alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                       2,465,148
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               22,476,420
<ALLOWANCES>                                   185,000
<INVENTORY>                                 18,805,100
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            44,964,277
<PP&E>                                      15,725,809
<DEPRECIATION>                               8,313,192
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              52,376,894
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       12,294,901
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       497,455
<OTHER-SE>                                  38,812,538
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                52,376,894
<SALES>                                     60,519,296
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            60,541,362
<CGS>                                       35,998,692
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               54,285,099
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              25,699
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              6,230,564
<INCOME-TAX>                                 2,554,500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          3,676,064
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,676,064
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.71
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.71
        

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

No. 74 PC.

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

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM LESCARDEN
INC'S AUGUST 31, 1998 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL LEGENDS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1998
<CASH>                                         104,849
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     33,834
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               138,683
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 141,763
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          561,893
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        16,611
<OTHER-SE>                                   (436,741)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   141,763
<SALES>                                            464
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   464
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  116,155
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (115,691)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (115,691)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (115,691)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.01)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-30-1997
<CASH>                                           2,926
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,435
<ALLOWANCES>                                       419
<INVENTORY>                                     11,325
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                19,815
<PP&E>                                          18,469
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,238
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  30,572
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,356
<BONDS>                                          1,150
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            41
<OTHER-SE>                                      19,638
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    30,572
<SALES>                                          7,540
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 7,540
<CGS>                                            7,252
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    7,252
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,344
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    25
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  29
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,469)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (477)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (992)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (992)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .24
        

</TABLE>
Case 1:07-cv-03211-PKC Document 8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000320446
<NAME> ALIANT COMMUNICATIONS INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           24209
<SECURITIES>                                      5800
<RECEIVABLES>                                    46546
<ALLOWANCES>                                      1438
<INVENTORY>                                      10326 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 85841
<PP&E>                                          573068
<DEPRECIATION>                                  321411
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  530753
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            73117
<BONDS>                                          97000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                       4499
<COMMON>                                          9312
<OTHER-SE>                                      286005
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    530753
<SALES>                                          13718
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                212390
<CGS>                                            11403
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   146013
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  1183
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   450
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                6559
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  65194
<INCOME-TAX>                                     26033
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              39161
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     38992
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    1.075
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    1.075 
<PAGE>
        

</TABLE>
# Gold Star Mother's Day, 2007

The gift of liberty is secured by heroes who have answered the call to serve when America needed them most. On Gold Star Mother's Day, we honor the mothers of the service men and women who have given their lives in the defense of our great Nation. 

America's Gold Star Mothers are remarkable patriots who serve their communities by demonstrating good citizenship, providing support and services to our troops and veterans, and helping comfort the families whose loved ones have made the ultimate sacrifice. Their sense of duty and deep devotion to our country inspire our Nation, and we thank them for their compassion, determination, and strength. Though they carry a great burden of grief, these courageous mothers help ensure that the legacy of our fallen heroes will be forever remembered. On this day, we offer our deep gratitude and respect to our Nation's Gold Star Mothers; we honor the sons and daughters who died while wearing the uniform of the United States; and we pray for God's blessings on them, their mothers, and their families. 

The Congress, by Senate Joint Resolution 115 of June 23, 1936 (49 Stat. 1895 as amended), has designated the last Sunday in September as “Gold Star Mother's Day” and has authorized and requested the President to issue a proclamation in its observance. 

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim Sunday, September 30, 2007, as Gold Star Mother's Day. I call upon all Government officials to display the flag of the United States over Government buildings on this solemn day. I also encourage the American people to display the flag and hold appropriate ceremonies as a public expression of our Nation's sympathy and respect for our Gold Star Mothers. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-first day of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand seven, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-second. 

[FR Doc. 07-4768

Billing code 3195-01-P
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas** MEMORANDUM OPINION
N o. 04

- 13

- 00093

- CV Arthur RAKOWITZ , Appellant

v. Bexar County BEXAR COUNTY SHERIFF S DEPT. , Appellee
From the 166th Judicial District Court , Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2013

- CI

- 01314 Honorable Barbara Hanson Nellermoe , Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Marialyn Barnard, Justice Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Delivered and Filed: June 5, 2013
DIS MISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION Appellant is appealing the trial court’s denial of his application for a temporary restraining order based on a lack of jurisdiction. A ppellate courts have jurisdiction over final judgments and interlocutory orders the Legislature deems appealable by statute. Lehmann v. Har

- Con Corp. , 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001); Ruiz v. Ruiz , 946 S.W.2d 123, 124 (Tex. App.

