alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 200218 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

Inconnection with the Annual Report of Hollywood Casino Shreveport and ShreveportCapital Corporation (collectively, the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the fiscalyear ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Tonya Tarrant, Chief FinancialOfficer of HCS I, Inc., Managing General Partner of Hollywood CasinoShreveport, Shreveport Capital Corporation and HWCC-Louisiana, Inc., certify,pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section1350 that, to my knowledge:

###### ** **

###### **1.             The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,as amended; and**

###### ** **

###### **2.             The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresult of operations of the Company.**

 
| ** **                  | **Hollywood Casino Shreveport**                  |
|-----------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|
|                        | **By:  HCS I, Inc., its Managing Partner;** |
|                        | **Shreveport Capital Corporation; and**          |
|                        | **HWCC-Louisiana, Inc.**                         |
|                        |                                             |   |
| Date:   March 29, 2005 | By:  /s/                                         |  Tonya Tarrant |
|                        |                                             |   Tonya  Tarrant |
|                        |                                             |   Chief  Financial Officer |

 

----
#### INSURANCE CO. v. TIRE CO.

No. 22 PC.

Case below: 22 N.C. App. 237.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 24 September 1974.
WTED STAIXS DZ1'fluCT COUKT 

soU3'HERN DISTR~~ OF NEW YQRK * 

i --------"--r----rc------.-h.-----d%+--. X 

i 

NW YW~ l:i~ ~opar/mmt of hv~ommtal ~owtioq 

Keho Leikh. Call @M*, M& Osd, 

Defendants. 

--. UNITED STATES DJYTIUCT COURT 

SOUTHERN UISmCT OF NEW YOFX 

.-- -IIII-------Cc--c-m---.----r- x 

1 -agaitutCITY OF NEW YOkK, hTW VORK CITY 07 Civ. 3436 {LTSKDFE) 

DEPARTm 06 E~ONMENTAL PROTECTION, 

KENO LElTCH, &CK MCMAS'IER, ROMEL 

OSBOURNE 4 t+pm osm, 

1 Defendants. f 

I 

TT PS KEREBY STXPIZATEI) AW AGREED by eurd between .tb6 - 

udcnipcd for 4 partios herein that plaintifPs time to me his oppsitim to Defendanah 

cross-motion for s judpcnl, dated kh 14,2008, if any, #U pl&lntjrs rims to spve I. 

his mly maaoqdm in Avther support of plahtiff s motion for wnmvy judgment, dated I 

. Fcb~1~,2~~$,?f~y.i~mtendedfromM~h31,2008rmti~April21.2008Mdthmt 1 

Case 1:07-cv-03436-LTS Document 18 Filed 03/28/2008 Page 1 of 2
-28-2U08 B1:51P FROM: 

IUYL t~ll WKIMWI tax :~12-/tl8-158,( 

'7 ' 

Dchndams' lime to skc thrrir rtply memorandum in Mer ~upmrt of thdr motion for 

I 

summary judpmt, &&d Mmh 14, 2008, if any, ig extended from April 21,2008 until May 5, 

I 

2008. Plaintiff amto lhat if he -es his oppogition to Defendants' cross-motion fat 8uwPary I 

judgment m(Uor his r@ly mcmur~dwa in -or =umcn of hie motion for swnmmy judgment 

on April 21, 2008 that1 he will effect service via overnight rnail but that if he sew- either his 

oppo~ition to Defenddts' cross-mdon for summary judgment andior h£s reply mernomdum In t 

i further support of phi~tiff s motion far summary judgrrlent prior tD A@ 21,2008 that he may I 

effect service via rcgull mail. 

I 

Dated: New Y& New York 

March 28,2008 

i 

MERVYNFRANKEI~ MICHAEL A. CARDOZQ 

Plaintinpro se I Cmpration Counsel of the City of New Yark 

144-16 68 Drive h Attorney for Dcfmdanb 

Flushing, New YO& 1) 367 t 00 Chwh Street, Room 2- 122 

(718) 793-5084 _/ 'lS~j New Yo& New York 10007 

 FA^ 1t0-2g3 $4) By: i J 

Mv prankel Kevin A, wden I 

I As&mt Corpadon Cousel 

Case 1:07-cv-03436-LTS Document 18 Filed 03/28/2008 Page 2 of 2
#### STATE v. MURRELL

No. 98 PC.

