alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6567

HENRY PERRY BEY, Petitioner - Appellant, versus S. K. YOUNG, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Vi rginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-408) Submitted: June 10, 2004 Decided: June 23, 2004 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Henry Perry-Bey, Appellant Pro Se. Leah Ann Darron, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Henry Perry Bey seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting the Commonwealth’s motion to dismiss Bey’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) claims as procedurally barred. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Bey has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Bey’s motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1999
<CASH>                                       4,281,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,086,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   372,000
<INVENTORY>                                  1,126,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,982,000
<PP&E>                                      19,790,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              18,751,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,057,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,062,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        21,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,971,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,057,000
<SALES>                                     11,997,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            11,997,000
<CGS>                                        5,157,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,157,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             6,481,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                435,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   435,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.20


</TABLE>
**Exhibit 31.2**RULE 13a-14(a) CERTIFICATIONI, Lori Rappucci, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of PetroHunter Energy Corporation; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations, and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich 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 effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter(the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.        Date: January 15, 2008/s/ Lori Rappucci  Lori Rappucci   Chief Financial Officer
#### Lyman T. Welliver *v.*William W. Jones *et al.*

*Filed at Springfield April 3, 1897.*

1. Real *peopeety—what language in will creates an estate tail at common law.*A devise of real estate in the words, “To my wife (naming her) and her heirs by me,” would create at common law an estate in fee tail in the wife.

2. *Same—effect of statute on estate conveyed by a devise to testator’s wife in tail.*By the provision of section 6 of the Conveyance act (Rev. Stat. 1874, p. 273,) a devise of land to the testator’s wife and her heirs by him conveys a life estate to the wife, with remainder in fee simple absolute to her child by the testator.

3. *Same—effect of death of remainder-man during existence of life estate.*Where land is devised to the testator’s wife and her heirs by him, the estate in remainder is a vested one, and the fact that the remainder-man dies during the existence of the life estate does not change its. vested character.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Douglas county; the Hon. Edward P. Vail, Judge, presiding.

Thomas W. Roberts, and John H. Chadwick, for appellant.

*81Mr. Justice Cartwright

delivered the opinion of the court:

The circuit court of Douglas county sustained a general demurrer to the bill filed by appellant in this case for partition, and dismissed the bill for want of equity.

The facts averred which are material to the question involved are as follows: Charles Welliver, the owner in fee of the tract of land sought to be partitioned, devised the same by his last will and testament in the following words: “To my wife, Morganna, and her heirs by me.” He died January 13, 1880, leaving said Morganna Welliver, his widow, and Ama Welliver, their only child. Ama Welliver died intestate in September, 1880, leaving said Morganna Welliver, her mother, and complainant and others, her half brothers and sisters through former marriages of her said parents, as her only heirs-at-law. Morganna Welliver was afterward married to B. P. Coykendall, and they both died before this suit was commenced.

At the common law Morganna Welliver would have taken an estate in fee tail in the premises by virtue of the devise, and by section 6 of the act concerning conveyances, in force July 1,1872, such an estate was changed to a life estate in her, with remainder in fee simple absolute to Ama Welliver, her heir by the testator. *(Butler*v. *Huestis,*68 Ill. 594; *Blair*v. *Vanblarcum,*71 id. 290; *Cooper*v. *Cooper,*76 id. 57; *Lehndorf*v. *Cope,*122 id. 317.) As the event upon which the estate in remainder was to take effect was one that must happen some time, that estate was a vested one, and the fact that Ama Welliver died during the existence of the life estate did not affect its vested character. *(Nicoll*v. *Scott,*99 Ill 529; *Smith*v. *West,*103 id. 332; *Lehndorf*v. *Cope, supra.)*The title in fee simple so vested passed to the heirs of Ama Welliver upon her death, and it was wrong to sustain the demurrer.

The decree will be reversed and the cause remanded.

*Reversed and remanded.*
<PAGE>



                                                                    Exhibit 99.3


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

This Certification is intended to accompany the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of
NCO Group, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended September 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
and is given solely for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002. To the best of his knowledge, the undersigned, Steven L. Winokur, Chief
Financial Officer, hereby certifies that:

    3.  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
        15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
    4.  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
        respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
        Company.


