alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Gerald F. Weiland and Carol Ann Weiland, Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. Daniel G. Paulin and Joan E. Paulin, Defendants-Appellants.

Supreme Court

*No. 02-0826.*

*Decided April 24, 2003.*

2003 WI 27

(Also reported in 659 N.W.2d 875.)

*278IT IS ORDERED the petition for review is granted and that part of the court of appeals' decision declaring the appeal to he frivolous is summarily reversed and the cause is remanded to the court of appeals with directions that: (1) the court of appeals shall give Attorney Kroening an opportunity to be heard regarding the frivolous appeal determination, and (2) the court of appeals shall then make specific findings to support any conclusion that the appeal is frivolous under Wis. Stat. § (Rule) 809.25(3)(c)2.
STATE of North Carolina v. Valentino Cabral DAROSA, Defendant.

No. COA17-1267

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: November 20, 2018

NO ERROR.
*

 Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except underthe limited circumstancessetforth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

1 Carbajal-Gonzalez v. INS, 78 F.3d 194 (5th Cir. 1996).

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-60630

Summary Calendar

YAW AYIM OWUSU,

Petitioner,

versus

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

(BIA No. A29 307 869)

June 12, 1997

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, WIENER and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Yaw Ayim Owusu petitionsfor review of the Board of Immigration Appeals

decision affirming the denial of his application for asylum. Our review of the

record and the briefs persuadesthat theBoard’s decision issupported by substantial

evidence.1 The petition for review is therefore DENIED.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

IN THE INTEREST OF: S.L., A MINOR

PETITION OF: J.L., FATHER :

:

:

:

: No. 62 EAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 7th day of April, 2020

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
ARKAY, LLC and Robert R. Knoth, its member, Petitioners, v. CITY OF CHARLESTON, City of Charleston Board of Zoning Appeals, Andrew Pinckney Inn, and Michael A. Molony, Respondents.

Appellate Case No. 2016-002360 Opinion No. 27849

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

Heard November 7, 2018 Filed November 21, 2018

Capers G. Barr III, of Barr Unger & McIntosh, LLC, of Charleston, for Petitioners.

Frances Isaac Cantwell and Daniel Simmons McQueeney Jr., both of Charleston; and Wilbur E. Johnson, of Young Clement Rivers, LLP, of Charleston; and Thomas S. Tisdale Jr., of Hellman, Yates & Tisdale, PA, of Charleston, all for Respondents.

PER CURIAM:

We granted a writ of certiorari to review the court of appeals' decision in *Arkay, LLC v. City of Charleston* , 418 S.C. 86, 791 S.E.2d 305 (Ct. App. 2016). We now dismiss the writ as improvidently granted.

**DISMISSED AS IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED.**

BEATTY, C.J., KITTREDGE, HEARN, FEW and JAMES, JJ., concur.
In the MATTER OF: N.H.

No. COA18-493

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: December 4, 2018

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Robert E. Swanson, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Ridgewood Energy K
Fund, LLC;

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 registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) 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 fiscal 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(s) 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.



Date: May 15, 2006
/s/ Robert E. Swanson
Robert E. Swanson
President and Chief Executive Officer(principal executive officer)
# C_2022002EN.01000901.xml

| 3.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 2/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 2/9

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 28 October 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — Finanzamt B v X-Beteiligungsgesellschaft mbH

(Case C-324/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2006/112/EC - Value added tax (VAT) - Supply of services - Articles 63 - Chargeability of VAT - Articles 64(1) - Concept of ‘supplies which give rise to successive payments’ - One-time supply remunerated by means of payment in instalments - Articles 90(1) - Reduction of the taxable amount - Concept of ‘non-payment of the price’)

(2022/C 2/12)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Finanzamt B

Respondent: X-Beteiligungsgesellschaft mbH

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | Article 64(1) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that a service supplied on a single occasion remunerated by way of instalment payments does not fall within the scope of that provision. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Article 64(1) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that a service supplied on a single occasion remunerated by way of instalment payments does not fall within the scope of that provision.

| 2. | Article 90(1) of Directive 2006/112 must be interpreted as meaning that, in the case of an agreement on payment in instalments, the fact that an instalment of the remuneration has not been paid before its term cannot be regarded as non-payment of the price, within the meaning of that provision, and, as a result, cannot lead to a reduction of the taxable amount. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Article 90(1) of Directive 2006/112 must be interpreted as meaning that, in the case of an agreement on payment in instalments, the fact that an instalment of the remuneration has not been paid before its term cannot be regarded as non-payment of the price, within the meaning of that provision, and, as a result, cannot lead to a reduction of the taxable amount.