Case below: 54 N.C. App. 342.

Petition by Attorney General for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 12 January 1982.
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 1 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 2 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 3 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 4 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 5 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 6 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 7 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 8 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 9 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 10 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 11 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 12 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 13 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 14 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 15 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 16 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 17 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 18 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 19 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 20 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 21 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 22 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 23 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 24 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 25 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 26 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 27 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 28 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 29 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 30 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 31 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 32 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 33 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 34 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 35 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 36 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 37 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 38 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 39 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 40 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 41 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 20-2 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 42 of 42
Case 1:07-cv-02262-WHP Document 7 Filed 04/30/2007 Page 1 of 1
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2142 

To allow remote participation on review panels under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 17, 2019 

Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mrs. SHAHEEN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To allow remote participation on review panels under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Helping Entrepreneurs 

5 Affects Regulatory Decisions Act of 2019’’ or the 

6 ‘‘HEARD Act of 2019’’. 

7 SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY 

8 ACT. 

9 Section 609(b) of title 5, United States Code, is 

10 amended— 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2142 IS

1 (1) in paragraph (3), by inserting ‘‘, through an 

2 in-person meeting or by electronic participation,’’ 

3 after ‘‘panel’’; 

4 (2) in paragraph (5), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the 

5 end; 

6 (3) in paragraph (6), by striking the period at 

7 the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

8 (4) by adding at the end the following: 

9 ‘‘(7) a covered agency shall take reasonable 

10 steps to ensure that representatives of small entities 

11 may participate electronically in a review panel con12 vened under this subsection.’’. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1215
ASSEGID ASSEFA NADEW, Petitioner, versus JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A75-374-330) Submitted: September 30, 2003 Decided: October 7, 2003 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mikre-Michael Ayele, Arlington, Virginia, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, David V. Bernal, Assistant Director, Jennifer Paisner, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Assegid Assefa Nadew, a native and citizen of Ethiopia, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”). The order, entered on January 23, 2003, denied Nadew’s motion to reconsider the Board’s June 24, 2002 order, affirming without opinion, the immigration judge’s order denying his applications for asylum and withholding of removal. Because Nadew did not raise the denial of the motion for reconsideration in his brief, we deem this issue abandoned. See Edwards v. City of Goldsboro , 178 F.3d 231, 241 (4th Cir. 1999). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. 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.

PETITION DENIED
# C_2011082EN.01000401.xml

| 16.3.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 82/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.3.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 82/4

---

Notice of the expiry of certain anti-dumping measures

2011/C 82/04

Further to the publication of a notice of impending expiry (1) following which no request for a review was lodged, the Commission gives notice that the anti-dumping measure mentioned below will shortly expire.

1

Since in this case the number of Union producers affected by potential dumping is very high and many of them are SMEs, the Commission considered appropriate to monitor for one year the evolution of the imports of footwear with uppers of leather originating in the People's Republic of China and Vietnam and of imports of footwear with uppers of leather consigned from Macao SAR, with a view to facilitate swift appropriate action should the situation so require.

This notice is published in accordance with Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 (2) on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community.

2

| Product | Country(ies) of origin or exportation | Measures | Reference | Date of expiry |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Footwear with uppers of leather | People's Republic of China
  Vietnam | Anti-dumping duty | Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1294/2009 (OJ L 352, 30.12.2009, p. 1) as extended to imports consigned from the Macao SAR, whether declared as originating in the Macao SAR or not, by Regulation (EC) No 388/2008 (OJ L 117, 1.5.2008, p. 1). | 31.3.2011 (3) |

Product

Country(ies) of origin or exportation

Measures

Reference

Date of expiry

Footwear with uppers of leather

People's Republic of China

Vietnam

Anti-dumping duty

Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1294/2009 (OJ L 352, 30.12.2009, p. 1) as extended to imports consigned from the Macao SAR, whether declared as originating in the Macao SAR or not, by Regulation (EC) No 388/2008 (OJ L 117, 1.5.2008, p. 1).

