alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(No. 74-CC-15

#### Dean Business Equipment Company, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Respondent.

*Opinion filed August 15, 1973.*

Floyd R. Dean, for Claimant.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; William E. Webber, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

*52Per Curiam.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA F OURTH D ISTRICT

PATRICIA TREJO , Appellant,

v.

SCHOOL BOARD OF PALM BEACH COUNTY , Appellee

.

No. 4D 2 2

- 856

[ April 13, 2023 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fif teenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Scott Ryan Kerner , Judge; L.T. Case No. 502018CA015224XXXXMB

- AN

.
Lisa Paige Glass of Glass Law Office, P.A., Boca Raton

, and Isidro M. Garcia of Garcia Law Firm, P.A. , West Palm Beach

, for appellant

.
Sean Fahey and V . Danielle Williams , Office of General Counsel for the School Board of Palm Beach County, West Palm Beach

, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.
Affirmed

.

K LINGENSMITH , C.J., D AMOORGIAN and L EVINE , JJ., concur

.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
(No. 7042

#### Motive Parts Company of America, Inc., Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of Transportation, Respondent.

*Opinion filed April 11, 1973.*

*272Motive Parts Company of America, Inc., Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Saul R. Wexler, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
#### Walter Werner, Respondent, v. Republic Yeast Corporation, Appellant.

Close, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Taylor and Lewis, JJ., concur.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**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 Rubicon Financial Incorporated (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael Sederoff, Chief Financial Officer, of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

|   | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

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

 

 

|   | /s/ Michael Sederoff                    |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Michael Sederoff

Chief Financial Officer

May 15, 2007
## 2001 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit

5-21-2001 

# App el v . H or n

P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al :

D ock e t 99-9003

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al w ork s a t : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w
. v i l l a no v a
. e du/thir dc ir c uit_2001

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o y ou for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit a t V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. I t h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2001 D e c i sion s b y a n a uthor i z e d a dmini s tr a t or of V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. F or mor e infor m a t ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j a min

. C a rl s on@l a

w
. v i l l a no v a
. e du

. 

## R e c omme nde d C it a t ion

" Appe l v . H or n " (2001). 2001 D e cisio n s

. P ape r 109. h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a

w
. v i l l a no v a
. e du/thir dc ir c uit_2001/109

### Filed May 21, 2001

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

No. 99-9003

MARTIN DANIEL APPEL

v.

MARTIN HORN, COMMISSIONER PENNSYLV ANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; JAMES S. PRICE, SUPERINTENDENT OF THE STATE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION AT GREENE AND JOSEPH MAZURKIEWICZ, SUPERINTENDENT OF THE STATE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION AT ROCKVIEW, Appellants
On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (D.C. Civ. No. 97-cv-02809) District Judge: Hon. William H. Yohn, Jr.
Argued October 5, 2000
Before: BECKER, Chief Judge, SLOVITER and GREENBERG, Circuit Judges

ORDER AMENDING OPINION
IT IS ORDERED that the slip opinion in the above ca se, filed May 3, 2001, be amended as follows:
The second sentence of footnote 5 on page 16 should be deleted and the following substituted in its stead:

### However, the District Court declined to r ea ch that

argument when granting Appel's habeas petiti on, and we see no reason to consider it here.

BY THE COURT:

/s/Dolores K. Sloviter
Circuit Judge
DATED: May 21, 2001

A True Copy: Teste:
Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

2
### §§3381, 3382. Repealed. Pub. L. 116–113, title VI, §601, Jan. 29, 2020, 134 Stat. 78

Section 3381, Pub. L. 103–182, title III, §316, Dec. 8, 1993, 107 Stat. 2108; Pub. L. 104–295, §21(b)(3), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3530, related to monitoring of fresh or chilled tomatoes and peppers.

Section 3382, Pub. L. 103–182, title III, §317(a), Dec. 8, 1993, 107 Stat. 2108, required the International Trade Commission to adopt procedures and rules to bring it into conformity with chapter 8 of NAFTA.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective on the date on which the USMCA entered into force (July 1, 2020), see section 601 of Pub. L. 116–113, set out as a note under former section 3301 of this title.
Executive Order 13569

# Amendments to Executive Orders 12824, 12835, 12859, and 13532, Reestablishment Pursuant to Executive Order 13498, and Revocation of Executive Order 13507

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

**Section 1.**Executive Order 12824, of December 7, 1992 (“Establishing the Transportation Distinguished Service Medal”), as amended, is hereby further amended by striking “a member of the Coast Guard” in section 1 and inserting in lieu thereof “any member of the Armed Forces of the United States”.                    

