alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-6127
VINCENT EUGENE WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus C. FIX; A. MORRIS; L. M. KIER; L. RICHARDS; W. COOK; L. M. SAUNDERS; D. SWISHER; AUGUSTA CORRECTIONAL CENTER; LARRY HUFFMAN; JACK LEE, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-9-740-R) Submitted: May 15, 1997 Decided: May 29, 1997 Before RUSSELL, HALL, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Vincent Eugene Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Susan Campbell Alexander, A ssistant Attorney General, Collin Jefferson Hite, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's orders denying reliefon his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint and his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Williams v. Fix , No. CA-95-740-R (W.D. Va. Dec. 12, 1996). We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT
23.3
 
 
 
 
 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
PETROLEUM ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS
 
 
 We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (No.
333-108162, No. 333-118976, No. 333-118977, No. 333-124964, 333-143203 and
333-143204) on Form S-8 of Noble Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) of the reference
to Netherland, Sewell & Associates, Inc. and the inclusion of our report
dated January 23, 2009, in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2008, of the Company and its subsidiaries, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
 NETHERLAND,
      SEWELL & ASSOCIATES, INC.By:
              /s/
      Danny D. SimmonsDanny
      D. Simmons, P.E.President
      and Chief Operating Officer
 
 Houston,
Texas
 February
18, 2009
  1
EXHIBIT 32.1





HARLEYSVILLE GROUP INC.



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 of Harleysville Group Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael L. Browne, 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 based on my knowledge:



(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:  March 10, 2009 |  | /s/ MICHAELL. BROWNE                 
|                      |  | Michael L. Browne                    
|                      |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 16, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69957-69960]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28764]



[[Page 69957]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Transmittal Nos. 10-38]


36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text 
of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to 
fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 
July 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM, (703) 
601-3740.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a copy of a letter to the 
Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittals 10-38 with 
attached transmittal, policy justification, and Sensitivity of 
Technology.

    Dated: November 9, 2010.
Morgan F. Park,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16NO10.031


[[Page 69958]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16NO10.032


[[Page 69959]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16NO10.033


[[Page 69960]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16NO10.034

[FR Doc. 2010-28764 Filed 11-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
PUBLIC LAW 109–216—APR. 13, 2006 120 STAT. 331

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.J. Res. 81 (S.J. Res. 30):

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 152 (2006):

Apr. 4, considered and passed House.

Apr. 5, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

Public Law 109–216

109th Congress

Joint Resolution

Providing for the appointment of Phillip Frost as a citizen regent of the Board

of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled, That, in accordance

with section 5581 of the Revised Statutes of the United States

(20 U.S.C. 43), the vacancy on the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution, in the class other than Members of Congress,

occurring by reason of the expiration of the term of Manuel L.

Ibanez of Texas on May 4, 2006, is filled by the appointment

of Phillip Frost of Florida. The appointment is for a term of 6

years, beginning on the later of May 5, 2006, or the date of the

enactment of this joint resolution.

Approved April 13, 2006.

Effective date.

Apr. 13, 2006

[H.J. Res. 81]
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 2 02 3

- 1 941

_____________________________
B ERNARD J ONES , Appellant,

v.

R ICKY D. D IXON , Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections
, Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County

. J. Scott Duncan
, Judge

. June 17, 2024

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
R OBERTS , R AY , and K ELSEY , JJ., concur

.2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________

Bernard Jones , pro se, Appellant

. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee , and David Welch
, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee

.
Order entered September 15, 2021

In The 

### Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05-21-00435-CV

IN RE HOWARD HOLLAND, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 422nd Judicial District Court Kaufman County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 31610-422

ORDER Before Justices Schenck, Nowell, and Garcia

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DENY relator’s petition for

writ of mandamus.

/s/ DENNISE GARCIA
JUSTICE
#### C. Samuel Redfern *v.*Dora C. McNaul.

*Opinion filed April 17, 1899.*

1. Bills of *exception—statements in bill construed against appellant.*A statement in a bill of exceptions prepared by defendant, which does not contain the evidence, that “plaintiff tendered evidence tending to support the various hypotheses set forth in the plaintiff’s instructions,” must prevail over a subsequent statement in the bill that a certain hypothesis in one of such instructions had no basis in evidence.

