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

No. 405PA17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 30, 2019

Lauren Tally Earnhardt, Assistant Attorney General, William P. Hart, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Ernie Lee, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

Jason C. Yoder, Attorney at Law, for J.C.

State of N.C. Judicial Dept., for N.C. Judicial Department.

*ORDER*

The Motion to Restrict Electronic Access, Place Case "Under Seal," and Redact Superior Court Case Numbers from All Published Materials filed by petitioner in this case is decided as follows: the motion is allowed to the extent that the materials filed in this case, such as the record, briefs, motions, orders, and other filings in this case will not be posted upon the North Carolina appellate court electronic filing site and that any opinion, orders, or similar documents published by the Court in this case will, from and after the date of the entry of this order, omit petitioner's name (as compared to his initials or a pseudonym) and the Onslow County file number(s) relevant to this case. The motion is denied to the extent that the Court declines to remove the Court of Appeals case number(s) from any opinions, orders, or similar documents published by the Court in this case.

By order of the Court in conference, this the *30th* day of January, 2019.
HAMPTON v. CUMBERLAND COUNTY

60PA18-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 14, 2018

Robert A. Hasty, Jr., Attorney at Law, for Cumberland County

Garris Neil Yarborough, Attorney at Law, Fayetteville, for Hampton, David, et al.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 14th of November 2018 by Respondent:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 14th of November 2018."

Respondent shall have up to and including the 4th day of December 2018 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.15


                                 AMENDMENT NO. 1
                                       TO
                              QUANTA SERVICES, INC.
                            2001 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN


         This Amendment No. 1 to the Quanta Services, Inc. 2001 Stock Incentive
Plan (the "Plan") is adopted by Quanta Services, Inc. (the "Company"), effective
as of November 9, 2001.

                                   WITNESSETH

         WHEREAS, the Board of Directors (the "Board") of the Company amended
and restated the Quanta Services, Inc. Amended and Restated 1997 Stock Option
Plan in the form of the Plan, effective as of May 23, 2001; and

         WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 16 of the Plan, the Board desires to amend
the Plan further to clarify that employees of the Company or an affiliate of the
Company who are not subject to Section 3401 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended are eligible to receive awards under the Plan;

         NOW THEREFORE, the Board hereby amends Section 3(o) of the Plan by
restatement in its entirety to read as follows:

         (o) "Employee" means any person, including an Officer or Director, who
is employed by the Company or an Affiliate. The provision of compensation by the
Company or an Affiliate to a Director solely with respect to such individual
rendering services in the capacity of a Director, however, shall not be
sufficient to constitute "employment" by the Company or that Affiliate.

         This Amendment No. 1 to the Plan was adopted by the Company effective
as of the day and year first above written.

                                              QUANTA SERVICES, NC.


                                              By: /s/ Dana A. Gordon
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                  Dana A. Gordon, Vice President
<PAGE>   1
                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.8(b)


                          PENNZOIL-QUAKER STATE COMPANY
                            SALARY CONTINUATION PLAN

                                 First Amendment


                  Pennzoil-Quaker State Company, a Delaware corporation, having
adopted the Pennzoil-Quaker State Company Salary Continuation Plan, effective
December 30, 1998 (the "Plan"), and having reserved the right to amend the Plan
under Section VI.1 of the Plan, does hereby amend Section IV.3 of the Plan,
effective as of June 1, 2000, as follows:

                  "IV.3 Medical Benefits Continuation. During the period that an
         Employee's Spouse is receiving benefits under Section IV.2 of this
         Plan, such Spouse and the eligible dependents of the deceased Employee
         and his Spouse shall be entitled to continued coverage under the
         Company's medical benefits plan in which the Employee is participating
         as of the Employee's date of death in the same manner and to the same
         extent as if coverage under such medical benefits plan, as in effect as
         of the Employee's date of death, had continued in full force and
         effect. Any reimbursement or payment of medical expenses pursuant to
         this Section IV.3 shall be made only if the medical expense, or portion
         thereof sought to be reimbursed or paid, is not otherwise reimbursable
         or payable by another plan or program of the Company or by U.S. Social
         Security, Medicare, Medicaid or any analogous state or federal program,
         assuming in all cases that any person eligible for such otherwise
         reimbursable or payable expense had properly applied for reimbursement
         or payment from such federal or state program."


