alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
STATE of North Carolina v. Dontail BRINKLEY

No. 394P17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 14, 2018

Michele A. Goldman, Attorney at Law, for Brinkley, Dontail.

Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy Attorney General, Robert A. Evans, Jr., District Attorney, for State of North Carolina

***ORDER***

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 21st of November 2017 by State of NC for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Dissolved by order of the Court in conference, this the 14th of August 2018."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by State of NC on the 21st of November 2017 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, 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."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 12th of December 2017 by State of NC 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."
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U. S. C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906

of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of THOMAS PROPERTIES GROUP, INC. (the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:



| | (i) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                       |  |  |  |  |  |                        
|---------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Dated: August 11, 2008 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Diana M. Laing     
|                       |  |  |  |  |  | Diana M. Laing         
|                       |  |  |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C § 1350 and shall
not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended or incorporated by reference in any registration statement of the Company filed under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

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.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-6542

GEORGE STEVENS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus G. K. WASHINGTON, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (3:05-cv-00059-RLW) Submitted: August 30, 2006 Decided: November 28, 2006 Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. George Stevens, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen R. McCullough, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: George Stevens seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Stevens has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and di smiss the appeal. 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
#### Sterling Vision, Inc., Appellant-Respondent, v Larry Joel et al., Respondents-Appellants.

[719 NYS2d 685]

In an action to recover payment on personal guarantees, brought by motion pursuant to CPLR 3213 for summary judgment in lieu of complaint, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Martin, J.), dated February 23, 2000, as denied its motion, and the defendants cross-appeal from so much of the same order as denied their cross motion pursuant to, *inter alia,*CPLR 3211 (a) (4) and 327 to dismiss or, in the alternative, to stay the action.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, the motion is granted, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, for further proceedings consistent herewith; and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as cross-appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that the plaintiff is awarded one bill of costs.

Contrary to the defendants’ contention, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying their cross motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, to stay the action pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (4) *(see, Whitney v Whitney, 57*NY2d 731). Although shortly before the commencement of this action the defendant Apryl Robinson had instituted a similar action against the plaintiff and the defendant Larry Joel in Kentucky, under the circumstances of this case, New York is the most appropriate forum for resolution of the dispute between the parties *(see, White Light Prods, v On the Scene Prods.,*231 AD2d 90; *Flintkote Co. v American Mut. Liab. Ins. Co.,*103 AD2d 501, *affd*67 NY2d 857).

The plaintiff established its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the issue of the defendants’ liability under the unconditional guarantees based upon the existence of notes and guarantees, as well as the nonpayment of each according to its terms *(see, Bosio v Selig,*165 AD2d 822). The guarantees at issue provide, *inter alia,*that the defendants’ duties and obligations are “immediate and unconditional.” The guarantees of notes payable by Diversified Optical Concepts, Inc., explicitly provide that they are subject to paragraph 1 of the notes, which absolves the defendants of liability for all obligations “accruing *569hereunder from and after thirty (30) days prior to said Early Termination Date” as defined in subsection 1 (A) (iii) of the franchise agreement. Subsection 1 (A) (iii) permits early termination of the franchise agreement based on a failure to comply with an oral consulting agreement upon “written notice upon the [plaintiff] of its election to terminate this Agreement.” There is no evidence in the record of such written notice from the franchisee to the plaintiff. Accordingly, there are no issues of fact for the Supreme Court’s consideration.

The parties’ remaining contentions are without merit. Bracken, Acting P. J., Altman, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Erroll Freeman, Appellant.

[718 NYS2d 858]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Honorof, J.), rendered April 5, 1999, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of those branches of the defendant’s omnibus motion which were to suppress identification testimony and statements he made to law enforcement authorities.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered.

The court properly denied those branches of the defendant’s motion which were to suppress identification testimony and his statements to law enforcement authorities *(see, People v McIntyre,*138 AD2d 634; *People v Boyd,*161 AD2d 719). However, during trial, the court erred by, in effect, advising the defendant repeatedly that a proposed affirmative defense would lead to his conviction and that there was a possibility of an acquittal if he rested without adducing any further evidence *(see, People v Hills,*140 AD2d 71, 81; *cf., People v Borrero,*19 NY2d 332, 335-336). Accordingly, the judgment is reversed and a new trial ordered. Bracken, Acting P. J., O’Brien, Florio and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
CERTIFICATION

SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION OF OUR CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



I, Norman Dority, certify that:



1.  I have reviewed this Quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Denia Enterprises Inc.;



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



3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included 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 periods presented in this report;



4.  The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining 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 such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and



5.  The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's   board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



(a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.