2. *Same—the bill of exceptions is construed against the appellant.*The bill of exceptions is to be construed against the appellant whose pleading it is and who is responsible for its contradictions.

*Redfern*v. *McNaul,*79 Ill. App. 232, affirmed.

Appeal from the Appellate Court for the First District;—heard in that court on appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Abner Smith, Judge, presiding.

Moses, Rosenthal *&*Kennedy, for appellant.

Phelps & Cleland, for appellee.

*204Mr. Justice Cartwright

delivered the opinion of the court:

The Appellate Court affirmed the judgment entered by the superior court of Cook county in favor of appellee, against appellant, in this action of assumpsit on the common counts. The bill of exceptions does not contain the evidence, but states that “plaintiff tendered evidence tending to support the various hypotheses set forth in the plaintiff’s instructions,” and from them we learn that plaintiff sued to recover money given defendant as her share to purchase a stock of goods for their joint ownership and not applied to that purpose. The court gave three instructions at the request of the plaintiff, and the giving of them furnishes the only ground of complaint. They correctly state the law, and as there was evidence tending to prove the facts stated in them, plaintiff had a right to have them given to the jury. *(Kendall*v. Brown, 74 Ill. 232; *Eames*v. *Rend,*105 id. 506.); One fact included in the hypotheses set forth in the second and third instructions is, that defendant knew the money given him for the purchase of the stock was the property of plaintiff, and the bill of exceptions, in addition to the statement that the evidence tended to prove these hypotheses, says that there was no evidence that defendant knew anything about the origin of the money. One statement is entitled to as much weight as the other, and the bill of exceptions being the pleading" of appellant, he is responsible for the contradiction and it is to be construed against him, and the statement that there was evidence tending to prove the fact must be adopted. *(Rogers*v. *Hall,*3 Scam. 5.) The second and third instructions, which directed a verdict, embraced every fact necessary to a recovery, and none of the instructions are subject to the objections made that they single out facts and give them undue prominence, or that they are argumentative.

The judgment of the Appellate Court is affirmed.

*Judgment affirmed.*
###### Editorial Note on Part 1944

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1944 appear at 80 FR 9885, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### § 1944.530 [Reserved]
**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with this Quarterly Report of Electric Moto Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Dennis Knepp, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 
| 1. | Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2006, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2006, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Electric Moto Corporation |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

Dated: August 15, 2006

 

*/s/ Dennis Knepp*

Dennis Knepp

Principal Financial Officer
Exhibit 32

                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 of CHISTE CORPORATION (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the year ending March 31, 2005, (the "Report"), I, Kevin R.
Keating, the Chief Executive Officer and 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 requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations.

Date: June 17, 2005


                                                /s/ Kevin R. Keating
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Chief Executive Officer
                                                and Chief Financial Officer
#### William Clyde BURTON, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania v. OFFICE OF REGIONAL ADMINISTRATION, Office of the Postmaster General, Washington, D. C., Frank T. Peartree, et al.

Civ. A. No. 70-3010.

United States District Court, E. D. Pennsylvania.

Dec. 3, 1970.

*229William Clyde Burton, in pro. per.

HUYETT, District Judge.

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff has filed an “Application For Writ Of Preliminary Injunction” under the all writs statute, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1651. In his application, plaintiff states that he was unlawfully removed from his engineering position in the Post Office Department by the defendants in 1966 and that his salary payments have been unlawfully withheld.1 He requests this Court to interpose its equitable powers to restore him to his position and order the payment of all his lost wages.

It is manifest that the actions of the defendants, of which the plaintiff complains, were of a discretionary nature. Where an executive officer exercises the discretion vested in him by statute “ * * * a court cannot restrain him from acting on the ground that he has exceeded his jurisdiction by reason of an error either of fact or law which induced his conclusion.” Adams v. Nagle, 308 U.S. 532, 542, 58 S.Ct. 687, 693, 82 L.Ed. 999 (1938).

Accordingly, we enter the following

ORDER

Now, this 3rd day of December, 1970, it is ordered that the plaintiff’s application for writ of preliminary injunction is denied.

