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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains financial information extracted from the Consolidated
Balance Sheet as of June 30, 1999 and the Consolidated Statement of
Operations for the six month period ended June 30, 1999 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           7,769
<SECURITIES>                                    30,358
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                39,251
<PP&E>                                           8,245
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (5,229)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  42,798
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,926
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       109,410
<OTHER-SE>                                    (79,659)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    42,798
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,033
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 478
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (10,418)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (10,418)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (10,418)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.90)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.90)




</TABLE>
No. 87-852.

#### Union Oil Company of California *v.*Sierra Club.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of *Gwaltney of Smithfield, Ltd.*v. *Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Inc.,*484 U. S. 49 (1987).
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18
- 6395

JOHN THOMAS LEWIS , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. MICHAEL WADE, Sheriff, Henrico County Sheriff ’ s Department; LIEUTENANT ROBINSON, Lieutenant, Henrico County Sheriff ’ s Department; DEPUTY AMOAH, Deputy, Henrico County Sheriff ’ s Department , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria

. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. ( 1:16

- cv
- 00835

- CMH

- TCB )

Submitted : September 28, 2018 Decided: October 12, 2018

Before WYNN and FLOYD , Circuit Judges , and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
John Thomas Lewis, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
John Thomas Lewis appeals the district court’s order granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Lewis v. Wade , No. 1:16

- cv
- 00835

- CMH

- TCB (E.D. Va. Mar. 20, 2018) . We dispense with oral argument b ecause the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-6359

MARK ALLEN WYNN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER MUNDO; NORTH CAROLINA

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; ALBEMARLE

CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION; CORRECTIONAL

OFFICER HONBARRIER; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER

BRUTON; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER SMITH;

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER CAVINESS; CORRECTIONAL

OFFICER EUDY; SERGEANT CHESTNUT; SERGEANT

PORTER; LIEUTENANT FLETCHER,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District to North Carolina, at Greensboro. Frank W. Bullock, Jr.,

District Judge. (CA-04-365-FWB)

Submitted: August 25, 2005 Decided: September 1, 2005

Before TRAXLER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mark Allen Wynn, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth F. Parsons, NORTH

CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for

Appellees

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Mark Allen Wynn appeals the district court’s order

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm

for the reasons stated by the district court. See Wynn v.

Correctional Officer Mundo, No. CA-04-365-FWB (M.D.N.C. Feb. 7,

2005). 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. Wynn’s

motion for appointment of counsel is denied.

AFFIRMED
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Charles FRANKLIN.

No. 2011-KK-2109.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 16, 2011.

In re Franklin, Charles; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. D, No. 496-305; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2011-K-1285.

Denied.
Exhibit 31.3



Certification of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(a)
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,

as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.



I, Nicholas J. DeIuliis, certify that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of CNX Midstream Partners LP; and
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 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.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Dated: April 26, 2019 |  | /s/ Nicholas J. DeIuliis                                               
|--------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|                      |  | Nicholas J. DeIuliis                                                   
|                      |  | Chief Executive Officer                                                
|                      |  |                                                                        
|                      |  | CNX Midstream GP LLC (the general partner of CNX Midstream Partners LP)
|                      |  | (Principal Executive Officer)
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

ROBERT MYER TONEY, DOC #Y45509, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-4797

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

___________________________________)

Opinion filed October 25, 2019.

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P.

9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Lee 

County; Margaret O. Steinbeck, Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

SILBERMAN, MORRIS, and SMITH, JJ., Concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 728 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 728

  To prohibit the Secretary of the Interior from issuing oil and gas 
leases on portions of the Outer Continental Shelf located off the coast 
                             of New Jersey.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 30, 2017

Mr. LoBiondo (for himself, Mr. Frelinghuysen, Mr. Lance, and Mr. Smith 
of New Jersey) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To prohibit the Secretary of the Interior from issuing oil and gas 
leases on portions of the Outer Continental Shelf located off the coast 
                             of New Jersey.

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

SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON OIL AND GAS LEASING OFF THE COAST OF NEW 
              JERSEY.

