alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### McCann *vs*Gouge.

Error to the Grant Circuit.

Costs.

Chancery. *Case*20.

*December*28.

A decree for costs, is a decree for such costs as the Clerk may legally tax. If the Clerk tax erroneously,it may be corrected by the Court of ■whichIre is Cl’k, but ■until the correction be made, the taxation is evidence of the amount in other courts.

*K Monroe*for defendant.

Judge Bbeok.

delivered the opinion of the Court.

The decree of this Court against Bartlett in favor of Gouge for the costs of the latter, was in effect a decree for the amount the clerk might tax — and although his taxation might be erroneous, it would still be the decree of the Court, subject, however, to cerrection by this Court, and by this Court alone. The execution issued by the clerk, issued upon the decree according to this construction of it, and was of as high a grade of evidence of the aggregate amount of the cost taxed, as the taxation itself. It was competent evidence of the amount of eosts decreed .Gouge, and the motion to ex-clud it, and also the other copies from the records of this Court, was properly overruled. In this action upon a •bond in this Court for costs, the Court below could not properly inquire whether the costs had been correctly ■taxed or not.

Wherefore, the decree is affirmed.
Case 1:22-cv-23752-PAS   Document 50   Entered on FLSD Docket 06/14/2023   Page 1 of 8

Case 1:22-cv-23752-PAS   Document 50   Entered on FLSD Docket 06/14/2023   Page 2 of 8

Case 1:22-cv-23752-PAS   Document 50   Entered on FLSD Docket 06/14/2023   Page 3 of 8

Case 1:22-cv-23752-PAS   Document 50   Entered on FLSD Docket 06/14/2023   Page 4 of 8

Case 1:22-cv-23752-PAS   Document 50   Entered on FLSD Docket 06/14/2023   Page 5 of 8

Case 1:22-cv-23752-PAS   Document 50   Entered on FLSD Docket 06/14/2023   Page 6 of 8

Case 1:22-cv-23752-PAS   Document 50   Entered on FLSD Docket 06/14/2023   Page 7 of 8

Case 1:22-cv-23752-PAS   Document 50   Entered on FLSD Docket 06/14/2023   Page 8 of 8
From:       "King, Heidi R." <Heidi_R._King@omb.eop.gov>                                                           

                                                                                                                     

To:           Chuck French/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA                                                                          

                                                                                                                     

Date:         04/06/2010 03:46 PM                                                                                    

                                                                                                                     

Subject:      Interagency comments under EO 12866 on the Gold Ore Processing  NESHAP Draft

NPRM   

Hello Chuck,

Interagency comments on the draft Gold Ore Processing NESHAP NPRM under EO 12866 Review:

1. Page 33 Section C:  It would be helpful to the reader to present the proposed standards in a

Table.

2. Page 34 Line 21:  We suggest adding in parentheses the emissions for each process stack will be

reported in total pounds for the 12 month reporting period as this is not clearly stated.

3. Page 40 Line 17:  It is suggested small buffers to account for variability during normal operation

may be used in cases where there is “very little variability” during the performance test. We

suggest a numerical limit be applied here, i.e., if the variability is ? 5%. The last sentence of the

paragraph refers to ±10% for the size of the buffer but it is not clear if this is also in relation to

the amount of variability that will enable the owner or operator to make use of a buffer.

4. Page 41 top:  It is written “...according to EPA Performance Specification (PS) 12A (except that

calibration standards traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) are

not required).” The text in parentheses is not clear with respect to what is not required, i.e., if

standards that are traceable to NIST are used, is the PS12A method not required?

5. Page 42 top:  For facilities that control roaster mercury emissions with mercury scrubbers, an

exemption from the proposed sorbent trap or mercury CEMs monitoring requirement is

proposed if a facility demonstrates that the mercury emissions from its roasters are consistently

low and well controlled. There is no mention of what will be required if the input material is

changed.

Best regards,

heidi
#### § 102-117.305 Where do I go for information on the process for suspending or debarring a TSP?

Refer to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (48 CFR part 9, subpart 9.4) for policies and procedures governing suspension and debarment of a TSP.
CERTIFICATION

OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF

THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

I, Richard Govatski, certify that:

 

1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB/A of NMXS.com, Inc.

