

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 26th of September 2018 by Defendant for Petition for Discretionary Review:

*378"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 24th of October 2018."
**Exhibit 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION**
     I, Jeffrey R. Steinhilber, certify that:
 1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of ERICO International Corporation;  2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;  4.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;  b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):
 a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.
Date: May 12, 2005         By:  /s/ Jeffrey S. Steinhilber   Name:  Jeffrey R. Steinhilber   Title:  Chief Financial Officer and Director
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13

- 20706 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
JOSE MARIA MAZARIEGOS

- CAMPOS, also known as Jose Mazariegos, also known as Jose Maria Mazariegos, also known as Jose M. Mazariegos , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:13

- CR

- 355

- 1

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Maria Mazariegos

- Campos has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Mazariegos

- Campos h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the

* Pursuant 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 Fifth Circuit 

### FILED November 4, 2014 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 13-20706 Document: 00512825401 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/04/2014No. 13

- 20706

record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’ s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, the motion for new appointed counsel is DENIED, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2.

2 Case: 13-20706 Document: 00512825401 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/04/2014
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4723 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4723

  To direct the Secretary of Commerce to study the Gulf of Mexico red 
    snapper fishery and to limit the authority of the Secretary to 
 promulgate any interim rules for the fishery, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 2, 2010

   Mr. Boyd introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To direct the Secretary of Commerce to study the Gulf of Mexico red 
    snapper fishery and to limit the authority of the Secretary to 
 promulgate any interim rules for the fishery, and for other purposes.

    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 of Mexico Red Snapper Fishery 
Protection Act''.

SEC. 2. GULF OF MEXICO RED SNAPPER FISHERY.

    (a) Stock Assessment.--
            (1) Requirement.--The Secretary of Commerce shall conduct a 
        benchmark stock assessment of the Gulf of Mexico red snapper 
        fishery.
            (2) Report to congress.--The Secretary of Commerce shall 
        submit to Congress a report on the findings of the assessment 
        required by paragraph (1).
    (b) Limitation on Rules To Shorten Fishing Season.--
            (1) In general.--The Secretary of Commerce may not 
        promulgate any interim rule under section 305(c) of the 
        Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 
        U.S.C. 1855(c)) or any final rule that decreases the number of 
        fishing days in the Gulf of Mexico red snapper fishery to less 
        than the number of such days in 2009--
                    (A) prior to the date the Secretary submits to 
                Congress the report required by subsection (a)(2); and
                    (B) unless such report demonstrates the need for 
                any such an interim or final rule.
            (2) Existing interim rules.--Any interim rule promulgated 
        under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 
        Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1855(c)) that 
        decreases the number of fishing days in the Gulf of Mexico red 
        snapper fishery to less than the number of such days in 2009 
        that was promulgated prior to the date of the enactment of this 
        Act shall have no force or effect.
                                 <all>
```
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk December 18, 2009

p1215 

# Order

December 18, 2009

138925

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 138925 COA: 288571 Kent CC: 04-009317-FH DANTE ANTOINE ROGERS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 5, 2009 order of the Court of Appeals is considered and, purs uant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we RE MAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration under the standard for direct appeals, because the defendant was depriv ed of his direct appeal as a result of constitutionally ineffectiv e assistance of counsel. See Roe v Flores-Ortega, 528 US 470, 477; 120 S Ct 1029 ; 145 L Ed 2d 985 (2000); Peguero v United States, 526 US 23, 28; 119 S Ct 961; 143 L Ed 2d 18 (1999).

We do not retain jurisdiction.
#### Jerry GRUBBS and Linda Grubbs v. LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF GEORGIA et al.

1011233.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

Nov. 27, 2002.

L. Andrew Hollis, Jr., and Josh J. Wright of Hollis *&*Wright, P.C., Birmingham, for appellants.

William C. Roedder, Jr., P. Russel Myles, and Richard M. Gaal of McDowell, Knight, Roedder & Sledge, L.L.C., Mobile, for appellee Life Insurance Company of Georgia.

James L. Martin, Eufaula, for appellee James C. Warr.

WOODALL, Justice.

AFFIRMED. NO OPINION.

See Rule 53(a)(1) and (a)(2)(E), Ala. R.App. P.

*466MOORE, C.J., and SEE, LYONS, BROWN, HARWOOD, and STUART, JJ., concur.

JOHNSTONE, J., concurs in part and dissents in part.

HOUSTON, J., recuses himself.

JOHNSTONE, Justice

(concurring in part and dissenting in part).

While I concur in affirming summary-judgment against the plaintiffs on their contract and negligence theories, I respectfully dissent from affirming summary judgment against the plaintiffs on their fraud theory.
STATE of North Carolina v. Quintin Sharod TAYLOR

No. COA18-55

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: December 18, 2018

AFFIRMED.
James H. MCCALL, IV and Shannon McCall v. Ronald Lee MILLION, Jr. and Marissa Hayler Million

No. 112P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 14, 2018

Nathan A. Miller, Attorney at Law, Boone, for Million, Ronald Lee (Jr.), et al.

Nancy Rivenbark, Andrew C. Brooks, Attorneys at Law, Boone, for McCall, James H. (IV), et al.

***ORDER***

*576Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by Defendants on the 10th of April 2018 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30 (substantial constitutional question), the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the notice of appeal is

"Dismissed Ex Mero Motu by order of the Court in conference, this the 14th of August 2018."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 10th of April 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 14th of August 2018."