/s/ Norman Dority

---------------------------

Norman Dority

Chief Executive Officer

November 26, 2007
Exhibit 8.01

Subsidiaries of Brasil Telecom Participações S.A.



|                                                   |  |                              
|-------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|Name of Subsidiary                                 |  | Jurisdiction of Incorporation
|                                                   | 
|Brasil Telecom S.A.                                |  | Brazil                       
|                                                   | 
|Internet Group (Cayman) Limited                    |  | Cayman                       
|                                                   | 
|BrT Serviços de Internet S.A.                      |  | Brazil                       
|                                                   | 
|14 Brasil Telecom Celular S.A.                     |  | Brazil                       
|                                                   | 
|Vant Telecomunicações S.A.                         |  | Brazil                       
|                                                   | 
|Brasil Telecom Cabos Submarinos Ltda. (GlobeNet)   |  | Brazil                       
|                                                   | 
|Brasil Telecom Subsea Cable Systems (Bermuda) Ltd. |  | Bermuda                      
|                                                   | 
|Brasil Telecom of America Inc.                     |  | United States                
|                                                   | 
|Brasil Telecom de Venezuela S.A.                   |  | Venezuela                    
|                                                   | 
|Brasil Telecom de Colombia E.U.                    |  | Colombia                     
|                                                   | 
|Internet Group do Brasil S.A. (iG)                 |  | Brazil                       
|                                                   | 
|Brasil Telecom Comunicação Multimidia Ltda.        |  | Brazil                       
|                                                   | 
|Brasil Telecom Call Center S.A.                    |  | Brazil                       
|                                                   | 
|BrT Card Serviços Financeiros Ltda.                |  | Brazil
CLerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals P.O. Box 12308, Capitol Station, Austin,?Texas 78711 December 30, 2014 RE: PD-0113-14; 05-12-00577-CR Garry Dean Stroner v. State Dear Clerk of the Court, 

### I amwriting you to request for the date that my Petition for discretionary review was refused. 

### Please provide the date=of the ruling on the cause number above. Thank you for all yourhelp and time within this matter!

Respectful! 

# (* GarryH5. Stroner #01777671-Coffield 2661 FM 2054 Tenn.Colony, Tx. 75884

COURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALS CC: file. ..,, , _ nnmr 

### JanU5 2015
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 194 (Friday, October 7, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 58735]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-20294]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY


Notice of Adjustment of Disaster Grant Amounts

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Emergency Preparedness and 
Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: FEMA gives notice of an increase of the maximum amount for 
Small Project Grants to State and local governments and private 
nonprofit facilities for disasters declared on or after October 1, 
2005.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 1, 2005 and applies to major disasters declared 
on or after October 1, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James A. Walke, Recovery Division, 
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-
3834.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and 
Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206 (the Stafford Act) 
prescribes that FEMA must annually adjust the maximum grant amount made 
under section 422, Small Project Grants, Simplified Procedure, relating 
to the Public Assistance program, to reflect changes in the Consumer 
Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the Department of 
Labor.
    FEMA gives notice of an increase of the maximum amount of any Small 
Project Grant made to the State, local government, or to the owner or 
operator of an eligible private nonprofit facility, under section 422 
of the Stafford Act, to $57,500 for all disasters declared on or after 
October 1, 2005.
    FEMA bases the adjustment on an increase in the Consumer Price 
Index for All Urban Consumers of 3.6 percent for the 12-month period 
ended in August 2005. The Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. 
Department of Labor released the information on September 15, 2005.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.036, Public 
Assistance Grants.)
R. David Paulison,
Acting Under Secretary, Emergency Preparedness and Response, Department 
of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 05-20294 Filed 10-6-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
Erin KEENA v. CEDAR STREET INVESTMENTS, LLC, d/b/a Draught, a Domestic for Profit, LLC, and John Doe Employee and/or Agent, jointly and severally, directly and vicariously

No. 73P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 14, 2018

Daniel C. Flint, Attorney at Law, for Keena, Erin.

Jeffrey S. Bolster, Charlotte, Melissa R. Monroe, Attorneys at Law, for Cedar Street Investments, LLC, et al.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 13th of March 2018 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 14th of August 2018."
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.2


            SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
         RELATING TO A PERIODIC REPORT CONTAINING FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


      I, Timothy M. Mayleben, Chief Financial Officer, of Esperion
Therapeutics, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), hereby certify
that:

      (1)  The Company's periodic report on Form 10-K for the period ended
December 31, 2002 (the "Form 10-K") fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

      (2)  The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


                                      * * *


/s/ Timothy M. Mayleben
Timothy M. Mayleben,
Chief Financial Officer

Date: March 26, 2003
Evelyn TALLEY v. PRIDE MOBILITY PRODUCTS CORPORATION, Quality Home Healthcare, Inc., William S. Cameron, and Barbara B. Cameron

No. 186P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 20, 2018

Chris Kremer, Attorney at Law, for Talley, Evelyn.

Todd A. King, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Pride Mobility Products Corporation.

Rodney E. Pettey, Attorney at Law, Justin M. Osborn, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Quality Home Healthcare, Inc., et al.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 19th of June 2018 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 20th of September 2018."
Table of Contents


EXHIBIT 12.1

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Antônio José Ribeiro dos Santos, the Chief Executive Officer of Telemig Celular Participações S.A., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Telemig Celular Participações S.A;

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

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the
periods presented in this report;

4. The companys other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the company and have:

a)    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period  in which this report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the companys disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the companys internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
companys internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The companys other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the companys auditors and to the audit committee of the companys board  of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the companys ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the companys internal control over financial reporting.

|                                   
|-----------------------------------
|Date: June 30, 2005                
|                                   
|/s/ Antônio José Ribeiro dos Santos
|Antônio José Ribeiro dos Santos    
|Chief Executive Officer            

---