/s/ Steven L. Winokur
---------------------
Chief Financial Officer


Date: 11/14/02
### §80112. Liability under negotiable bills issued in parts, sets, or duplicates

(a) Parts and Sets.—A negotiable bill of lading issued in a State for the transportation of goods to a place in the 48 contiguous States or the District of Columbia may not be issued in parts or sets. A common carrier issuing a bill in violation of this subsection is liable for damages for failure to deliver the goods to a purchaser of one part for value in good faith even though the purchase occurred after the carrier delivered the goods to a holder of one of the other parts.

(b) Duplicates.—When at least 2 negotiable bills of lading are issued in a State for the same goods to be transported to a place in the 48 contiguous States or the District of Columbia, the word "duplicate" or another word indicating that the bill is not an original must be put plainly on the face of each bill except the original. A common carrier violating this subsection is liable for damages caused by the violation to a purchaser of the bill for value in good faith as an original bill even though the purchase occurred after the carrier delivered the goods to the holder of the original bill.

(Pub. L. 103–272, §1(e), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 1351.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 80112(a) | 49 App.:84. | Aug. 29, 1916, ch. 415, §§4, 5, 39 Stat. 539. |
| 80112(b) | 49 App.:85. | |

Section

In this section, the words "48 contiguous States or the District of Columbia" are substituted for "United States on the Continent of North America, except Alaska and Panama" and the text of 49 App.:84 (proviso) and 85 (proviso) for clarity.

In subsection (a), the words "If so issued" and "described therein" are omitted as surplus. The word "occurred" is added for clarity.
July 26 , 2011



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

EARL BRYAN WILSON AN D CHEATWOOD ELECTRIC A/K/A/ C M CHEATWOOD ELECTRIC A /K/A CMC ELECTRIC , Appellants

NO. 14

- 10

- 00598

- CV V.

KELLIE MARTINEZ , Appellee

____________________ This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellee, KELLIE MARTINEZ, signed June 3, 2010, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find no error in the judgment. We order the judgment of the trial

court AFFIRME D

.
We order appellants, EARL BRYAN WILSON AN D CHEATWOOD ELECTRIC
A/K/A/ C M CHEATWOOD ELECTRIC A/K/A CMC E LECTRIC , jointly and severally, to pay all costs incurred in this appeal. We further order this decision certified
below for observance.
###### Editorial Note on Part 250

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

#### § 250.840 Design, installation, and maintenance—general.

You must design, install, and maintain all production facilities and equipment including, but not limited to, separators, treaters, pumps, heat exchangers, fired components, wellhead injection lines, compressors, headers, and flowlines in a manner that is efficient, safe, and protects the environment.
### §102. Same; by whom administered

Such oath may be administered by any person who, by the law of the State, is authorized to administer the oath of office; and the person so administering such oath shall cause a record or certificate thereof to be made in the same manner, as by the law of the State, he is directed to record or certify the oath of office.

(July 30, 1947, ch. 389, 61 Stat. 644.)
### §6102. Definitions

In this chapter, the following definitions apply:

(1) One-call notification system.—The term "one-call notification system" means a system operated by an organization that has as 1 of its purposes to receive notification from excavators of intended excavation in a specified area in order to disseminate such notification to underground facility operators that are members of the system so that such operators can locate and mark their facilities in order to prevent damage to underground facilities in the course of such excavation.

(2) State one-call notification program.—The term "State one-call notification program" means the State statutes, regulations, orders, judicial decisions, and other elements of law and policy in effect in a State that establish the requirements for the operation of one-call notification systems in such State.

(3) State.—The term "State" means a State, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.

(4) Secretary.—The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of Transportation.

(Added Pub. L. 105–178, title VII, §7302(a), June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 478.)
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsLow gravity experiment for studying a rotating fluid having a free surfaceElectrical, mechanical, and operational aspects of a test cell assembly for studying rotating fluids with a free surface are described. Results of a stress analysis prepared to document the structural adequacy for safe use on the KC-135 aircraft are presented along with results of a single load proof test of the most critical load case. Engineering drawings are included.Document ID19840004345Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsHolderer, O. C.*(Precision Devices Ltd. Huntsville, AL, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 4, 2013Publication DateOctober 29, 1983Subject CategoryFluid Mechanics And Heat TransferReport/Patent NumberNASA-CR-170923NAS 1.26:170923DCN-1-3-ES-26516Accession Number84N12413Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS8-35481Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19840004345.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
### §1512a. Transportation of chemical munitions

#### (a) Prohibition of transportation across State lines

The Secretary of Defense may not transport any chemical munition that constitutes part of the chemical weapons stockpile out of the State in which that munition is located on October 5, 1994, and, in the case of any such chemical munition not located in a State on October 5, 1994, may not transport any such munition into a State.