**Sec. 2.**Executive Order 12835 of January 25, 1993 (“Establishment of the National Economic Council”), as amended, is hereby further amended by striking “(o) Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change;” in section 2 and inserting in lieu thereof “(o) Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality;”.                    

**Sec. 3.**Executive Order 12859 of August 16, 1993 (“Establishment of the Domestic Policy Council”), as amended, is hereby further amended by striking “(v) Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change;” in section 2 and inserting in lieu thereof “(v) Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality;”.                    

**Sec. 4.**Executive Order 13532 of February 26, 2010 (“Promoting Excellence, Innovation, and Sustainability at Historically Black Colleges and Universities”), is hereby amended by striking “34 C.F.R. 602.8” in section 4(a) and inserting in lieu thereof “34 C.F.R. 608.2”.                    

**Sec. 5.**                         The President's Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, as set forth under the provisions of Executive Order 13498 of February 5, 2009, is hereby reestablished and shall terminate 2 years from the date of this order unless extended by the President.                    

**Sec. 6.**Executive Order 13507 of April 8, 2009 (“Establishment of the White House Office of Health Reform”), is hereby revoked.                    

**Sec. 7.**                         This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.                    

[FR Doc. 2011-8642

Billing code 3195-W1-P
1... See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 2-08-395-CV

ROYCE HOMES-DALLAS, L.P. APPELLANT

V.

HARMON ROAD/287 PARTNERS, L.P. APPELLEE

----------

FROM THE 96TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

------------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

------------

On October 7, 2008 and October 22, 2008, we notified appellant, in

accordance with rule of appellate procedure 42.3(c), that we would dismiss this

appeal unless the $175 filing fee was paid. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c).

Appellant has not paid the $175 filing fee. See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 12.1(b).
2... See Supreme Court of Tex., Order Regarding Fees Charged in Civil

Cases in the Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeals and Before the Judicial

Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, Misc. Docket No. 07-9138 (Aug. 28, 2007)

(listing fees in courts of appeals).

2

Because appellant has failed to comply with a requirement of the rules of

appellate procedure and the Texas Supreme Court’s order of August 28, 2007,

2

we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f).

Appellant shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.

See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: MCCOY, J.; CAYCE, C.J.; and LIVINGSTON, J.

DELIVERED: November 20, 2008
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY ELEV

 1,198.25

 1,198.25

 1,198.25

 1,198.26

 1,198.25

 1,198.25

 1,198.24

 1,198.23

 1,198.21

 1,198.22

 1,198.22

 1,198.22

 1,198.23

 1,198.23

 1,198.23

 1,198.21

 1,198.20

 1,198.20

 1,198.21

 1,198.22

 1,198.22

 1,198.22

 1,198.20

 1,198.20

 1,198.20

 1,198.21

 1,198.21

 1,198.22

 1,198.21

 1,198.21

 48.33

 48.33

 48.33

 48.35

 48.33

 48.33

 48.32

 48.30

 48.26

 48.28

 48.28

 48.28

 48.30

 48.30

 48.30

 48.26

 48.25

 48.25

 48.26

 48.28

 48.28

 48.28

 48.25

 48.25

 48.25

 48.26

 48.26

 48.28

 48.26

 48.26

STORAGE

+0.02

+0.00

+0.00

+0.02

-0.02

+0.00

-0.02

-0.02

-0.04

+0.02

+0.00

+0.00

+0.02

+0.00

+0.00

-0.04

-0.02

+0.00

+0.02

+0.02

+0.00

+0.00

-0.04

+0.00

+0.00

+0.02

+0.00

+0.02

-0.02

+0.00

CHANGE

42

31

33

48

26

34

23

20

4

35

33

25

37

28

29

0

8

16

29

32

26

26

8

21

21

30

19

34

13

23

INFLOW

 27

 27

 27

 31

 27

 27

 22

 18

 10

 14

 14

 14

 18

 18

 18

 10

 6

 6

 10

 14

 14

 14

 6

 6

 6

 10

 10

 14

 10

 10

SPILL

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

OUTLET

 5

 3

 5

 7

 7

 6

 9

 10

 11

 11

 18

 10

 9

 9

 10

 7

 10

 9

 9

 8

 11

 11

 19

 14

 14

 10

 8

 10

 11

 12

C.F.S.