 

2.  Based on my knowledge, this amended yearly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this amended yearly report;

 

3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this amended yearly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this amended yearly report;

 

4.  I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

 

(a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the a registrant is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this amended yearly report is being prepared;

 

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this amended yearly report (the “Evaluation Date”); and

 

(c)  presented in this amended yearly report my conclusions about effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on my evaluation as of the Evaluation Date

 

5.  I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

(a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any material weakness in internal controls; and

 

(b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls; and

 

6.  I have indicated in this amended yearly report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of my most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

 

Dated:March 24, 2006

 

/s/ Richard Govatski

Richard Govatski

Chief Executive Officer
#### § 101-1.106 Applicability of FPMR.

The FPMR apply to all Federal agencies to the extent specified in the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 or other applicable law.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 560 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  1st Session

                               H. R. 560

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located 
  at the intersection of Comercio and San Justo Streets, in San Juan, 
Puerto Rico, as the ``Jose V. Toledo Federal Building and United States 
                             Courthouse''.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 560

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located 
  at the intersection of Comercio and San Justo Streets, in San Juan, 
Puerto Rico, as the ``Jose V. Toledo Federal Building and United States 
                             Courthouse''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The Federal building and United States courthouse located at the 
intersection of Comercio and San Justo Streets, in San Juan, Puerto 
Rico, shall be known and designated as the ``Jose V. Toledo Federal 
Building and United States Courthouse''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the Federal building and United States 
courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 
to the ``Jose V. Toledo Federal Building and United States 
Courthouse''.

            Passed the House of Representatives May 4, 1999.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Bennie Johnson, Jr., Appellant

No. 06

- 14

- 00194

- CR v.
The State of Texas, Appellee Appeal from the 102nd District Court of Bowie County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 12F0821

- 102 ). Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Carter*

, participating. Sitting by assignment.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court

below

. We affirm the judgment of the trial court

. We note th at the appellant, Bennie Johnson, Jr., has adequately indicated his inability to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED OCTOBER 14, 2015 BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
#### CHARLOTTE E. SULLIVAN, Respondent, *v.*JOHN C. SULLIVAN, Appellant.

*Wages*— services *rendered by merriber of family*— Evidence.

Where members of the same family live together, an express, distinct and well understood bargain to pay for board on the one side, or wages on the other, should be clearly proved before such a claim should be allowed. *{B/Mnson*v. *Oushnian, 2*Denio, 152 ; *Dye y. Kerr,*15 Barb., 444; *Wilcox*v. *Wilcox,*48 id., 329; *Shirty*v. *Vail,*38 How., 406; *Williams*v. *Hutchinson,*3 Comst., 312.)

*659Appeal from a judgment, entered on the report of a referee, in favor of plaintiff.

*Huger da*Jenney, for appellant. *Johnson <& Hoyt,*for respondent.

Opinion by

Smith, J.

Present — Mullin, P. J., Smith and Gilbert, JJ.

Judgment reversed, new trial granted, costs to abide event.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-30956 Summary Calendar

BLONG LOR, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus JOHN B. Z. CAPLINGER, District Director, Immigration and Naturalization Serv., Respondent-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 97-CV-513

- - - - - - - - - - March 19, 1998 Before DUHE’, DeMOSS and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
AFFIRMED. See 5th Cir. R. 47.6. PENDING MOTION DENIED.
#### § 953.7 Default; Appearances.

If a timely reply to the appeal is not filed, the presiding officer shall refer the appeal to the Judicial Officer, who may find that the General Counsel or the Chief Postal Inspector or his or her designee is in default. Whenever the General Counsel or the Chief Postal Inspector or his or her designee has been deemed to be in default, the Judicial Officer shall take whatever action on the appeal he deems appropriate. If an oral evidentiary hearing is to be held, the appellant may appear at the hearing in person or by counsel. If either party fails to appear at the hearing, the presiding officer shall receive the evidence of the party appearing and render a decision.

[59 FR 31538, June 20, 1994, as amended at 71 FR 53972, Sept. 13, 2006]
I

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5280

To amend the Equity in Educational Land-Grant Status Act of 1994 to

add White Earth Tribal and Community College to the list of 1994

Institutions.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 25, 2000

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota (for himself, Mr. SABO, Mr. OBERSTAR, and Mr.

MINGE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture

A BILL

To amend the Equity in Educational Land-Grant Status

Act of 1994 to add White Earth Tribal and Community

College to the list of 1994 Institutions.

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

3 SECTION 1. ADDITION TO LIST OF 1994 INSTITUTIONS.

4 Section 532 of the Equity in Educational Land-Grant

5 Status Act of 1994 (Public Law 103–382; 7 U.S.C. 301

6 note) is amended by adding at the end the following:

7 ‘‘(31) White Earth Tribal and Community Col8 lege.’’.

