alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Midtown Edge, L.P. and Midtown Condominiums, L.L.C. v. The City of Houston, Texas, and The Pierce Street Flats, L.L.C.

Appellate case number: 01

- 12

- 00730

- CV

Trial court case number: 1003812

Trial court: Co Civil Ct at Law No 4 of Harris County

Howard L. Steele, Charles Storm, Matt Zagrodzky, and Richard P. Le Blanc III, c ounsel for appellants, M idtown Edge, LP and Midtown Condominiums, LLC, ha ve filed a motion to withdraw as appellate counsel. It is ordered that the motion to withdraw as appellate counsel is granted.

A corporation may be represented only by a licensed attorney in the prosecution of its appeal. See Moore v. Elektro

- Mobile Techn ik GmbH , 874 S.W/.2d 324, 327 (Tex. App.

— El
Paso 1994, w rit denied). Accordingly, if they desire to prosecute their appeal, Midtown Edge, LP and Midtown Condominiums, LLC must retain licensed counsel to represent t hem . Any attorney retained to represent Midtown Edge, LP and Midtown Condominiums , LLC in this appeal must make an appearance by filing a notice of representation with the Clerk of this Court by August 1 6 , 2013. If such not ice of representation is not filed, Midtown Edge, LP and

Midtown Condomi niums, LLC’s appeal will be dismissed on August 30 , 2013

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(b), (c); see also MHL Homebuilder LLC v. Dabal/Graphic Resource , No. 14

- 05000295

- CV, 2005 WL 1404475 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] June 16, 2005, no pet.) (mem. op.).

Judge’s signature: /s/ Terry J e nnings

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: August 1, 2013
§ 171.113 Trunks. ( a ) For the purpose of this section, “trunk” means a large enclosed passageway through any deck or bulkhead of a vessel.
( b ) Each trunk, other than those specified in paragraph (c) of this section, must have a watertight door at each end except that a trunk may have a watertight door at one end if— ( 1 ) The trunk does not pass through more than one main compartment;
( 2 ) The sides of the trunk are not nearer to the shell than is permitted by § 171.067(c) for the sides of a recess in a bulkhead; and
( 3 ) The vessel complies with the subdivision requirements in this part when the volume of the trunk is included with the volume of the compartment into which it opens.
( c ) Each trunk that provides access from a crew accommodation space and that passes through a main transverse watertight bulkhead must comply with the following: ( 1 ) The trunk must be watertight.
( 2 ) The trunk, if used for passage at sea, must have at least one end above the margin line and access to the other end of the trunk must be through a watertight door.
( 3 ) The trunk must not pass through the first main transverse watertight bulkhead aft of the collision bulkhead.
# C_2013101EN.01001402.xml

| 6.4.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 101/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.4.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 101/14

---

Order of the President of the Court of 4 October 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Okresný súd Prešov — Slovakia) — Valeria Marcinová v Pohotovst’ s.r.o.

(Case C-30/12) (1)

1

2013/C 101/29

Language of the case: Slovak

The President of Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 98, 31.3.2012.

1

---
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 23.1 - CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-10435) pertaining to the Affinity Technology Group, Inc. 1995 Stock
Option Plan, 1996 Stock Option and the Non-Employee Directors' Stock Option
Plan, of our report dated March 27, 2002, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements and schedule of Affinity Technology Group, Inc. included in
the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2001.





                                           /s/  SCOTT McELVEEN LLP


Columbia, South Carolina
April 1, 2002


                                       48
#### The Town of Thompson, *Appellant, v.*William Norris, *Respondent*.

Motion to continue injunction pending appeal, denied.
#### § 201.91 Filing of motions, answers.

Any party or (if a petition to intervene shall have been filed but not have been acted upon) any prospective party may at or before the first prehearing conference in any proceeding, or at such later time as might be allowed by the presiding officer, move with supporting affidavits for a summary disposition in his favor of all or any part of the proceeding. Any adverse party may within 20 days serve opposing affidavits or may countermove for summary disposition. Oral argument thereon may be granted in the discretion of the presiding officer.
Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATIONS**I, Lyle Berman, certify that:1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Lakes Entertainment, Inc.; 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 quarterly 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 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 disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b. designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internalcontrol over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to providereasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparationof financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally acceptedaccounting principles;  c. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  d. disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer 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 operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant.’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.     Date: December 16, 2005 /s/Lyle Berman         Lyle Berman    Chief Executive Officer
# RECEIVED
-s Z: (J

### 2 FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

## AUG 2**~** 

## 2012 

# HEARING DOCKET
Executive Helicopters, Inc. ) ) ) Docket No. FAA-2012-0476


# ____________________________ ) Judge J.E. Sullivan
WITHDRAWAL OF COMPLAINT As the parties have settled this matter, the Complaint filed inthis matter onJune 12, 2012 is hereby withdrawn.
Peter J. Lynch Assistant ChiefCounsel Enforcement ivision, AGC-300