— El Paso 1997, no pet.). A party may appeal from an interlocutory order that grants or denies a temporary injunction or overrules a motion to dissolve a tempora ry injunction. See T EX
. C IV
. P RAC
. & R EM
. C ODE A NN
. § 51.014(a)(4) (West Supp. 2012). However, a temporary04

- 13

- 00093

- CV

- 2

- restraining order is generally not an appealable order. In re Tex. Natural Res. Conservation
Com m’ n , 85 S.W.3d 201, 205 (Tex. 2002) (orig. proceed ing); see also In re Newton , 146 S.W.3d 648, 652

- 53 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding)

. Therefore, b ecause it appear ed we lack jurisdiction over this appeal, we ordered appellant to show cause in writing why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jur isdiction. Appellant did not respond; therefore, this appeal is dismiss ed for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM
Case 3:10-cr-00043-MCR-CJK   Document 420   Filed 06/16/11   Page 1 of 8

Case 3:10-cr-00043-MCR-CJK   Document 420   Filed 06/16/11   Page 2 of 8

Case 3:10-cr-00043-MCR-CJK   Document 420   Filed 06/16/11   Page 3 of 8

Case 3:10-cr-00043-MCR-CJK   Document 420   Filed 06/16/11   Page 4 of 8

Case 3:10-cr-00043-MCR-CJK   Document 420   Filed 06/16/11   Page 5 of 8

Case 3:10-cr-00043-MCR-CJK   Document 420   Filed 06/16/11   Page 6 of 8

Case 3:10-cr-00043-MCR-CJK   Document 420   Filed 06/16/11   Page 7 of 8

Case 3:10-cr-00043-MCR-CJK   Document 420   Filed 06/16/11   Page 8 of 8
#### ETHEL DOVE, Administratrix of the Estate of ADOLPH DOVE, Deceased v. ELISHA (HOTFOOT) LAWSON, Deceased, and E. R. WOOTEN, ADMINISTRATOR of the Estate of ELISHA (HOTFOOT) LAWSON.

(Filed 25 March 1964.)

Appeal by plaintiff from *Cowper, J.,*November Civil Session 1963 of Lenoie.

This is an action to recover for the wrongful death of plaintiff’s intestate. The accident which resulted in the death of plaintiff’s intestate occurred on 11 February 1955, about 1:00 p.m., on North Carolina Highway 11, approximately 300 feet south of Stonington Creek Bridge.

At the close of plaintiff’s evidence the defendant moved for judgment as of nonsuit. The motion was allowed and the action dismissed. The plaintiff appeals, assigning error.

*H.. E. Beech, Fred Harrison, D. D. Pollock for plaintiff appellant.*

*Whitaker & Jeffress, Thomas H. Morris for defendant appellee.*

Per Curiam.

A careful review of the evidence adduced in the trial below, when considered in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, *517as it must be on a motion for judgment as of nonsuit, leads us to the conclusion that it is sufficient to carry the case to the jury.

Therefore, the ruling of the court below, sustaining defendant’s motion for judgment as of nonsuit, is

Reversed.
#### INVESTORS, INC. v. BERRY

No. 117 PC.

Case below: 32 N.C. App. 642.

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 13 June 1977.
#### Willam M. Peters, plaintiff in error, *vs.*J. J. Bradford, sheriff, *et al.,*defendants in error.

(By two judges.) — A non-resident plaintiff *in fi. fa.,*whose judgment was obtained on a debt, contracted prior to June, 1865, may claim money brought into Court by junior judgments without attaching the affidavit of payment of taxes required by the Act of 1870, when his non-residence appears by affidavit or other proof. 5th March, 1872.

Relief Act of 1870. Before Judge Johnson. Muscogee Superior Court. May Term, 1872.

Bradford, sheriff, had in hand a fund for distribution among the judgment creditors of Winter. Peters had the oldest judgment against Winter, and asked that it be first paid, because it was founded upon a contract made before June, 1865; and Peters had filed no affidavit as to payment of taxes on the claim, as required by the Relief Act of 1870. The Court refused to let him be paid, and ordered the sheriff to pay the junior judgments, notwithstanding, Peters offered to prove that, since the creation of the debt, he had never resided in Georgia. This ruling is assigned as error.

L. T. Downing, for plaintiff in error.

H. L. Benning, for defendants.

Montgomery, Judge.

Peters’ execution was founded on a debt created before June, 1865. The executions of other creditors, claiming the funds in the hands of the sheriff, were founded on debts created since June, 1865. Peters had paid no taxes, but offered to prove his non-residence, in Georgia, since the creation of the debt, and asked an order directing the sheriff to satisfy first his execution, which was the oldest. The Court required him to prove payment of taxes on his debt, and, on his failure to comply, refused his order, and passed one directing the sheriff to pay the money over to the junior executions. Peters excepted. *94The case is controlled by the decision of this Court in *Williams vs. Mandell,*delivered September 26th, 1871, after Judge Johnson decided this case. The plaintiff (Peters) should have been allowed to prove his non-residence. The proof made, no taxes were due, and his execution was entitled to priority, so far as the objection made is concerned.

Judgment reversed.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

January 24, 2018

No. 04

- 17

- 00379

- CV

I N RE TEXAS REAL ESTATE COMMISSION

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

ORDER

On June 12, 2017, relator Texas Real Estate Commission filed a petition for writ of mandamus. The real party in interest Evan Jacobson filed a response. After reviewing the petition and response, we have determined that relator is entitled to the relief requested. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is CONDITIONALLY GRANTED. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.8(c).