1

. A full and complete statement of the facts in this matter can be found in Burton v. United States, 404 F.2d 365 (Ct.Cl.1968) cert. denied 394 U.S. 1002, 89 S.Ct. 1599, 22 L.Ed.2d 780 (1969).
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with Warner Chilcott Limiteds Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2009 (the Report) for the purpose of complying
with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

Roger M. Boissonneault, the Chief Executive Officer and Paul Herendeen, the Chief Financial Officer of Warner Chilcott Limited, each certifies that, to
the best of his knowledge:



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



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

Date: May 11, 2009



/s/ Roger M. BoissonneaultName:

Roger M. BoissonneaultTitle:

President and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Paul HerendeenName:

Paul HerendeenTitle:

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial 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 Warner Chilcott Limited and will be retained by
Warner Chilcott Limited and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



34
PUBLIC LAW 108–292—AUG. 6, 2004 118 STAT. 1027

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 4380:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD,

Vol. 150 (2004):

July 12, considered and passed House.

July 19, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

Public Law 108–292

108th Congress

An Act

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 4737 Mile

Stretch Drive in Holiday, Florida, as the ‘‘Sergeant First Class Paul Ray Smith

Post Office Building’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

The facility of the United States Postal Service located at

4737 Mile Stretch Drive in Holiday, Florida, shall be known and

designated as the ‘‘Sergeant First Class Paul Ray Smith Post Office

Building’’.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,

or other record of the United States to the facility referred to

in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Sergeant

First Class Paul Ray Smith Post Office Building’’.

Approved August 6, 2004.

Aug. 6, 2004

[H.R. 4380]
###### Editorial Note on Part 1951

#### Editorial Notes:

1. Some of the exhibits referenced in this part 1951 are not published in the Code of Federal Regulations. Exhibits are available in any Rural Development office.

2. Nomenclature changes to part 1951 appear at 80 FR 9890-9894, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### § 1951.202 Objectives.

The purpose of loan and grant servicing functions is to assist recipients to meet the objectives of loans and grants, repay loans on schedule, comply with agreements, and protect Rural Development's financial interest. Supervision by Rural Development includes, but is not limited to, review of budgets, management reports, audits and financial statements; performing security inspections and providing, arranging for, or recommending technical assistance; evaluating environmental impacts of proposed actions by the borrower; and performing civil rights compliance reviews.
#### Springfield Sugar & Products Company, Appellant, v Star Plaza, Inc., et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant. (And Another Action.)

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered April 6, 1979 in Albany County, which denied plaintiff’s motion to consolidate the two actions for trial. Order affirmed, without costs. (See *English Wholesale Grocery Co. v Plaza Super of Malta,*73 AD2d 759.) Mahoney, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Staley, Jr., and Herlihy, JJ., concur.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

In the Matter of

LAURA ANNE NANDA

PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT
FROM ADMINISTRATIVE SUSPENSION :

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 134 DB 201 9 (No. 84 RST 2019)

Attorney Registration No. 60941

( Out of State )

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 4 th day of October

, 201 9 , the Report and Recommendation of

Disciplinary Board Member dated September 24 , 2019 , is approved and it is ORDERED

that Laura Anne Nanda

, who has been on Administrative Suspension

, has never been

suspended or disbarred, and has demonstrated that s h e has the moral qualifications,

competency and learning in law required for admission to practice in the Commonwealth,

shall be and is, hereby reinstated to active status as a member of th e Bar of this

Commonwealth. The expenses incurred by the Board in the investigation and processing

of this matter shall be paid by the Petitioner.
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

I,Michael A. Schneider, President and Chief Executive Officer of Affinity GroupHolding, Inc., certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Affinity GroupHolding, Inc.;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly 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(s) 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 we have:

(a)     Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)     Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered bythis report based on such evaluation; and

(c)     Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.   The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

(a)     Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

(b)     Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.
| Date: May 9, 2007 | /s/ Michael A. Schneider               |   |
|-------------------|----------------------------------------|--------|
|              | Michael A.  Schneider                  |
|              | President and  Chief Executive Officer |

 

1

----