    (a) Prohibition.--The Secretary of the Interior shall not issue a 
lease, permit, or license for the exploration for or extraction of oil 
or gas on or from submerged lands described in subsection (b).
    (b) Lands Described.--The submerged lands with respect to which 
subsection (a) applies are all submerged lands seaward from the 
landward boundary of the Outer Continental Shelf that lie within 125 
miles of any point of the coastline of the State of New Jersey.
                                 <all>
```
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Terrance Wayne LEWIS.

No. 2010-KK-2814.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 23, 2010.

In re Lewis, Terrance Wayne; -Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson Davis, 31st Judicial District Court Div. 0, No. CR-36-10; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KW 10-01288.

Denied.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

January 11, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

135120 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. ________________________________________ Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

IN RE AKLIAH MARSHALL and MYNYA ADEA 

TAWANA JEANETTE MARSHALL, Minors. 

________________________________________ 

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,

Petitioner-Appellee, 

v SC: 135120 

 COA: 274736

 Oakland CC

JADA LATRICE THOMPSON,

Respondent-Appellant. 

 Family Division: 04-697833-NA 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 27, 2007 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

s0108 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

January 11, 2008 

Clerk
#### DAVENPORT & BROADHURST *v.*WOOD *et al.*

Upon an issue whether a voluntary conveyance by a husband to his wife was made by an insolvent debtor to hinder, delay, and defraud the plaintiffs, his creditors, *held,*that it was error to grant a nonsuit.

No. 6129.

May 17, 1928.

Equitable petition. Before Judge Littlejohn. Sumter superior court. May 24, 1927.

*366*Ellis, Webb & Ellis,*for plaintiffs.

*W. P. Wallis*and *Hollis Fort,*for defendants.

Hill, J.

“An insolvent person can not make a valid gift to the injury of his existing creditors.” Civil Code (1910), § 4149. “The following acts by debtors shall be fraudulent in law against creditors and others, and as to them null and void, viz.: . . Every voluntary deed or conveyance, not for a valuable consideration, made by a debtor insolvent at the time of such conveyance.” § 3224. '“When a transaction between husband and wife is attacked for fraud by the creditors of either, the onus is on the husband and wife to show that the transaction was fair.” § 3011.

In 1917 a husband acquired described realty. In 1918 he incurred an indebtedness upon several promissory notes, the last of which fell due in 1922. Shortly before maturity of the last note he executed a voluntary deed of conveyance to his wife and children, subject to an outstanding loan for a small amount. In 1924 the creditor obtained judgment upon the notes, and the sheriff made a return of nulla bona upon the execution issued upon the judgment. Shortly thereafter the creditor instituted an equitable action against the grantees, to cancel the deed from C. L. Wood to his wife, Elsie M. Wood, on the ground that it was void as against the plaintiffs: (a) because it was a voluntary conveyance made while the husband was insolvent; and (b) because it was made to hinder, delay, and defraud the plaintiffs in the collection of their debt. The answer of the defendant denied the allegations as to the insolvency of the husband at the time of the conveyance, and as to the conveyance having been made to hinder and delay the collection of the debt. On the trial the plaintiff introduced the notes, the suit and judgment against the defendant, the deed to Wood, the deed from Wood to his wife, and the ñ. fa. against Wood, with the entry of nulla bona by the sheriff. The court granted a nonsuit upon motion of the defendant. The exception is to that judgment. Under application of the principles stated above, the issues made by the pleadings should have been submitted to the jury, and the grant of a nonsuit was erroneous. *Primrose*v. *Browning,*56 *Ga.*369 (3); *Cothran*v. *Forsyth,*68 *Ga.*560 (4); *Garner*v. *State Bank,*150 *Ga.*6 (4) (102 S. E. 442); *Duncan*v. *Freeman,*152 *Ga.*332 (110 S. E. 5), and cit.

*Judgment reversed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
Exhibit 32.2

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANTTOSECTION 906**

**OFTHESARBANES-OXLEYACT**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Highwoods Properties, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Terry L. Stevens, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 Company. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| /s/ TERRYL.STEVENS                                                |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Terry L. StevensSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |   |
| August 4, 2009                                          |   |

 

 

65
- OFFICEOFTHEATTOUNEYGENERALOFTEXAS 

AUSTIN 

GROVER’SEUERS 

ATrORNEI GENERA‘ 

Uonomble Otto:?. loore 

County Attzmey 

ColorEao County 

Colusalus, "iexas :, 

Dear.l.ir. Lf3ore: ' 

Opinion Pie. O-7186 

Court,, be ke$? 

Court of Laveca Cowty, TCXFIS, is 

bzly of.such Zistriot : 

the mne;:ement en& control of 

the Z:istrict shall be aaministcrea. end It is 

powered to do my ma all thln,;s neoezsary to 

the alns ofid pur2opz3 of this :%ct." 

hcrcbp eacarry out 

Article 1, soctlon 12, H. B. 362, s.u:?ra, provides as 

ro11oi;s: 

."The County Judge, County Som3cslonere, 

and Colleator of tame, the County Trentiurer, 

: ,’ 

the &es& 

and the' 
Hod. Otto P. ~&?oore - Page 2 