Within fifteen days from the date of this order, the Honorable Stephani A. Walsh is ORDERED to: (1) vacate the Order Granting Bill of Revie w and Injunctive Relief; and (2) reinstate the July 31, 2013 default judgment. The writ will issue only if we are notified that Judge Walsh has not complied with this order.

It is so ORDERED on January 24, 2018

.

_____________________________ Sandee B ryan Marion, Chief Justice

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

court on this 24th day of January, 2018

.

_____________________________ Keith E. Hottle, Clerk of Court

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2016

- CI

- 03723, styled Evan Jacobson v. Ben Luong , pending in the 45th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Stephani A. Walsh presiding.
# C_2011140EN.01002301.xml

| 11.5.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 140/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.5.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 140/23

---

Notice for the attention of the persons to which restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/273/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria apply

2011/C 140/14

COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

The following information is brought to the attention of the persons that appear in Annex II to Council Decision 2011/273/CFSP (1) and in Annex II to Council Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 (2) concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria.

1

2

The Council of the European Union has decided that the persons that appear in the above-mentioned Annexes should be included in the list of persons subject to restrictive measures provided for in Decision 2011/273/CFSP and to Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria.

The attention of the persons concerned is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated in the web-sites in Annex III to Regulation (EU) No 442/2011, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Article 6 of the Regulation).

The persons concerned may submit a request to the Council, together with supporting documentation, that the decision to include them on the above-mentioned list should be reconsidered, to the following address:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| TEFS Coordination |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

TEFS Coordination

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

The attention of the persons concerned is also drawn to the possibility of challenging the Council's Decision before the General Court of the European Union, in accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 275, 2nd paragraph, and Article 263, 4th and 6th paragraphs, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ L 121, 10.5.2011, p. 11.

1

(2)  OJ L 121, 10.5.2011, p. 1.

2

---
# C_2011221EN.01000601.xml

| 27.7.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 221/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.7.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 221/6

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries

2011/C 221/05

In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:

1

| Date and time of closure | 22.4.2011 |
| --- | --- |
| Duration | 22.4.2011-31.12.2011 |
| Member State | Spain |
| Stock or Group of stocks | BSF/56712- |
| Species | Black scabbardfish (Aphanopus carbo) |
| Zone | EU and international waters of V, VI, VII and XII |
| Type(s) of fishing vessels | — |
| Reference number | 477956 |

Date and time of closure

22.4.2011

Duration

22.4.2011-31.12.2011

Member State

Spain

Stock or Group of stocks

BSF/56712-

Species

Black scabbardfish (Aphanopus carbo)

Aphanopus carbo)

Zone

EU and international waters of V, VI, VII and XII

Type(s) of fishing vessels

—

Reference number

477956

Web link to the decision of the Member State:

http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/fishing_rules/tacs/index_en.htm

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

1

---
Case 1:07-cv-03555-BSJ-THK     Document 11      Filed 06/02/2008     Page 1 of 1
# C_2011129EN.01002601.xml

| 30.4.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 129/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.4.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 129/26

---

Corrigendum to information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the common market in application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty (General Block Exemption Regulation)

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 78 of 11 March 2011
  )

Official Journal of the European Union C 78 of 11 March 2011

2011/C 129/13

On page 38, State aid No SA.32308 (11/X):

for:

‘Web link to the full text of the aid measure:

http://www.bundesfinanzministerium.de/nn_53848/DE/BMFStartseite/Aktuelles/AktuelleGesetze/GesetzeVerordnungen/003a,property=publicationFile.pdf’,

read:

‘Web link to the full text of the aid measure:

| | http://www.juris.de/jportal/docs/news_anlage/jpk/fub/mat/bgbl110s1885.pdf
  and |
| --- | --- |

http://www.juris.de/jportal/docs/news_anlage/jpk/fub/mat/bgbl110s1885.pdf

and

| | http://www.bundesanzeiger-verlag.de/old/banz/banzinha/BAnz_63_029.htm’. |
| --- | --- |

http://www.bundesanzeiger-verlag.de/old/banz/banzinha/BAnz_63_029.htm’.

---
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

THE FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION PREMIER
LEAGUE LIMITED, ET AL., on behalf of

themselves and all others similarly situated, Case No.: 07-CV-3582 (LLS)

Plaintiffs,
- against -
YOUTUBE, INC., ET AL.,

Defendants.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Noah Siskind Gitterman, hereby certify that I caused the accompanying Notice of
Motion For Reconsideration and Memorandum in Support of Motion For Reconsideration to be
served by hand delivery and ECF electronic filing on the following counsel for Defendants:

Andrew H. Schapiro, Esq.
MAYER BROWN LLP
1675 Broadway

New York, NY 10019-5820

on November 6, 2009.

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date: November 6, 2009 a La

Noah Siskind Gitterman
Proskauer Rose LLP
1585 Broadway

New York, NY 10036
(212) 969-3000

Attorneys for Lead Plaintiffs, Named Plaintiffs, and
the Prospective Class