Autumn Killingham Attorney, AGC-300 Federal Aviation Administration Office ofthe ChiefCounsel 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20591 Telephone: (202) 267-7728CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that the Withdrawal ofComplaint, in the matter ofExecutive Helicopters, Inc., has been mailed this date by via facsimile and certified mail to: Jeremy Bass, President Executive Helicopters, Inc. 3231 Victory Street Hanger 328 West Myrtle Beach, SC 29577
The Honorable J.E. Sullivan, Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) Washington, D.C. 20591

The original and one copy was also mailed this date by Certified Mail to: Hearing Docket, Room 924A, AGC-10 (Original and one copy) Federal Aviation Administration 600 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20591 Atten: Hearing Docket Clerk
August 22, 2012
§ 188.25-1 Electrical engineering details. ( a ) The electrical engineering details shall be in accordance with subchapter J (Electrical Engineering) of this chapter.
#### § 189.25-45 Fire hazards.

At each inspection for certification and periodic inspection, the inspector shall examine the tank tops and bilges in the machinery spaces to see that there is no accumulation of oil which might create a fire hazard.

[CGFR 67-83, 33 FR 1118, Jan. 27, 1968, as amended by USCG-1999-4976, 65 FR 6509, Feb. 9, 2000]
#### JOHN HAMMOND ET AL. v. JOSEPH WACKER.

Decided May 4, 1929.

Before Gummere, Chiee Justice, and Justice Parker.

For the rule, *George W. G. McCarter.*

*Contra, Theodore D. Parsons.*

Per Curiam.

This is an action for personal injuries. The trial resulted in verdicts in favor of the plaintiff John Hammond and of his mother, with whom he was living and who supported him. The facts relating to the accident were as follows: The *454defendant operated an auto bus under a contract with the board of education of Middletown, which required him to carry pupils to and from the Leonardo High School. John Hammond was one of the pupils so carried. He was thirteen years old. The accident happened in East Keansburg, at the corner of Port Monmouth road and Ocean avenue. The auto bus was then upon its way to the high school, and one of its regular stops was on the far corner of these two intersecting streets. At that corner some sixteen boys and girls, including the plaintiff John Hammond, had collected, waiting for the arrival of the bus. John saw it approaching, and, instead of waiting until it came to a standstill at its regular stopping place, hurried across the intersecting street, evidently for the purpose of being one of the first of the crowd of sixteen to get on the bus. The door of the bus was open, and he attempted to board it while it was still in motion and approaching its regular stopping place. At that moment the bus swung off the concrete toward the curb, and John, who had taken hold of the handles of the bus, lost his grip, slipped under the wheels and was run over. This is his own story, and it demonstrates that the accident was due, in part at least, to his own negligence.

Por this reason the rule to show cause will be made absolute.
United States Court of Appeals,

Eleventh Circuit.

No. 94-9152.

Margery A. MORSTEIN, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

NATIONAL INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.; Pan American Life Insurance

Company; The Shaw Agency; Scott Hankins, Defendants-Appellees.

April 11, 1996.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern

District of Georgia (No. 1:92-cv-2686-RLV), Robert L. Vining, Jr.,

Judge.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

(Opinion February 12, 1996, 11th Cir., 1996, 74 F.3d 1135).

Before TJOFLAT, Chief Judge, and KRAVITCH, HATCHETT, ANDERSON,

EDMONDSON, COX, BIRCH, DUBINA, BLACK, CARNES and BARKETT, Circuit

Judges.

BY THE COURT:

A member of this court in active service having requested a

poll on the suggestion of rehearing en banc and a majority of the

judges in this court in active service having voted in favor of

granting a rehearing en banc,

IT IS ORDERED that the above cause shall be reheard by this

court en banc. The previous panel's opinion is hereby VACATED.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 19, 2020

No. 04-20-00487-CV

Joe GUILLEN, Carolyn Harris, Sidney Hipp, Wayne Holmes and Shenandoah Church of Christ,

Appellants

v.

Gabriel RODRIGUEZ,

Appellee

From the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2020-CI10510

Honorable Angelica Jimenez, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The trial court clerk has filed a notification of late record, stating that appellants have

failed to pay or make arrangements to pay the fee for preparing the clerk’s record and that 

appellants are not entitled to preparation of the clerk’s record without paying the fee.

It is therefore ORDERED that appellants provide written proof to this court on or before 

October 30, 2020, that either (1) the clerk’s fee has been paid or arrangements have been made 

to pay the clerk’s fee; or (2) appellants are entitled to appeal without paying the clerk’s fee. If 

appellants fail to respond within the time provided, this appeal will be dismissed for want of 

prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b); see also TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c) (allowing dismissal of 

appeal if an appellant fails to comply with an order of this court).