                                                  PENNZOIL-QUAKER STATE COMPANY
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23
- 0372 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. WILLIAM JAMES PILLANS, 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 January 17 , 2024, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 11 2023

12/11/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0372
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

RAYMOND WINCHESTER
,
Defendant Below

Appellant
,

v.
STATE OF DELAWARE,

Plaintiff Below

Appellee. § § No. 451, 2015 § § § § Court Below

— Superior Court § of the State of Delaware, § in and for New Castle County § Cr. ID 1408023564 § §

Su bmitted: August 28, 2015 Decided: August 31
, 2015

Before STRINE , Chief Justice; HOLLAND , and SEITZ
, Justices.

O R D E R

This 31st day of August 2015 , it appears to the Court that:
(1) On August 20, 2015 , the Court received the appellant Raymond

Winchester ’s notice of appeal from a Superior Court violation of probation
sentencing order entered on July 16, 2015

. Under Supreme Court Rule

6 (a)( i i) , a timely notice of appeal should have been filed on or before August
17, 2015

. (2) The Clerk issued a notice directing Winchester to show cause
why the appeal should not be dismissed as untimely filed. Winchester filed
a response to the notice to show cause on August 28, 2015

. He asserts that- 2

-

his appeal was untimely because he thought that he was supposed to file his
papers by leaving them with the Department of Justice.
(3) Winchester’s response is unavailing. T ime is a jurisdictional
requirement. 1 A notice of appeal must be received by the Office of the Clerk
of this Court within the applicable time period in order to be effective. 2 An
appellant’s pro se status does not excuse a failure to comply strictly with the
jurisdictional requirements of Supreme Court Rule 6. 3 Unless an appellant

can demonstr ate that the failure to file a timely notice of appeal is

attributable to court

- related personnel, an untimely appeal cannot be

considered. 4 Winchester’s case does not fall within th is exception

. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the appeal is

DISMISSE D.

BY THE COURT: /s/ Leo E. Strine, Jr.
Chief Justice

1 Carr v. State , 554 A.2d 778, 779 (Del.), cert. denied , 493 U.S. 829 (1989).

2 Del. Supr. Ct. R. 10(a).

3 Smith v. State , 47 A.3d 481, 486

- 87 (Del. 2012)

. 4 Bey v. State , 402 A.2d 362, 363 (Del. 1979).
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4893 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4893

  To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish a United 
  States Citizenship and Immigration Services field office in Kodiak, 
                                Alaska.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 19, 2010

 Mr. Young of Alaska introduced the following bill; which was referred 
to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee 
  on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
  Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 
           within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish a United 
  States Citizenship and Immigration Services field office in Kodiak, 
                                Alaska.

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

SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF USCIS FIELD OFFICE IN KODIAK.

