alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Motion Granted; Order filed January 26, 2023 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-22-00514-CR

____________

VECENTIE SONTIAGO MORALES, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from Criminal Distric Court 1

Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1730004R

ORDER

Appellant’s court-appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the 

appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Appellant filed a motion requesting

to review the record and file a pro se brief. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 

(1967); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). The motion is 

granted.
Accordingly, we hereby direct the Judge of Criminal Distric Court 1 to 

afford appellant an opportunity to view the trial record in accordance with local 

procedure; that the clerk of that court furnish the record to appellant on or before

February 10, 2023; that the clerk of that court certify to this court the date on 

which delivery of the record to appellant is made; and that appellant file his pro se 

brief with this court within thirty days of that date.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Justices Wise, Jewell, and Poissant.
### §2009cc–15. Removal or suspension of directors or officers

Using the procedures established by the Secretary for removing or suspending a director or an officer of a rural business investment company, the Secretary may remove or suspend any director or officer of any rural business investment company.

(Pub. L. 87–128, title III, §384P, as added Pub. L. 107–171, title VI, §6029, May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 401.)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-27-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-28-1997
<CASH>                                             371
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,775
<ALLOWANCES>                                       154
<INVENTORY>                                      2,588
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                22,790
<PP&E>                                           9,340
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,599
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  26,796
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,053
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      2,319
<COMMON>                                         2,935
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    26,796
<SALES>                                         21,464
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                21,464
<CGS>                                           14,679
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,757
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   149
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 947
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,932
<INCOME-TAX>                                       675
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,257
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,257
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.34
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.32
        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York v. Alfred Reger.

Motion to dismiss appeal granted, with $10 costs, unless the appellant procures the record on appeal and appellant’s points to be served and filed on or before December 5, 1960, with notice of argument for the January 1961 Term of this court, said appeal to be argued or submitted when reached. Concur — Botein, P. J., Rabin, Stevens and Eager, JJ.
Editorial Note on Part 842
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 842 appear at 81 FR 83688, Nov. 22, 2016.

§ 842.83 Non-assertable claims. A claim is not assertable under this subpart when it is for: ( a ) Reimbursement for military or civilian employees for their negligence claims paid by the United States.
( b ) Loss or damage to government property: ( 1 ) Caused by a nonappropriated fund employee acting in the scope of employment.
( 2 ) Caused by a person who has accountability and responsibility for the damaged property under the Report of Survey system.
( c ) Loss or damage to nonappropriated fund property assertable under other provisions.
( d ) Loss or damage caused by an employee of an instrumentality of the government in the absence of statutory authority to reimburse.
( e ) Monies recovered against a foreign government or any of its political subdivisions. (AFLOA/JACC may authorize this claim as an exception to the rule).
( f ) Loss or damage caused by an employee of another federal agency while the employee was acting in the scope of his employment.
[55 FR 2809, Jan. 29, 1990, as amended at 55 FR 32077, Aug. 7, 1990. Redesignated and amended at 81 FR 83696, Nov. 22, 2016]
EXHIBIT 32.1



Certification of Chief Executive Officer 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 on Form 10-Q/A of
Duquesne Light Holdings, Inc. (the Company) for the period ending September 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Morgan K. OBrien, as Chief Executive Officer of
the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge:



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



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



WITNESS the due execution hereof this 24th day of March, 2005.



/s/ Morgan K. OBrienMorgan K. OBrienPresident and Chief Executive Officer




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section
906, has been provided to Duquesne Light Holdings, Inc. and will be retained by Duquesne Light Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### First Baptist Church of Long Beach New York, Inc., Appellant, v. City of Long Beach et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.

In an action to set aside a tax deed, and for other related relief, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated January 22, 1960, granting the motion of defendants City of Long Beach and Foster E. Vogel (its Corporation Counsel) for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and severing the action as against them, pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice; and granting the motion of said defendants to vacate plaintiff’s notice to examine them before trial. Order affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Nolan, P. J., Beldoek, Kleinfeld, Christ and Pette, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>
                                                                  EXHIBIT 99(a)

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT
                          ----------------------------


The Board of Directors
State First Financial Corporation:


    We have audited the consolidated statements of income, stockholders' 
equity, and cash flows of State First Financial Corporation and subsidiaries 
for the year ended December 31, 1993, (not presented separately herein).  These 
consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's 
management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated 
financial statements based on our audits.

    We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing 
standards.  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to 
obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of 
material misstatement.  An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence 
supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.  An audit 
also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant 
estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial 
statement presentation.  We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis 
for our opinion.

    In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above 
present fairly, in all material respects, the results of operations and cash 
flows of State First Financial Corporation and subsidiaries for the year ended 
December 31, 1993, in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.


