alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas August 9, 2021 No. 04-21-00320-CR Jessie NELSON , Appellant

v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the County Court, Atascosa County, Texas

Trial Court No. 35546 Honorable Bob Brendel, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R Appellant, Jessie Ray Nelson, filed a notice of appeal from the judgment on August 4, 2021. The clerk’s record has been filed. The clerk’s record includes the trial court’s certification of defendant’s right of appeal, which states “the Defendant has waived the right of appeal.” Rule 25.2(a)(2) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure requires “[t]he trial court [to] enter a certification of the defendant’s right of appeal in every case in which it enters a judgment of guilt or other appealable order.” T EX . R. A PP . P. 25.2(a)(2). This court must dismiss an appeal “if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record.” T EX . R. A PP . P. 25.2(d). However, we are first “obligated to review that record [to] ascertain[] whether the certifications [are] defective.” Dears v. State , 154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). A certification is “defective” if it “proves to be inaccurate” “when compared with the record.” Id. at 614. Appellant pled guilty to the underlying offense and a jury found him guilty. Nothing in the record indicates a plea agreement or a waiver of the right to appeal. However, the trial court’s certification indicates appellant waived his right to an appeal. Although the certification appears to be inaccurate, and therefore defective, this appeal may not proceed on the merits in the absence of a certification by the trial court that appellant has the right of appeal. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 25.2(d). To “ensur[e] that [appellant’s] right to appeal is not abridged due to ‘defects or irregularities’ which can be corrected,” we ABATE this appeal for a period of ten days to allow the trial court to review the record and to either (1) submit an amended Rule 25.2 certification that comports with the record or (2) direct the trial court clerk to file a supplemental clerk’srecord that evidences the appellant waived his right to appeal. See Dears , 154 S.W.3d at 614-

15; T EX . R. A PP . P. 34.5(c), 37.1. We ORDER the clerk to file a supplemental record containing any amended certification signed by the trial court and/or a record showing appellant waived his right to appeal not later than August 24, 2021. We ORDER the clerk of this court to serve copies of this order on the attorneys of record, the trial court judge, and the trial court clerk.

_________________________________ Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 9th day of August, 2021.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
Skip to Content

        -   Log in            -  Log inEmailPassword Show Password	            Remember meAlready have an account? Log in!No account? Sign up!Forgot your password?Didn't receive confirmation instructions? 
        -            -  Forgot your password?Email Already have an account? Log in!No account? Sign up!Forgot your password?Didn't receive confirmation instructions? 
        -            -  Resend confirmation instructionsEmail Already have an account? Log in!No account? Sign up!Forgot your password?Didn't receive confirmation instructions? 
        -   Sign Up            -  Sign upEmail Password Passwords must be at least 6 characters and contain at least one lower-case letter, one upper-case letter, one number, and one punctuation mark or symbolPassword confirmation  Show Password            Already have an account? Log in!No account? Sign up!Forgot your password?Didn't receive confirmation instructions? 

# Search Publications

- Home

#           Tobacco: World Markets and Trade            FAS

----

Frequency of Release:Monthly

----

Category:Crops and Crop Products:Tobacco

Keywords:burley tobaccocigarettesflue-cured tobaccotariffstobacco

----

## Releases

            -  « Previous 
            -  Next » 
            -  1 
            -  2 
            -  3 
            -  4 
            -  5 
            -  6 

| Sep  1, 2005 | PDF | Sep  1, 2005: Tobacco: World Markets and Trade detailsx                Sep  1, 2005: Tobacco: World Markets and TradeRelease datetime:Sep  1, 2005Close |
|--------------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Contact office name:Foreign Agricultural Service

Contact email:Press@fas.usda.gov

##         Agency Announcements        
Do you also want to subscribe to all agency announcements from ?
NoYesFooter content with page navigation, site information, and copyright.-  Home 
-  Release Calendar 
×Release CalendarClose
-  About
-  Help 
-  Contact 
-  API 

The USDA Economics, Statistics and Market Information System (ESMIS) contains over 2,100 publications from five agencies of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). These materials cover U.S. and international agriculture and related      topics. Mann Library at Cornell University developed and maintains this site.

© 2024 USDA Economics, Statistics and Market Information System
USDA ESMIS partners list with links to their websites.Partners:- Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS)
- Economic Research Service (ERS)
- Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS)
- National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS)
- World Agricultural Outlook Board (WAOB)
- 
- Albert R. Mann Library, Cornell University
- United States Department of Agriculture
Cornell development contact information.Developed & supported by:
**Albert R. Mann Library**Cornell UniversityIthaca, NY 14853-4301 Phone: (607) 255-3296 Email: usda-help@cornell.edu
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

ANN LOTIERZO

, Appellant,

v.