    Subject to the availability of appropriated funds, not later than 
the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish a United States 
Citizenship and Immigration Services field office in Kodiak, Alaska.
                                 <all>
```
STATE of North Carolina v. David Kenneth FOWLER

No. 353P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 5, 2018

Kathryn L. VandenBerg, Assistant Appellant Defender, for Fowler, David Kenneth.

Joseph L. Hyde, Assistant Attorney General, Ted Bell, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

*171***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 18th of October 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:

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

Upon consideration of the petition filed in the alternative by Defendant on the 18th of October 2018 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina 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 5th of December 2018."
#### Michael William McGRAIL, et al. v. Jessie R. LEE, et al.

No. 2002-C-1496.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

July 3, 2003.

PER CURIAM.

We granted defendants’ application for a writ of certiorari in this case on October 4, 2002. On April 9, 2003, after hearing oral arguments and reviewing the record, we recalled our order of October 4, 2002 as improvidently granted and denied defendants’ writ application. Defendants then applied for rehearing from this order. We granted rehearing on June 6, 2003. Plaintiffs have now filed a motion to vacate the grant of rehearing.

Supreme Court IX, § 6 provides that “an application for rehearing will not be considered when the court has denied ... an application for writ of certiorari....” In our order of April 9, 2003, we recalled our earlier grant of certiorari and denied defendants’ writ application. Accordingly, defendants’ application for rehearing from the April 9, 2003 judgment was procedurally improper and should not have been entertained by this court. Once we denied the writ, the judgment of the court of appeal became final and definitive under La.Code Civ. P. art. 2166(E) (“a judgment of the court of appeal becomes final and definitive when the supreme court denies the application for certiorari”).

Accordingly, plaintiffs’ motion is granted. The judgment of June 6, 2003 grant*991ing defendants’ application for rehearing is vacated and set aside.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







In connection with the Quarterly report of Global-E Investments, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jamie Kerr, acting in the capacity as the Chief Executive Officer and I, John Shaffer, acting in the capacity of Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the best of our knowledge, 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 result of operations of the Company.





/s/ Jamie Kerr

Jamie Kerr

Chief Executive Officer

August 16, 2004





/s/ John Shaffer

John Shaffer

Chief Financial Officer

August 16, 2004
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

** **

**CHIEFFINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION**

I, Ajay Sabherwal,certify that:

1.             Ihave reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Aventine Renewable EnergyHoldings, Inc.;

2.             Basedon my knowledge, this 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 report;

3.             Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this 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 report;

4.             Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a.                                     Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation 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.                                      Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and

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

5.             Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a.                                     Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely

----

affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

b.                                      Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

Date:  August 10,2006

/s/  Ajay Sabherwal                             

Ajay Sabherwal

Chief Financial Officer

 

----
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

          - [Docket No. 050125015-5015-01]

# AGENCY:

Department of Commerce.

# ACTION:

Notice; Commerce/Department-18; Employees Personnel Files Not Covered by Notices of Other Agencies.

# SUMMARY:

The Department of Commerce (Commerce) publishes this notice to announce the effective date of a Privacy Act System of Records notice entitled Commerce/Department-18; Employees Personnel Files Not Covered by Notices of Other Agencies.

# DATES:

The system of records becomes effective on February 3, 2005.

# ADDRESSES:

For a copy of the system of records please mail requests to Curtina Smith, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 6422, 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, D.C. 20230, 202-482-4186.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Curtina Smith, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 6422, 1401 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20230.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

On September 27, 2004, the Commerce published and requested comments on a proposed Privacy Act System of Records notice entitled Commerce/Department-18; Employees Personnel Files Not Covered by Notices of Other Agencies. No comments were received in response to the request for comments. By this notice, the Department is adopting the proposed system as final without changes effective February 3, 2005.

Dated: January 27, 2005.

Brenda Dolan,

U.S. Department of Commerce, Freedom of Information/Privacy Act Officer.

[FR Doc. 05-2050 Filed 2-2-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-03-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         1067702
<NAME>                        R.A.B. HOLDINGS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                               4,637
<SECURITIES>                                         3,145
<RECEIVABLES>                                       59,236
<ALLOWANCES>                                       (4,251)
<INVENTORY>                                         65,286
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   133,810
<PP&E>                                              52,392
<DEPRECIATION>                                    (15,193)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     290,008
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               79,261
<BONDS>                                            124,150
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                         12,844
<COMMON>                                                 1
<OTHER-SE>                                           5,903
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       290,008
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   580,616
<CGS>                                              443,390
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      121,261
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   564,651
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  18,960
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (2,995)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       (1,146)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (1,849)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     12,914
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                        11,065
<EPS-BASIC>                                              0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0



</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

JOSE DEMETRIO PINEDA, 

 

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 State.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No.08-21-00142-CR

Appeal from the

109th District Court

of Winkler County, Texas 

(TC# 5462)

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Appellant’s third motion for extension of time within which to 

file the brief until February 3, 2022. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME 

TO FILE THE APPELLANT’S BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. M. Michele Rogers, the Appellant’s attorney, prepare 

the Appellant’s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before February 3, 2022.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 4

th day of January, 2022.

PER CURIAM

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox, and Alley, JJ.
**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

**The Board of Directors**

**Infosys Technologies Limited:**

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 333-32196) on Form S-8 and in the registration statement (No. 333-138491) on Form F-3 of Infosys Technologies Limited of our reports dated April 29, 2008, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Infosys Technologies Limited and subsidiaries as of March 31, 2008 and 2007, and the related consolidated statements of income, stockholders' equity and comprehensive income and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended March 31, 2008, and related financial statement schedule II, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of March 31, 2008, which reports appear in the March 31, 2008 annual report on Form 20-F of Infosys Technologies Limited.

KPMGBangalore, IndiaApril 30, 2008