31.3.2011 (3)

3

---

(1)  OJ C 345, 18.12.2010, p. 12.

1

(2)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.

2

(3)  It should be noted that the date of expiry mentioned in the Notice of impending expiry should have read 31.3.2011.

3

---
EXHIBIT 15.2
 BARCLAYCARD FUNDING PLCS OFFICERS CERTIFICATE
 BARCLAYCARD FUNDING PLC
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
  1.
    
    I am a duly appointed, qualified and acting Director of the MTN Issuer;2.
    
    I am duly authorized to execute and deliver this Officers Certificate on behalf of the MTN Issuer; and3.
    
    To the best of my knowledge, the MTN Issuer has complied with all conditions and covenants under the
Relevant Documents for the issue of the Investor Certificate for the period between January 1, 2007
and December 31, 2007.
  th
 By:
    /s/ Timothy George JungName:
    Timothy George JungTitle:
    Director -30-
#### STATE v. STALLINGS

No. 38P82.

Case below: 55 N.C. App. 268.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 30 March 1982. Motion of Attorney General to dismiss appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 30 March 1982.
Case 1:06-cv-15013-AKH Document 5 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 23.1


                          Independent Auditors' Consent

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No.
333-55218 and No. 333-45560 of Brek Energy Corporation (formerly First Ecom.com,
Inc.) on Form S-3 and on Form S-8, respectively, of our report dated March 20,
2002, except for note 20(f), as to which the date is April 8, 2002, appearing in
the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Brek Energy Corporation for the year ended
December 31, 2001.

Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu
Hong Kong
April 8, 2002
#### STATE v. GARNER

No. 116 PC.

Case below: 34 N.C. App. 498.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 24 January 1978.
| 1.   | the      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of      the Exchange Act; and |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | the      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of CNOOC      Limited. |
|----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                         |                |
|--------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------|
| By:                                                          | /s/      Chengyu Fu |   |
| Name:      Chengyu Fu                                        |                |
| Title:        Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |                |

|                                                                                         |              |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------|
| By:                                                                                          | /s/      Hua Yang |   |
| Name:       Hua Yang                                                                    |              |
| Title:         Executive Director, President and Chief Financial      Officer |              |

----
# STATEOFLOUISIANA

COURTOFAPPEAL,FIRSTCIRCUIT
STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS MICHAEL D. TURNER NO. 

### 2022 KW 0414 

### JULY 5, 2022
In Re: Michael D. Turner, 

### applying for supervisory writs, 19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, No. 

### 12- 93-0388.
BEFORE: McCLENDON, WELCH, AND HESTER, JJ.

WRIT GRANTED. The 

### district court 

### is ordered to act on relator' s " Motion to Lift 

### Stay," 

## filed February 18, 2022, on or 

### before August 

### 2, 

### 2022. A 

### copy of the 

### district court' s action 

### shall be filed in this court on or before August 10, 2022. PMc JEW CHH

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT 

# C" < 7"" -L

# j DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT



### FOR THE COURT
#### STATE v. SNIPES

No. 101 PC.

Case below: 54 N.C. App. 192.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 12 January 1982.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

NETWORK TALLAHASSEE, INC., etc.,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 4:10cv38-RH/WCS

EMBARQ CORPORATION et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The joint motion for voluntary dismissal of the claims against specified

defendants, ECF No 78, is GRANTED. 

2. All claims against these defendants are dismissed without prejudice:

• Carolina Telephone And Telegraph Co., LLC, d/b/a Embarq

• Central Telephone Co., d/b/a Embarq

• Central Telephone Co. of Texas, d/b/a Embarq

• United Telephone Co. of Texas, Inc., d/b/a Embarq

• Central Telephone Co. of Virginia d/b/a Embarq

Case 4:10-cv-00038-RH-WCS Document 86 Filed 10/19/10 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No: 4:10cv38-RH/WCS

• United Telephone Southeast Inc., d/b/a Embarq

• Embarq Minnesota, Inc.