                                                   /s/KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

Little Rock, Arkansas
January 28, 1994
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1997             FEB-28-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1997             MAR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1997             FEB-28-1997
<CASH>                                         280,000                  82,153
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,194,000               2,225,588
<ALLOWANCES>                                   227,000                 192,900
<INVENTORY>                                 10,177,100              10,048,457
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            13,665,700              12,502,287
<PP&E>                                       1,318,800               1,294,372
<DEPRECIATION>                                 593,200                 445,894
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,398,800              13,365,369
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,150,100               5,092,324
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        1,084,900               1,084,848
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                   8,163,800               7,188,197
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,398,800              13,365,369
<SALES>                                      9,927,000              21,239,507
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,927,000              21,239,507
<CGS>                                        4,110,900               8,396,060
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,494,000              16,945,341
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               710,500               1,255,012
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                30,000                  60,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             103,500                 344,966
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,589,000               2,634,188
<INCOME-TAX>                                   644,300               1,004,100
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            944,700               1,630,088
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   944,700               1,630,088
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .18                     .31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .18                     .31
        

</TABLE>
### §2207a. Reports to Congress on obligation and expenditure

(a) Not later than 20 days after the end of each fiscal year, the Secretary of Agriculture shall submit to Congress a report on the amounts obligated and expended by the Department during that fiscal year for the procurement of advisory and assistance services.

(b) Each report submitted under subsection (a) shall include a list with the following information:

(1) All contracts awarded for the procurement of advisory and assistance services during the fiscal year and the amount of each contract.

(2) The purpose of each contract.

(3) The justification for the award of each contract and the reason the work cannot be performed by civil servants.

(Pub. L. 101–161, title VI, §641, Nov. 21, 1989, 103 Stat. 986; Pub. L. 104–316, title I, §104(b), Oct. 19, 1996, 110 Stat. 3829.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1996—Pub. L. 104–316, in subsec. (a), struck out par. (1) designation before "Not later than", struck out subpar. (A) designation before "submit to Congress", struck out ", and (B) transmit a copy of such report to the Comptroller General of the United States" after "and assistance services", redesignated par. (2) as subsec. (b) and in introductory provisions substituted "subsection (a) of this section shall" for "paragraph (1) shall", redesignated subpars. (A) to (C) as pars. (1) to (3), respectively, and struck out former subsec. (b) which read as follows: "The Comptroller General of the United States shall review the reports submitted under subsection (a) of this section and transmit to Congress any comments and recommendations the Comptroller General considers appropriate regarding the matter contained in such reports."
### §5761. Foreign language proficiency pay awards for the Federal Bureau of Investigation

The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation may, under regulations prescribed by the Director, pay a cash award of up to 10 percent of basic pay to any Bureau employee who maintains proficiency in a language or languages critical to the mission or who uses one or more foreign languages in the performance of official duties.

(Added Pub. L. 111–117, div. B, title II, §219(a), Dec. 16, 2009, 123 Stat. 3141.)
### §2008. Rural development and farm loan program activities

The Secretary may not complete a study of, or enter into a contract with a private party to carry out, without specific authorization in a subsequent Act of Congress, a competitive sourcing activity of the Secretary, including support personnel of the Department of Agriculture, relating to rural development or farm loan programs.

(Pub. L. 87–128, title III, §365, as added Pub. L. 110–234, title V, §5306, May 22, 2008, 122 Stat. 1153, and Pub. L. 110–246, §4(a), title V, §5306, June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1664, 1915.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 110–234 and Pub. L. 110–246 enacted identical sections. Pub. L. 110–234 was repealed by section 4(a) of Pub. L. 110–246.

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 2008, Pub. L. 87–128, title III, §365, as added Pub. L. 101–624, title XXIII, §2316(a), Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 4000; amended Pub. L. 102–237, title VII, §701(e), Dec. 13, 1991, 105 Stat. 1879, related to system for delivery of certain rural development programs, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 104–127, title VII, §753(a), Apr. 4, 1996, 110 Stat. 1131.

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

#### Effective Date

Enactment of this section and repeal of Pub. L. 110–234 by Pub. L. 110–246 effective May 22, 2008, the date of enactment of Pub. L. 110–234, see section 4 of Pub. L. 110–246, set out as a note under section 8701 of this title.
§ 536.31 Opening claim files. A claim file will be opened when: ( a ) Information that requires investigation under § 536.23 is received.
( b ) Records or other documents are requested by a potential claimant or legal representative.
( c ) A claim is filed.
Note to § 536.31 :
See the parallel discussion at DA Pam 27-162, paragraph 2-10.
EXHIBIT 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                              18 USC, SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In connection with the annual report of 3Si Holdings,  Inc. (the "Company")
on Form  10-KSB  for the  fiscal  year  ended  June 30,  2005 as filed  with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on date  hereof  (the  "Report"),  I, the
undersigned,  in the capacity and on the date indicated below, certify, pursuant
to 18  U.S.C./  Section  1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

     1.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Rule 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.