 .08

 .06

 .08

 .13

 .12

 .10

 .15

 .17

 .19

 .19

 .32

 .18

 .16

 .16

 .18

 .12

 .17

 .16

 .16

 .14

 .19

 .19

 .34

 .24

 .25

 .17

 .14

 .17

 .20

 .21

INCHES

 .13

 .00

 .00

 .29

 .05

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .01

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-ORLAND PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

APRIL 2013 EAST PARK RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: 05/10/2013

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS -.06 754 30 458 293 5.12 .48

ACRE-FEET -60 1,496 60 908 581

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

DATA BASED ON 24 HOUR PERIOD ENDING 0800 AM.

SUMMARY RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

SPILL 908

OUTLET

TOTAL

 60

 968

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 .48

JULY 1, 2012 13.18

 48.32
#### Town of East Haven et al. *v.*City of New Haven et al.

The motion by the plaintiffs to dismiss the defendants’ appeal from the Superior Court in New Haven County is dismissed.

*576
      *Anthony V. DeMayo,*for the appellees (plaintiffs).

*Roger J. Frechette,*assistant corporation counsel, for the appellants (defendants).

Argued November 3

decided November 10, 1970
Editorial Note on Part 25
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 25 appear by T.D. ATF-437, 66 FR 5478, 5479, Jan. 19, 2001.

§ 25.79 Change in bond status. A brewer must file an amended Brewer's Notice, Form 5130.10, if the brewer's bond status changes because either: ( a ) A brewer has not furnished any bond and has become required to furnish a bond as provided under § 25.95(b); or
( b ) A brewer has furnished a bond, has become exempt from bond requirements under § 25.91(e), and chooses to terminate all bond coverage as provided under § 25.106.
[T.D. TTB-146, 82 FR 1127, Jan. 4, 2017]
(No. 77-CC-1012

#### Charles Prucha, Claimant, *v.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed September 18, 1978.*

Polos,C.J.

Claimant, an inmate of Illinois penal institution, has brought this action to recover the value of certain items of personal property of which he was allegedly possessed while incarcerated. Claimant contends that the property in question was lost while in the actual physical possession of the State of Illinois, and that the State is liable as a bailee for the return of that property.

The record establishes that on December 20,1976, Claimant was a prisoner at the Joliet Correctional Center and was in possession of a General Electric radio which he had purchased for $21.97 on August 17, 1976. On that date he was taken to Silver Cross Hospital and prison authorities took possession of his personal property, including the radio. On his return from the hospital his property was returned to him, but the radio was missing.

This Court held in *Doubling v. State, 32 Ill.Ct.Cl.1,*deciding that the State has a duty to excercise reasonable care to safeguard and return an inmate’s property when it takes actual physical possession of such prop*663erty during the course of the transfer of an inmate between penal institutions.

While bailment is ordinarily a voluntary contractual transaction between bailor and bailee, various types of constructive and involuntary bailments have been recognized:

> “A constructive bailment can be created between an owner of the property and one in possession thereof.” 4A Illinois Law and Practice 550, Bailments, citing *Chesterfield Sewer & Water, Inc., v. Citizens Insurance Co. of New Jersey, et al., 57 Ill. App.2d 90, 207 NE2d 84.*

In *Chesterfield,*the Court quotes from *Woodson v. Hare, 244 Ala. 301, 13 So2d. 172, at 174,*as follows:

> “An acutal contract or one implied in fact is not always necessary to create a bailment. Where, otherwise than by mutual contract of bailment, one person has lawfully acquired the possession of personal property of another and holds it under circumstances whereby he ought, upon principles of justice, to keep it safely and restore it or deliver it to the owner, such person and the owner of the property are, by operation of law, generally treated as bailee and bailor under a contract of bailment, irrespective of whether or not there has been any mutual assent, express or implied, to such relationship.”