#### (b) Transportation of chemical munitions not in chemical weapons stockpile

In the case of any chemical munitions that are discovered or otherwise come within the control of the Department of Defense and that do not constitute part of the chemical weapons stockpile, the Secretary of Defense may transport such munitions to the nearest chemical munitions stockpile storage facility that has necessary permits for receiving and storing such items if the transportation of such munitions to that facility—

(1) is considered by the Secretary of Defense to be necessary; and

(2) can be accomplished while protecting public health and safety.

(Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title I, §143, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2689.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995, and not as part of Pub. L. 91–121, title IV, §409, Nov. 19, 1969, 83 Stat. 209, which comprises this chapter.
#### § 56.20010 Retaining dams.

If failure of a water or silt retaining dam will create a hazard, it shall be of substantial construction and inspected at regular intervals.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 9391 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

108 North Main Street in Bucoda, Washington, as the ‘‘Mayor Rob 

Gordan Post Office’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

AUGUST 20, 2024 

Ms. PEREZ (for herself, Ms. DELBENE, Mr. LARSEN of Washington, Mr. 

NEWHOUSE, Mrs. RODGERS of Washington, Mr. KILMER, Ms. JAYAPAL, 

Ms. SCHRIER, Mr. SMITH of Washington, and Ms. STRICKLAND) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Accountability 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 108 North Main Street in Bucoda, Washington, as the ‘‘Mayor Rob Gordan Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. MAYOR ROB GORDAN POST OFFICE. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 108 North Main Street in 

6 Bucoda, Washington, shall be known and designated as 

7 the ‘‘Mayor Rob Gordan Post Office’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 9391 IH

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Mayor Rob Gordan 

5 Post Office’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
### §1708. Discrimination prohibited in rights of access to, and benefits from, conveyed lands

No person shall be denied access to, or any of the benefits accruing from, the lands conveyed by this Act, or by the amendment made by this Act, on the basis of race, religion, creed, color, sex, national origin, or ancestry: Provided, however, That this section shall not be construed in derogation of any of the provisions of the April 17, 1900 cession of Tutuila and Aunuu or the July 16, 1904 cession of the Manu's Islands, as ratified by the Act of February 20, 1929 (45 Stat. 1253) and the Act of May 22, 1929 (46 Stat. 4).

(Pub. L. 93–435, §6, Oct. 5, 1974, 88 Stat. 1212.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This Act, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 93–435, Oct. 5, 1974, 88 Stat. 1210, which enacted sections 1705 to 1708 of this title, amended section 1545 of this title, and repealed sections 1701 to 1703 of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables.

The amendment made by this Act, referred to in text, means the amendment made by section 3 of Pub. L. 93–435 to section 1545(b) of this title.

Act of February 20, 1929, referred to in text, is act Feb. 20, 1929, ch. 281, 45 Stat. 1253, as amended, which enacted section 1661 of this title.

Act of May 22, 1929, referred to in text, is act May 22, 1929, ch. 6, 46 Stat. 4, which amended section 1661 of this title.
#### ASPELL v. NANNY.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

January 9, 1903.)

In the matter of the charges of John W. Aspell against Harrison W. Nanny. No opinion. Reference ordered, under section 68 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to Hon. John J. Beattie, of Warwick, Orange county, New York.
| (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. |
|-----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                  |   |                                                                                    |
|-----------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                  |   |                                                                                    |   |
| Date: August 13, 2009 | By:    | /s/ Robert Cheney                                                                  |   |
|                  |   | Name: Robert CheneyTitle: Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer |   |
|                  |   |                                                                                    |   |
|                  |   |                                                                                    |   |
Exhibit 23

                     CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement of
Intelligent Controls, Inc. on Form S-8 of our report dated February 13, 1998, 
on our audits of the financial statements of Intelligent Controls, Inc. as of 
December 27, 1998 and December 31, 1996, and for each of the two years in the 
period ended December 27, 1997, which report is included in this Annual Report 
on Form 10-KSB.

/s/ COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.

Portland, Maine
March 27, 1998