• Embarq Missouri, Inc.

• The United Telephone Co. of Pennsylvania, LLC, d/b/a Embarq

• United Telephone Co. of Eastern Kansas d/b/a Embarq

• United Telephone Co. of Kansas, d/b/a Embarq

• United Telephone Co of South Central Kansas, d/b/a Embarq

• United Telephone Co. of the Carolinas LLC, d/b/a Embarq

• United Telephone Co. of Indiana, Inc., d/b/a Embarq

• United Telephone Co. of New Jersey, Inc., d/b/a Embarq

• United Telephone Co. of Ohio, d/b/a Embarq

• United Telephone Co. of the Northwest, d/b/a Embarq

• United Telephone Co. of the West, d/b/a Embarq

3. I do not direct the entry of judgment under Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 54(b). 

4. The claims against the other defendants remain pending.

SO ORDERED on October 19, 2010.

s/Robert L. Hinkle 

United States District Judge

Case 4:10-cv-00038-RH-WCS Document 86 Filed 10/19/10 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:06-cv-15080-AKH Document 4 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
#### HOMANICH v. MILLER

No. 82 PC.

Case below: 28 N.C. App. 451.

Petition for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 6 April 1976.
#### HOUSING, INC. v. WEAVER

No. 326 PC.

Case below: 52 N.C. App. 662.

Petition by plaintiffs for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 3 November 1981.
The State of TexasAppellee/s



# Fourth Court of **Appeals**

**San Antonio, Texas**

March 6, 2014

N o. 04

- 13

- 00844

- CR

Mathew Ray GOMEZ

, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the County Court At Law No 2, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. CCL

- 12

- 1963

Honorable Frank Follis, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

The Court Reporter ’ s Notification of Late Record is hereby GRANTED. The reporter ’ s

record is due April 18, 2014.

_________________________________ Marialyn Barnard, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 6th day of March, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Ali Jenab, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of VA Software Corporation on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of VA Software Corporation.  

| Date:  October 16, 2006 | By:         | /s/ ALI JENAB                           |
|------------------------------|-------------|-----------------------------------------|
|                         |        |                                         |
|                         | Name:  | Ali Jenab                               |
|                         | Title:      | Chief Executive   Officer and President |
# EXHIBIT 23.1

# CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

VA Software Corporation
  Fremont,  California

We hereby consent to the incorporation
                                by reference in the Registration Statements on
                          Form S-8 (Nos. 333-92409; 333-92391; 333-38768;
          333-38766; 333-38874; 333-59096; 333-71944; 333-101965; and 333-116778)
                            of our report dated August 20, 2004, except for the
                          second paragraph of Note 5, as to
          which the date is September 24, 2004, relating to the consolidated
                        financial statements and schedule of VA Software Corporation
                        appearing in this
 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2004.

San Jose, California
  October 14, 2004
#### STATE v. MASON

No. 43 PC.

Case below: 24 N.C. App. 568.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 2 April 1975.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                               5
<MULTIPLIER>                        1,000
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                JAN-1-1997
<PERIOD-END>                  MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 3-MOS
<CASH>                                136
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                      39,585
<ALLOWANCES>                        2,298
<INVENTORY>                        85,037
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  124,355
<PP&E>                            237,186
<DEPRECIATION>                    123,566
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    317,077
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              68,860
<BONDS>                            95,614
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                            83
<COMMON>                               41
<OTHER-SE>                         17,162
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      317,077
<SALES>                            80,846
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                   80,846
<CGS>                              73,870
<TOTAL-COSTS>                      74,825
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    3,359
<LOSS-PROVISION>                       19
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                  2,427
<INCOME-PRETAX>                       235
<INCOME-TAX>                          100
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                   135
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                          135
<EPS-PRIMARY>                        0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                        0.01

</TABLE>
#### STATE v. HUNT

No. 76 PC.

Case below: 28 N.C. App. 591.

Petition for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 6 April 1976.