Æ
I

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5424

To amend the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 to authorize

communities receiving community development block grants to use grant

amounts to provide assistance to local firefighting, emergency medical,

and rescue services.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 6, 2000

Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania introduced the following bill; which was referred

to the Committee on Banking and Financial Services

A BILL

To amend the Housing and Community Development Act

of 1974 to authorize communities receiving community

development block grants to use grant amounts to provide assistance to local firefighting, emergency medical,

and rescue services.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 5424 IH

1 SECTION 1. ASSISTANCE TO FIRE FIGHTING, EMERGENCY

2 MEDICAL, AND RESCUE SERVICES AS ELIGI3 BLE ACTIVITY UNDER CDBG PROGRAM.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 105(a) of the Housing

5 and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C.

6 5305(a)) is amended—

7 (1) in paragraph (23), by striking the period at

8 the end and inserting a semicolon; and

9 (2) by inserting after paragraph (23) the fol10 lowing new paragraph:

11 ‘‘(24) provision of assistance to local fire fight12 ing, emergency medical, or rescue services for—

13 ‘‘(A) acquisition, repair, or rehabilitation

14 of equipment (including any accessory, commu15 nications, or protective equipment) or vehicles

16 for fire fighting, emergency medical, or rescue

17 services,

18 ‘‘(B) construction, acquisition, rehabilita19 tion, or improvement of facilities for local fire

20 fighting, emergency medical, or rescue services,

21 or

22 ‘‘(C) training or planning involved in pro23 viding fire fighting, emergency medical, or res24 cue services; and’’.

25 (b) LOW- AND MODERATE-INCOME BENEFIT.—Sec26 tion 105(c) of the Housing and Community Development
3

•HR 5424 IH

1 Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5305(c)) is amended by adding

2 at the end the following new paragraph:

3 ‘‘(5) An assisted activity described in subsection

4 (a)(24) shall be considered to benefit persons of low and

5 moderate income if the service provides such services to

6 all persons in the geographical area served, including any

7 low and moderate income persons.’’.

Æ
§ 102-2.35 How is the FMR distributed? ( a ) A liaison appointed by each agency provides GSA with their agency's distribution requirements of the looseleaf version of the FMR. Agencies must submit GSA Form 2053, Agency Consolidated Requirements for GSA Regulations and Other External Issuances, to—General Services Administration, Office of Communications (X), 1800 F Street, NW., Washington, DC 20405.
( b ) Order Federal Register and Code of Federal Regulations copies of FMR material through your agency's authorizing officer.
§ 403.10 Hearings; witnesses; affidavits. [Rule 10] ( a ) The witnesses at the hearings shall be examined viva voce, but the Board may, at any time, for sufficient reason, order that any particular facts may be proved by affidavit or that the affidavit of any witness may be read at the hearing, on such conditions as it may think reasonable, or that any witness whose attendance ought, for some sufficient reason to be dispensed with, be examined before a member of the Board. The evidence taken before a member of the Board shall be confined to the subject matter in question, and any objection to the admission of evidence shall be noted by the member and dealt with by the Board at the hearing. Such notice of the time and place of examination as is prescribed shall be given to the parties. All examinations shall be returned to the Board, and may without further proof be used in evidence, saving all just exceptions.
( b ) The Board may, whenever it deems it advisable to do so, require written briefs to be submitted by the parties.
( c ) The hearing, when once commenced, shall proceed, so far as in the opinion of the Board may be practicable, from day to day. [Rule 10]
[24 FR 9307, Nov. 18, 1959; 24 FR 10445, Dec. 23, 1959. Redesignated at 47 FR 13805, Apr. 1, 1982]
EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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-KSB of  Quotemedia,  Inc.
(the  "Company")  for the year  ended  December  31,  2002,  as  filed  with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Dave
Shworan, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.  1350,  as adopted  pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,
that:

(1)  The Report fully complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

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


/s/ David M. Shworan
---------------------------------
Dave Shworan
Chief Executive Officer
March 10, 2003
#### THE PEOPLE ex rel. WALTER SIMONDS, Commissioner of Highways, etc., *v.*WILLIAM RYKEN, Town Clerk of Grand Island, and others.

*Gertiomri*— return *to conclusive*— affidavits *showing it to be false*— court *cannot consider.*

Upon a common-law *certiorari,*the return is held conclusive; the court cannot consider affidavits tending to show that it is false, nor can the court refer it to a referee to ascertain the truth of the facts stated in the return.