---

(1)  OJ C 313, 21.9.2020.

---
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATE OF

PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER 

AND

 PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

OF

NITRO PETROLEUM INCORPORATED

I, Larry Wise, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Nitro Petroleum Incorporated (the “Company”), hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the quarterly report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 31, 2008 (the “Report”):

|   | a. | 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 of the Company at October 31, 2008, and the results of the Company’s operations for the quarter ended October 31, 2008. |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|                     |   |   |   |                                     |
|--------------------------|--------|--------|--------|------------------------------------------|
| Date:  December 19, 2008 |   |   |   | /s/  Larry Wise                          |
|                     |   |   |   |                                     |
|                     |   |   |   | Larry Wise                               |
|                     |   |   |   | *President, Chief Executive Officer and* |
|                     |   |   |   | *Chief Financial Officer*                |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>               5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Balance Sheet at March 31, 1997 and Statements of Income for the twelve months
ended March 31, 1997 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                          <C>    
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                 MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         7,646,000
<SECURITIES>                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  2,357,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (161,000)
<INVENTORY>                                      700,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              10,759,000
<PP&E>                                         2,884,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                (1,255,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                14,251,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,318,000
<BONDS>                                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                            0
<COMMON>                                       6,984,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     5,949,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  14,251,000
<SALES>                                       18,680,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              18,680,000
<CGS>                                         10,921,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 10,921,000 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               4,209,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 2,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                3,889,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   1,404,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            2,485,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                   2,485,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        .76
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        .76

        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32








CERTIFICATIONS 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 report of Ridgewood Energy K Fund, LLC (the “Fund”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned officers of the Fund hereby certifies, 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Fund.





RIDGEWOOD ENERGY K FUND, LLCDated:
November 9, 2010
By:
/s/

ROBERT E. SWANSONName:

Robert E. SwansonTitle:

Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)Dated:
November 9, 2010
By:
/s/

KATHLEEN P. MCSHERRYName:

Kathleen P. McSherryTitle:

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)





A signed original of this written statement or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to Ridgewood Energy K Fund, LLC and will be retained by Ridgewood Energy K Fund, LLC and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Order entered March 28 , 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 18

- 00613

- CV

ENVISION REALTY GROU P, LLC AND JACKSON P OTTER, AND THEIR

ATTORNEY DAVID J. PO TTER, Appellan t s

V.

CHUAN C. CHEN, Appellee

On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC

- 17

- 16534

- G



### O RDER

Before the Court is Appellants ’ unopposed motion to extend time to file reply brief. We

GRANT the motion. A ppellants ’ reply brief shall be filed by April 1, 2019

.

/s/ BILL WHITEHILL JUSTICE
Johnnie ROWE v. STATE of North Carolina

No. 242P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 7, 2018

Johnnie Rowe, for Rowe, Johnnie.

Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State.

Roger A. Echols, District Attorney, for State.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the application filed by Petitioner on the 6th of August 2018 in this matter for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Durham County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 7th of August 2018."
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION




In
connection with the periodic report of Novint Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Tom Anderson, Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer) and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial
Officer) of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for
purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that
to the best of my knowledge:




(1)
      The Report fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods
indicated.