~ileysltory are outhorihed to, and shall be required tot 

pezbfom ~11 duties in connection with the iGood ?ontrol 

District required of thea by law in connection with 

nfftcial~.satters for Iavaca County,.aEd the County Auditor shall be the Auditor for the Davaoa County Flood 

,’ Control District .* 

Artiqle 2349, Vernon*s Annotetefi Civil Statutes, provj.d.es 

El5 .fOllOW: 

“The Court shall require the county clerk’to, keen 

suitable books in which shall be recorded the oroaeed?cms 

of .-eaoh term of the ,oourt; which record shall be read hia 

signed efter eaoh term by the oounty Judge, or the member 

presiding aod attested by the clerk. The clerk shsll also 

reoord all authorized pmoeedlng of the court between 

tenus; and suoh record stx?ll be read and signed on the 

llret day, of the tern next aftem such prooeediqs occurred.* 

‘Article 2345, V.A.O.S,., provides as follows: . . 

“The county clerk shall be ix-officio clerk of the 

‘Comfssioaera court; end he shall attend upon each toti 

of s~eic? oormlssioners court; preserve and kee;, all books* 

papox%, records and effeots belonginS thereto, issue all 

notfces, writs and process neoessary for the proper excoution or the povjers and duties of the comiaaionors court, 

;I& perform all suoh other duties as my be prescribed by 3, 

. 

The v:ord’*prooeedings I1 in’krtiole 23.49 SUD.TC 5s~ used in 

its ordinary some and mans the offloial funotioasLof’the court. 

Such functions are not limited to any particular olesc of functions, 

hut on the contrary they include every official act docc by the aenhers of the oourt in the course of their sessions.~ ‘, 

We, therefore, ahsvper your questSoh nuslber one In -the aegotin. 

Be answer your question- number two $n the affimative~ 

Tour question nunbar three cannot be answered properly in 

the arfimatlve or ne(;ative. However, no &vise y3u thet, in viw.9 

of the statute6 cited, supr- FI, and the wozelny of Article 1, 2eotion 

1, quoted in part trox IT. D. 362, ou?ra, it is- the duty of the COUnty 

Clerk to keep officially and record all of the proceedings OS: *he 
. Bon, Ot.to P. Koore - Page 3 7 

Colorado County Flood Contml Dlotrict. 

T Trusting, that we have fully answere?I your inquiries, 

vie are -. 

Very truly you23 

JI.kdjn 

, . 

. 

h .- 

.
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7159 

To clarify the rights of not-for-profit religious employers under the National 

Labor Relations Act. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 16, 2018 

Mr. FRANCIS ROONEY of Florida (for himself and Mr. ROKITA) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the 

Workforce 

A BILL 

To clarify the rights of not-for-profit religious employers 

under the National Labor Relations Act. 

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 ‘‘Freedom For Religious 

5 Communities Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EXEMPTION FOR NOT-FOR-PROFIT RELIGIOUS OR7 GANIZATIONS. 

8 Section 2 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 

9 U.S.C. 152) is amended— 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7159 IH

1 (1) in paragraph (2), by inserting ‘‘or any not2 for-profit religious organization,’’ after ‘‘subdivision 

3 thereof,’’; and 

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

5 ‘‘(15) The term ‘not-for-profit religious organi6 zation’ means— 

7 ‘‘(A) any church, religious corporation, ec8 clesiastical corporation, corporation sole, non9 profit corporation, unincorporated association, 

10 foundation, or other entity that is organized for 

11 religious purposes or carries out religious activi12 ties and is exempt under section 501(c)(3) of 

13 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; or 

14 ‘‘(B) any not-for-profit entity affiliated 

15 with, or owned, operated, or controlled, directly 

16 or indirectly, by a recognized religious organiza17 tion, or with an entity, membership of which is 

18 determined, at least in part, with reference to 

19 religion, and that is exempt under section 

20 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.’’. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
#### Kathryn BREND, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. David BREND, Appellee/Cross-Appellant.

No. 2D09-4268.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 1, 2011.

Allison M. Perry of Law Office of Allison M. Perry, P.A., Tampa, for Appellant-Cross Appellee.

Michelle A. Ralat and Michael L. Lundy of Older, Lundy & Weisman, Attorneys at Law, Tampa, for Appellee/Cross-Appel-lant.

*924WHATLEY, Judge.

Kathryn Brend (the Wife) appeals and David Brend (the Husband) cross-appeals the final judgment of dissolution of marriage. We affirm all issues except for the Wife’s claim regarding child support obligations. The parties have one child who is now eight years of age. The Husband was ordered to pay the Wife $330.99 per month in child support. However, the trial court erroneously computed this amount based on the parties’ gross incomes, rather than their net incomes. *See*§ 61.30(9), Fla. Stat. (2009); *see also Finney v. Finney,*995 So.2d 579 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). The Husband agrees that remand is appropriate. Based on the recalculation of child support, the trial court will need to review the uncovered medical and dental expenses for the minor child, which the trial court ordered be divided equally between the parties. The trial court will also need to determine the status of the tax deduction for the minor child for Internal Revenue Service purposes.

Accordingly, we affirm the final judgment of dissolution but reverse the award of child support and remand with directions consistent with this opinion.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

NORTHCUTT and WALLACE, JJ., Concur.