Dated: June 13, 2006                         s/Frederick J. Slack
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Frederick J. Slack, Chief Executive
                                             Officer/Chief Financial Officer
###### Editorial Note on Part 842

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 842 appear at 81 FR 83688, Nov. 22, 2016.

#### § 842.85 Referring a claim to the U.S. Attorney or the Department of Justice.

If collection efforts are unsuccessful, AFLOA/JACC may refer a claim to the appropriate U.S. Attorney's Office or the Department of Justice for initiation of a lawsuit.

[81 FR 83696, Nov. 22, 2016]
#### LEHMAN, DURR & CO. *vs.*FORD et al.

[APPEAL EKOM DEOBEE DISMISSING CEOSS-BILL BEEOKE EINAL DETEBMINATION OP OBIGINAL BILL.]

1. Oroas-MU, *regularly filed; when appeal lies from decree MsmAssing.*— A cross-bill,- regularly filed, is so far an independent suit as to authorize an appeal from a decree dismissing the same on demurrer for want of equity before the final determination of the original bill.

Appellees, on the ground that this appeal was prematurely taken, moved to dismiss it. The appeal was taken from a decree of the chancery court of Montgomery, dismissing a regular cross-bill on demurrer for want of equity before the final determination of the original bill. Appellants contested the motion, and also petitioned for a *mandamus*to compel the restoration and reinstatement of the cross-bill to the docket. The points decided are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Elmobe *&*Gunter, for motion to dismiss appeal.

Rice, Chilton & Jones, *contra.*

PETERS, J.

This is a motion to dismiss this appeal, because tbe same has been prematurely taken. And in connection witb tbis motion to dismiss, there is also an application for *mandamus*to compel tbe reinstatement and restoration of tbe cause to tbe docket in tbe court below.

Tbe bill in tbis case is a cross-bill, regularly filed as such, and not an answer to an original bill in chancery turned into a cross-bill under our statute. It is, then, not a mere statutory proceeding, to be governed by tbe rules prescribed by tbe statute, or growing out of it. Such a bill is an auxiliary suit, in which tbe complainant may be entitled to independent relief connected witb tbe matters of tbe original bill. Tbe cross-bill is a suit which terminates in a final judgment. — Story Eq. Pl. §§ 389, 398. And it is *734served, and answered, and proceeded in just , as if it were an original bill, until it is finally disposed of. — 3 Daw. Ch. Pr. pp. 1746-7. In *Brooks v. Woods,*such a bill has been treated as a separate suit so far as to allow an appeal from an order of dismissal on sustaining a demurrer for want of equity. — 40 Ala. 538; Story Eq. Pl. §§ 628, 630, 632. This is a convenient practice, and we see no sufficient reason to overrule it. La the practice of the English courts, á cross-bill may be treated as a separate suit, and filed in a different court. — 3 Dan. Ch. Pr. p. 1746, note 2. We therefore think that the appeal in this case ought to be retained. If it is, the necessity for a *mandamus*is removed.

[Nous bx Reporter. — The opinion in this ease was delivered at the June term, 3871, hut was omitted from the 46th volume of Reports on account of a want of space.]

The *mandamus*is denied, with costs, and the motion to dismiss is denied, with costs.
# C_2008022EN.01004001.xml

| 26.1.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.1.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/40

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 12 December 2007 — Pagliacci v Commission

(Case T-307/04) (1)

1

(Officials - Open competition - Failure to include candidate's name on the reserve list - Breach of the notice of competition - Qualifications and professional experience required)

(2008/C 22/72)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Carlo Pagliacci (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and É. Marchal, lawyers, initially, and F. Schiaudone, lawyer, subsequently)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: C. Berardis-Kayser and H. Tserepa-Lacombe, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Action for annulment of the decision of the selection board of competition COM/A/1/02, which gave the applicant insufficient points in the tests for his name to be included in the list of successful candidates.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the section board of competition COM/A/1/02 which gave Mr Carlo Pagliacci insufficient points in the tests for his name to be included in the list of successful candidates; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the section board of competition COM/A/1/02 which gave Mr Carlo Pagliacci insufficient points in the tests for his name to be included in the list of successful candidates;

| 2. | Orders the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Commission to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 262, 14.5.2005.

1

---