_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 19th day of October, 2020.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 3
Federal Reserve Bank of: Philadelphia

## Filings received during the week ending June 17, 2006

|Filer                           | Filing Type   | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                   | End of Comment Period                             
|------------------------------- | ------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------
|CONESTOGA BANCORP, INC          | Member* 3A1   | Conestoga Bancorp, Inc., (in formation) King of Prussia, PA, to become a bank holding company, by acquiring Conestoga Bank (also in formation), King Prussia, PA. | Newspaper:06/25/2006Federal Register:Not available
|Newspaper:                      | 06/25/2006   
|Federal Register:               | Not available
|EAST PENN FINANCIAL CORPORATION | * 3A5         | East Penn Financial Corporation, Emmaus, PA, to acquire up to 19.9% of Berkshire Bancorp, Inc., Wyomissing, PA.                                                   | Newspaper:Not availableFederal Register:07/10/2006
|Newspaper:                      | Not available
|Federal Register:               | 07/10/2006   

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report ofSanders Morris Harris Group Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period endedJune 30, 2004 (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof, I, Ben T. Morris, Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.     The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,as amended; and

 

2.     The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 
| /s/  BEN T.  MORRIS |   |   |   |
|--------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| Ben T. Morris            |   |   |
| Chief Executive Officer  |   |   |

 

 

August 9, 2004

 

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Sanders MorrisHarris Group Inc. and will be retained by Sanders Morris Harris Group Inc. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

WILDFIRE CREDIT UNION, 

a Michigan Credit Union, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

FISERV, INC., a Wisconsin 

corporation, also known as 

FISERV SOLUTIONS, INC., 

 Defendant/Counter- 

 Plaintiff, 

and 

OPEN SOLUTIONS, LLC, 

 Counter-Plaintiff. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. 1:14-cv-14359-TLL-PTM

Hon. Thomas L. Ludington 

Hon. Patricia T. Morris, Magistrate 

Judge 

STIPULATED ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

This Stipulation is being filed on behalf of Wildfire Credit Union, Fiserv 

Solutions, Inc. n/k/a Fiserv Solutions, LLC and Open Solutions, LLC, by and 

through their counsel of record, and seeks dismissal of this action in its entirety and 

with prejudice, in light of a confidential settlement of all claims in this lawsuit 

entered into by all parties that have appeared in this action as of June 2, 2016. 

Case 1:14-cv-14359-TLL-PTM ECF No. 57 filed 06/27/16 PageID.1335 Page 1 of 3
2 

Each party will bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees. A proposed order is 

submitted herewith. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED with 

prejudice, in its entirety, with each party to bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees. 

This is a final order and closes the case. 

Dated: June 27, 2016 s/Thomas L. Ludington 

 THOMAS L. LUDINGTON 

 United States District Judge 

STIPULATED AND AGREED TO: 

KUS RYAN & ASSOCIATES, PLLC

/s/ Cindy Rhodes Victor 

Cindy Rhodes Victor (P33613) 

Michael A. Kus (P27186) 

Jeffrey S. Horowitz (P66251) 

2851 High Meadow Circle 

Suite 120 

Auburn Hills, MI 48326 

(248) 364-3090 

cvictor@victorfirm.com

mkus@krslaw.biz 

jhorowitz@krslaw.biz

Attorneys for Wildfire Credit Union 

Dated: June 13, 2016 

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP 

/s/ Andrew J. Wronski 

Andrew J. Wronski 

Elizabeth A. N. Haas 

Kate E. Gehl 

Foley & Lardner LLP 

777 East Wisconsin Avenue 

Milwaukee, WI 53202 

awronski@foley.com

ehaas@foley.com

kgehl@foley.com

(414) 271-2400 

Vanessa L. Miller (P67794) 

500 Woodward Avenue, Suite 2700 

Detroit, MI 48226 

vmiller@foley.com

(313) 234-7100 

Attorneys for Open Solutions, LLC, 

Fiserv, Inc. and Fiserv Solutions, LLC.

Case 1:14-cv-14359-TLL-PTM ECF No. 57 filed 06/27/16 PageID.1336 Page 2 of 3
3 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served 

upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first 

class U.S. mail on June 27, 2016. 

 s/Michael A. Sian 

 MICHAEL A. SIAN, Case Manager 

Case 1:14-cv-14359-TLL-PTM ECF No. 57 filed 06/27/16 PageID.1337 Page 3 of 3
#### Barton Pratt, *Appellant,*v. George Richardson and Harvey Collis, *Respondents*.

Judgment affirmed. Opinion by

Haight, J.
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**




**Certification
      Pursuant to**


**Exchange
      Act Rule 15d-14(b) and**


**18
      U.S.C. Section 1350**





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Astrata Group Incorporated
      (the ”Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending November 30, 2006,
      as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
      “Report”), I, Martin Euler, Chief Executive Officer and Chief
      Financial Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant
      to Exchange Act Rule 15d-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, that:





i.
            The
                report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
                of
                the Securities Exchange Act 1934; and





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








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 Astrata Group
      Incorporated and will be retained by Astrata Group Incorporated and furnished
      to
      the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.




/s/ MARTIN
                  EULERDated:
                  January 19, 2007
                Name:
                  Martin EulerTitle: 
                    Chief Executive Officer and
                  Chief
                    Financial Officer
# C_2013046EN.01003304.xml

| 16.2.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 46/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.2.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 46/33

---

Order of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal of 20 June 2012 — Westeren v Commission

(Case F-64/11) (1)

1

2013/C 46/70

Language of the case: English

The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 252, 27.08.2011, p. 57

1

---