The loss or damage to bailed property while in the possession of the bailee raises a presumption of negligence which the bailee must rebut by evidence of due care. The effect of this rule is not to shift the ultimate burden of proof from the bailor to the bailee, but simply to shift the burden of proceeding or going forward with the evidence.

At the trial of this cause the State presented no testimony to explain the disapperance of Claimant’s property, and presented no testimony of its freedom from negligence.

It is therfore ordered that Claimant be, and hereby is, awarded the sum of $21.97.
CERTIFICATION OF
 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
 CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 PURSUANT TO
 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
    
 I certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Las Vegas Gaming, Inc. for the quarterly period ending March 31, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Las Vegas Gaming, Inc.
 
 
 
 
 By:                        /s/ Russell R. Roth
 
 Name: Russell R. Roth
  Title: Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
  Date: May 14, 2004
 
 
 1
(No. 74-CC-112

#### Pfizer Inc., Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of Mental Health, Respondent.

*Opinion filed December 17, 1973.*

Pfizer Inc., Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; William E. Webber, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Charles Bland, Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Sirenza Microdevices, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2007 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Sirenza
Microdevices, Inc.



|                     |  |  |  |        |  |                        
|-------------------- |  |  |  | ------ |  | -----------------------
|Date: August 9, 2007 |  |  |  |        |  | /s/ CHARLES R. BLAND   
|                     |  |  |  | Name:  |  | Charles R. Bland       
|                     |  |  |  | Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer
§ 19.372 Physical inventories of bottled and packaged spirits. ( a ) *Physical inventories.* Generally, a proprietor must take physical inventories of bottled and packaged spirits in the processing account for the return periods ending June 30 and December 31, and at any other time that the appropriate TTB officer requires. Physical inventories may be taken within a period of a few days before or after June 30 or December 31 if: ( 1 ) The period does not include more than one complete weekend; and
( 2 ) Necessary adjustments are made to the inventory record to reflect the actual quantities on hand June 30 or December 31.
( b ) *Alternate dates.* On approval of an application filed with the appropriate TTB officer, required physical inventories may be taken on dates other than June 30 and December 31 if the dates established for taking such inventories: ( 1 ) Coincide with the end of a return period, and
( 2 ) Are approximately 6 months apart.
( c ) *Waiver of physical inventory.* A proprietor may file an application to take only one physical inventory per year. The appropriate TTB officer may approve the application if she or he finds that only one physical inventory per year will be sufficient to protect the revenue. However, the requirement for the waived inventory may be reimposed if it becomes necessary for protection of the revenue.
( d ) *Notification of physical inventory.* A proprietor must notify the appropriate TTB officer at least 5 business days in advance of the date and time of a physical inventory of bottled or packaged spirits. TTB officers may be assigned to verify or supervise physical inventories taken under the provisions of this section.
(26 U.S.C. 5201)
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.                  

###### Consumer Product Safety Commission

# TIME AND DATE:

 Wednesday, April 6, 2011, 10 a.m.-11.a.m.

# PLACE:

 Room 410, Bethesda Towers, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, Maryland.

# STATUS:

 Commission Meeting—Open to the Public.

## Matter To Be Considered

*Decisional Matter:*                     Bed Rails—Notice of Proposed Rulemaking                

                    A live webcast of the Meeting can be viewed at                     *http://www.cpsc.gov/​webcast*. For a recorded message containing the latest agenda information, call (301) 504-7948.                

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

 Todd A. Stevenson, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 504-7923.

Dated: March 30, 2011.

Todd A. Stevenson,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2011-7973 Filed 3-30-11; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
(No. 74-CC-441

#### Hub Clothiers, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Secretary of State, Respondent.

*Opinion filed March 25, 1974.*

Hub Clothiers, Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; William E. Webber, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
§ 648.4 What is included in the grant? Each grant awarded by the Secretary consists of the following: ( a ) The stipends paid by the Secretary through the institution of higher education to fellows. The stipend provides an allowance to a fellow for the fellow's (and his or her dependents') subsistence and other expenses.
( b ) The institutional payments paid by the Secretary to the institution of higher education to be applied against each fellow's tuition, fees, and the costs listed in § 648.62(b).
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1135c, 1135d)