GERALD BARBARITO, FELIPE DE JESUS ESTEVEZ, DIOCESE OF PALM BEACH, INC., ARCHDIOCESE OF MIAMI, INC.

and THOMAS EUTENEUER
, Appellee s

.

No. 4D 2 2

- 238

[ March 8, 2023 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Ninet eenth Judicial Circuit,

Martin County ; Gary L. Sweet ; L.T. Case No. 43 2019CA001525

.

Martin B. Kofsky of Kofsky Law Office, P.A., Stuart, for appellant

.

Emily C. Smith, Daniel C. Dresch, and Michael A. Mul len of Gaebe Mullen Antonelli DiMatteo, Coral Gables, for appellees Gerald Barbarito, Felipe De Jesus Estevez, Diocese of Palm Beach, Inc., and Archdiocese of Miami, Inc.

G ROSS

, J

.

In her third amended complaint, a parishioner has attempted to state causes of action against a priest and the church hierarchy arising out of her ongoing counseling relationship with the priest.

The trial judge dismissed four counts against the church hierarchy with prejudice based on the application of Florida’s i mpact rule , leaving the priest as the only remaining defendant.

Florida’s impact rule is “a judicially

- created rule designed to assure the validity of claims for emotional distress.” Woodard v. Jupiter Christian Sch., Inc. , 913 So. 2d 1188, 1190 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (citing Int’l Ocean

Tel. Co. v. Saunders

, 32 Fla. 434, 14 So. 148 (1893)). The rule requires that “before a plaintiff can recover damages for emotional distress caused by the negligence of another, the emotional distress suffered must flow

f rom physical injuries the plaintiff sustained in an impact.” Fla. Dep’t of2 Corr. v. Abril , 969 So. 2d 201, 206 (Fla. 2007) (quoting R.J. v. Humana of Fla., Inc.

, 652 So. 2d 360, 362 (Fla. 1995))

.

In Doe v. Evans , the Florida Supreme Court recognized tha t a fiduciary duty generally arises in counseling relationships such as those between a priest and a parishioner. 814 So. 2d 370, 373

– 75 (Fla. 2002). And in Gracey v. Eaker , the Florida Supreme Court held that the breach of such a fiduciary relationship is not subject to the impact rule. 837 So. 2d 348,

355

– 56 (Fla. 2002). Appellant’s counts seeking recovery against the church hierarchy may be subject to dismissal for many reasons, but not because of application of the impact rule.

Appellant’s attorney made statements at a hearing that make it unclear what legal theories she is pursuing against the defendants. Appellant should be given one more chance to file a focused amended complaint setting forth her claims.

We affirm the dismissal of “Count Six

— Duty to Disclose” because it does not state a recognized cause of action apart from a breach of fiduciary duty , which appellant had attempted to assert in a separate count.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded

.

D AMOORGIAN an d K UNTZ

, JJ

. , concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 227 (Friday, November 26, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 68886]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26181]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Air Force


HQ USAF Scientific Advisory Board

AGENCY: Department of the Air Force, DoD.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given of the 
forthcoming meeting of the 2004 Science and Technology Quality Review 
Panel. The purpose of the meeting is to allow the Air Force Scientific 
Advisory Board to assess the quality and long-term relevance of Air 
Force Research Laboratory research reviewed in Fall 2004. Because 
classified and contractor-proprietary information will be discussed, 
this meeting will be closed to the public.

DATES: December 10, 2004.

ADDRESSES: 1560 Wilson Blvd, Suite 400, Arlington VA 22209-2404.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Major Kyle Gresham, Air Force 
Scientific Advisory Board Secretariat, 1180 Air Force Pentagon, Rm 
5D982, Washington DC 20330-1180, (703) 697-4808.