Date:
      August 19, 2009
              /s/
      Tom AndersonTom
      AndersonChief
      Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) and
                Chief
      Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
Steven GRODENSKY v. Roger MCLENDON, MD, Duke University Health System, Inc. d/b/a Duke University Medical Center, Associated Health Services, Inc., Duke Medicine Global Support Corporation, The Duke University School of Medicine Research Foundation, and Private Diagnostic Clinic

No. 283P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 5, 2018

Fred D. Smith, Jr., Attorney at Law, Jeremy Ross Swindlehurst, Attorney at Law, Robert W. Mann, Attorney at Law, for Grodensky, Steven.

Mark E. Anderson, Attorney at Law, Joan S. Dinsmore, Attorney at Law, Jacob D. Charles, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for McLendon, Roger (M.D.)

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 30th of August 2018 by Defendant (Roger McLendon, MD) 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 5th of December 2018."
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-09-00418-CV

In re Nicholas Xenos

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Relator Nicholas Xenos’s petition for writ of mandamus is denied.

 

G. Alan Waldrop, Justice

Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton and Waldrop

Filed: July 29, 2009
Exhibit 32.1





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 annual report of CelLynx Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
10-K for the year ending June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the “Report”), I, Daniel R. Ash, Chief Executive Officer (Principal
Executive Officer) of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely
for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States
Code, that to the best of my knowledge:




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




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




Date:
      October 14, 2008
            
            /s/
      Daniel R. AshDaniel
      R. Ash
              Chief
      Executive Officer
              (Principal
      Executive 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.
#### STATE ex rel. Vincent J. HEMPHILL v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 2002-KH-2053.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Aug. 29, 2003.

In re Hemphill, Vincent J.,;—Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial *999Writs, Parish of Claiborne, 2nd Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 20078; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 35,-671-KA.

Denied.
STATE of North Carolina v. Ramar Dion Benjamin CRUMP

No. 151PA18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 05, 2018

Ann B. Petersen, Attorney at Law, Chapel Hill, for Crump, Ramar Dion Benjamin.

James R. Glover, Attorney at Law, Chapel Hill.

Peter A. Regulski, Assistant Attorney General, R. Andrew Murray, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 22nd of May 2018 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:

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of December 2018."

Therefore the case is docketed as of the date of this order's certification. 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).
Exhibit 32.1

**CERTIFICATE OF**

**CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**AND**

**INTERIM CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**OF**

**NITRO PETROLEUM INCORPORATED**

I, James G. Borem, President, Chief Executive Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer of Nitro Petroleum Incorporated (the “Company”), hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the quarterly report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 31, 2009 (the “Report”):

|   | a. | 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 of the Company at October 31, 2009, and the results of the Company’s operations for the quarter ended October 31, 2009. |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|                    |   |   |   |                                                                     |
|-------------------------|--------|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date: December 18, 2009 |   |   |   | /s/ James G. Borem                                                       |
|                    |   |   |   |                                                                     |
|                    |   |   |   | James G. Borem                                                           |
|                    |   |   |   | *President, Chief Executive Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer* |
#### George MIMS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D02-1356.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Aug. 13, 2003.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Lisa Walsh, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, and Barbara A. Zappi, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before GERSTEN, GODERICH and SHEVIN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

George Mims appeals a judgment and sentence for attempted manslaughter with a firearm. The trial court committed fundamental error when it gave an erroneous jury instruction to the jury. *See Thompson v. State,*814 So.2d 1103 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); *King v. State,*800 So.2d 734 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). Accordingly, we vacate the sentence and reverse and remand for a new trial.

Reversed and remanded for a new trial.
John Beverly CHAPMAN, Jr., Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Virginia, Appellee.

Record No. 171417

Supreme Court of Virginia.

November 29, 2018

In this case, we awarded appellant an appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeals, holding that the trial court did not err in finding appellant guilty of felony reckless driving in violation of Code §§ 46.2-852 and 46.2-868(B). *See**Chapman v. Commonwealth* , 68 Va. App. 131, 145, 804 S.E.2d 326 (2017).

We have considered the record, briefs, and arguments of counsel, and for the reasons stated in the opinion of the Court of Appeals, we will affirm the judgment.

This order shall be published in the Virginia Reports and certified to the Court of Appeals of Virginia and to the Circuit Court of Frederick County.