Motion either to strike out part of a return, made by a justice of the peace to a writ of certiorari, or to refer it to a referee to ascertain its truth. The motion was made upon affidavits tending to show that the return was in some respects untrue.

*Geo. W.*Ooltmwn, for the motion.

*Lewis, Gurney & Sill,*for the relator.

*Per Curiam:*

Upon affidavits showing that the return of the justice is in several respects untrue, the respondent asks that such parts be stricken out, or that the court direct a reference to ascertain and report the facts occurring in the proceedings before the justice. Upon a common law *certiorari*the return is held conclusive as to the facts alleged, and the court must give judg*626ment upon the record and proceedings embraced in such return. It cannot consider affidavits contradicting said return in any particular. To do so, would subvert the proceeding by *certiorari*and turn it in effect into an ordinary special motion. In this case, there is quite a number of affidavits on both sides conflicting quite essentially in respect to the facts stated in the return. If the return is false, the officer is liable to an action for a false return. *(Smith*v. *Johnston,*30 How., 374; *People*v. *Powers,*19 Abb., 99 ; *Rawson*v. *Adams,*17 Johns., *131 ; Haines*v. *The Judges of Westchester County,*20 Wend., 625; *People*v. *Morgan,*65 Barb., 473.)

Nor can the court refer it to a referee to ascertain the truth of the facts stated in the return. There is no such practice.

If the return contains matter not called for or irrelevant, the court will disregard it, and so of matters returned upon information and belief. *(Lawton*v. *Commissioners of Highway of Cambridge,*2 Caines, 179; *Stone et al.*v. *Mayor of N. Y.,*25 Wend., 168.)

The motion should be denied with costs.

Present — Mullin, P. J., Smith and Gilbert, JJ.

Motion to strike out return, etc., denied, with ten dollars costs.
EXHIBIT 1 

Case 1:22-cv-22391-RKA Document 1-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2022 Page 1 of 9
Case 1:22-cv-22391-RKA Document 1-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2022 Page 2 of 9
Case 1:22-cv-22391-RKA Document 1-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2022 Page 3 of 9
Case 1:22-cv-22391-RKA Document 1-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2022 Page 4 of 9
Case 1:22-cv-22391-RKA Document 1-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2022 Page 5 of 9
Case 1:22-cv-22391-RKA Document 1-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2022 Page 6 of 9
Case 1:22-cv-22391-RKA Document 1-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2022 Page 7 of 9
Case 1:22-cv-22391-RKA Document 1-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2022 Page 8 of 9
Case 1:22-cv-22391-RKA Document 1-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2022 Page 9 of 9
#### § 221.7 Postal Service emblem.

The Postal Service emblem, which is identical with the seal, is registered as a trademark and service mark by the U.S. Patent Office. Except for the emblem on official stationery, the emblem must bear one of the following notations: “Reg. U.S. Pat. Off.”, “Registered in U.S. Patent Office”, or the letter R enclosed within a circle.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 21-0540 

# FILED DEC 2 8 2021 IN THE MATTER OF: Bowen Greenwood Clerk of Supreme Court State of IVIontana R.J.E., ORDER

A Youth in Need ofCare.

This matter comes before the Court on the petition of Appellate Defender Chad Wright for leave to file an out-of-time appeal on the Father's behalf, pursuant to M. R. App. P.4(6). The petition includes an Affidavit oftrial counsel Michael Strand with explanation that due to his illness, absence from the office, and miscommunication with Father, he did not timely perfect Father's appeal. The order terminating Father's parental rights was issued by the Thirteenth Judicial District Court, Yellowstone County, on October 4, 2021, in Cause No. DN 17-154. To guaranteethat Father'srightto appeal isprotected,theAppellateDefenderrequestsan order permitting an out-of-time appeal from that Order. IfFather is not permitted to appeal, it would constitute a gross miscarriage ofjustice and unduly punish him. The petition further states the Attorney General has no objection. Given the importance ofthe interests at stake for the Father, and without objection, IT IS ORDERED that the petition for leave to file an out-of-time appeal is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Appellate Defender shall have ten days from the dateofthis Order within which to file a Notice ofAppeal. The AppellateDefendershall immediately order the appropriate transcripts, ifthey have not been already ordered. 12/28/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0540The Clerk ofthis Court is directed to provide copies of this Order to all counsel of

record. 't / Th DATED this day ofDecember, 2021.

2