Albert Bodnar,
Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 04-26181 Filed 11-24-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-05-P
§ 1051.1 Scope. ( a ) This part establishes procedures for the submission and disposition of petitions for the issuance, amendment or revocation of rules under the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) (15 U.S.C. 2051 *et seq.*) or other statutes administered by the Consumer Product Safety Commission.
( b ) Persons filing petitions for rulemaking shall follow as closely as possible the requirements and are encouraged to follow as closely as possible the recommendations for filing petitions under § 1051.5.
( c ) Petitions regarding products regulated under the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (FHSA) (15 U.S.C. 1261 *et seq.*) are governed by existing Commission procedures at 16 CFR 1500.82. Petitions regarding the exemption of products regulated under the Poison Prevention Packaging Act of 1970 (PPPA) (15 U.S.C. 1471 *et seq.*) are governed by existing Commission procedures at 16 CFR part 1702. In addition, however, persons filing such petitions shall follow the requirements and are encouraged to follow the recommendations for filing petitions as set forth in § 1051.5.
[48 FR 57123, Dec. 28, 1983, as amended at 64 FR 48704, Sept. 8, 1999]
Exhibit 32.1

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 annual report on Form 10-K of Network Engines, Inc. (the "Company") for the fiscal
year ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Gregory A. Shortell, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



Dated: December 10, 2010

/s/ GREGORY A. SHORTELL Gregory A. Shortell Chief Executive Officer


---



QuickLinks
Board Coverage Decision

2015-20

No Decision Published

BA # 2780

Decision issued 08/17/2015

Nebraska, Kansas, Colorado Railway, LLC 

(Name Change)
**EXHIBIT 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, James W. McGinley, certify that:
     1.     I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of StratosInternational, Inc.;
     2.     Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annualreport;
     3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this annual report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
     4.     The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the registrant and have:
     a)     Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
     b)     Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and
     c)     Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
     5.     The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, tothe registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
     a)     All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and
-1-

 

     b)     Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.        Date: August 30, 2004 /s/ James W. McGinley   James W. McGinley   President and Chief Executive Officer  
-2-
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on September 21, 2004, pursuant to section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc. has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership status. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Sentient Consulting Limited, Liverpool, United Kingdom; ACT Consultants Ltd., Sheffield, United Kingdom; and UK eUniversities Worldwide Limited, London, United Kingdom have been dropped as parties to this venture.                

No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc. intends to file additional written notification disclosing all changes in membership.

                    On April 7, 2000, IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc. filed its original notification pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on September 13, 2000 (65 FR 55283).                

                    The last notification was filed with the Department on June 29, 2004. A notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on August 6, 2004 (69 FR 47959).                

Dorothy B. Fountain,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 04-26227  Filed 11-26-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on October 13, 2004, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. § 4301                     *et seq.*                     (“the Act”), Enterprise Grid Alliance (“EGA”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing (1) the name and principal place of business of the standards development organization and (2) the nature and scope of its standards development activities. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances.                

Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, the name and principal place of business of the standards development organization is: Enterprise Grid Alliance, San Ramon, CA. The nature and scope of EGA's standards development activities are: To provide, plan, develop and coordinate voluntary standards and solutions allowing enterprise users to embrace and realize the benefits of grid technologies in the near term.

Dorothy B. Fountain,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 04-26215 Filed 11-26-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
Exhibit 32.1


          CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADDED BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


      In connection with the Quarterly Report of East Penn Financial Corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2005, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Brent L. Peters,
President and Chief Executive 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:

      o     The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and
            15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

      o     To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly
            presents, in all material respects, the Company's financial
            condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates
            and for the periods presented in the Report.



/s/ Brent L. Peters
------------------------------------------------------
Brent L. Peters, President and Chief Executive Officer

Dated: August 12, 2005


                                    Page 28
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

July 29, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

136246 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 136246 

 COA: 270415 

Oakland CC: 2004-194560-FH 

CAMILLA MARIE DENISON, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 26, 2008 

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. 

p0721 

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. 

July 29, 2008 

 Clerk
§ 908.5 Interim reports. ( a ) Any person engaged in a weather modification project or activity in the United States on January 1 in any year shall submit to the Administrator, not later than 45 days thereafter, an interim report setting forth as of such date the information required below with respect to any such continuing project or activity not previously furnished to the Administrator in a prior interim report; provided that the January 1 date shall not apply if other arrangements have previously been made with the written approval of the Administrator.
( b ) The interim report shall include the file number assigned by the Administrator and shall provide a summary of the project or activity containing at least the following information for each month: ( 1 ) Number of days on which actual modification activities took place;
( 2 ) Number of days on which weather modification activities were conducted, segregated by each of the major purposes of the activities;
( 3 ) Total number of hours of operation of each type of weather modification apparatus (*i.e.*, net hours of agent release);
( 4 ) Total amount of agent used. If more than one agent was used, each should be totaled separately (e.g., carbon dioxide, sodium chloride, urea, silver iodide).
( c ) The totals for the items in paragraph (b) of this section shall be provided for the period covered by the interim report.
[41 FR 23394, June 10, 1976, as amended at 46 FR 32233, June 22, 1981]