alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Traffic Safety, Appellant *v.*Mary P. Calloway, Appellee.

Argued May 8, 1981,

before President Judge Crumlish and Judges Rogers and Williams, Jr., sitting as a panel of three.

*Harold H. Cramer,*Assistant Attorney General, with him *Ward T. Williams,*Chief Counsel of Transportation, and *Harvey Bartle, III,*Acting Attorney General, for appellant.

*Stephen P. McClosky, Phillips and Faldowski,*for appellee.

*648July 20, 1981:

Opinion by

President Judge Crumlish,

The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation appeals a Washington County Common Pleas Court decision reinstating driving privileges based upon extenuating circumstances. We reverse.

Mary P. Calloway was convicted on January 11, 1979, for having driven a motor vehicle on January 2, 1979, while already under license suspension. Although she successfully completed an examination in late December of 1978, Calloway was cited on January 2nd prior to receiving her license in the mail several days later. Upon receiving certification of the conviction, PennDOT revoked her operating privileges for a six-month period.

This Court has clearly held that an underlying criminal conviction may not be attacked in a subsequent suspension appeal which is civil in nature. *Department of Transportation, Bureau of Traffic Safety v. Grobes,*45 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 151, 405 A.2d 588 (1979). The issue is only whether the licensee was in fact convicted, not whether she should have been convicted, and whether PennDOT has acted as required by statute.1
      *Department of Transportation, Bureau of Traffic Safety v. Lea,*34 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 310, 384 A.2d 269 (1978).

Calloway cites us to *Commonwealth v. Emerick,*373 Pa. 388, 96 A.2d 370 (1953), for the proposition that economic hardship may serve to mitigate a license revocation. This is simply not the case. A lower court is limited solely to a de novo review to deter*649mine whether the violation has actually occurred, and may not modify or reverse PennDOT action based upon extenuating circumstances. *Department of Transportation v. Verna,*23 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 260, 351 A.2d 694 (1976). In fact, no compelling circumstances can be found here to mitigate the operation of a motor vehicle without a license.

Eeversed.

Order

The Washington County Common Pleas Court order dated October 29, 1979, No. 134 April Term 1979, is reversed and the suspension of the motor vehicle operating privileges of Mary P. Calloway is reinstated.

According to Section 1543(b) of the Vehicle Code, Act of June 17, 1976, P.L. 162, *as amended,*75 Pa. C. S. §1543 (b), upon receiving a certified record of the person’s conviction for driving a vehicle while the- operating privilege was suspended, PennDOT must revoke that privilege for an, additional period of six months.
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, Tammie A. Quinlan, Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, certifies that (1) this Quarterly Report of CNL Income Properties, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (this 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition of the Company as of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, and its results of operations for the quarters ended March 31, 2006 and 2005.



|                   |  |                                                                                                         
|------------------ |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: May 10, 2006 |  | /s/ Tammie A. QuinlanName: Tammie A. Quinlan Title: Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
#### TRIANGLE CRANE SERVICE, INC., PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANT-PETITIONER.

April 13, 1964. Denied.

*Messrs. Taylor, Bischoff, Neutze & Williams*and *Mr. Burchard V. Martin*for the petitioner.

*Messrs. Steinberg & Steele*and *Mr. William E. O’Connor, Jr.*for the respondents.

On petition for certification to Superior Court, Appellate Division.
A-P- am-. March 22, 1939

Honorable

TIXI C. &in% StateAhditor Austin,Texas

Dear Sirs Opinion No. O-628 Rer Cancellation

and releas. IBdeN3 RailwayBonds.

l7e are in moeipt of your letter of h!arah 22.whioh

is as Poll

.. "During'the

year 186C sad 1881 the State purchased for its Furmanen SohoolFund serial‘bonds of the TRt%RC

railroad

la the amount of #43O,soO,CC.

At a laterdate there uas a defaultIn prinoippl and : tern& and about1671 a speoial agraaaent

was made daferrlng thema turitier

of the obligation

and providing

a speo!fIoI

annualpayment prinalpal

and intorest. Final paymanbof the principaland lnteres~ obligationms made July 14, 1936, ~This offioe Is ~satisfisd that t recordsreflect

that the ~~bligatioas have been+d~Ia full to the S

"We are advised

that duringthe year 1936 the offioe of the Attoxng General of Texas rendered aa optionthat a joint resolution afthe legIslatIva.bodiis, authoriaiagtherelease of the obligPtions

to t TN&NO raIlrcPd~~uld be neoessary

before-suoh

releasecouldbe made the,'State~Treasurer aad the Governor. There‘seams to be ooasiderab .doubt as to the legal requirement of such a joint res@luticm or law uhlohevar

it may be oalled,

before the administrative officials

of State osn relaare

obligations

whioh have been satisfied in full. I will thadryou to advise if a legislative sot is neosssarp baforet StateTreasurer

and the Governor

oan releasethe pald'krt unoanosll obligations

of the TN&t70

railroad

mfarredto above.?

If these 'bonds

and aoorued interest have been fully paid off, the ohlIgatIOn'oo~plstely disoharged,

as stated In your latter, the road %axxld'undoubtbdly be entirled

to the surrender

and oanoellatlo the bonds 5.n

question.
..- Assrrming

that the bonds and Interest have been fullypaid, it tioassaryfor the Legislature to pass aw Act or Resolution authori proper offioials

to oanoeland surrender said bonds, and exeoutea widending that faot.

CCZtFG~egw Yours very truly APPROVED /s/GERALD C. MANN ATT~GRRRRADOF ATlWNEy GENEEbLOFTRXAS By /s/ Cecil C.-C&i &c3istar
(Reap. Dec. 8877)

Entry No. 845982, etc.

#### Astra Trading Corp. *v.*United States

(Decided June 25, 1957)

*Barnes, Richardson & Colburn*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule “B,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the plaintiff and the Assistant Attorney General for the United States concerning the merchandise referred to in the attached Schedule A, as follows: .

> 1. Said merchandise consists of binoculars and leather carrying cases which, in *John P. Herber & Co. Inc.*v. *United States,*C. D. 1519, this Court held to be subject to appraisement separately according to the value of each class of articles.

> 2. At the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States, the price at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers, in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States, packing included, is the unit price as shown in the attached Schedule A, in United States currency, the foreign value of such or similar merchandise being no higher.

> 3. The above reappraisements are abandoned as to all entries and merchandise not listed in the attached Schedule A, and said reappraisements may be deemed to be submitted for decision upon this stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values are as set forth in schedule *“A,”*hereto attached and made a part hereof.

The appeals having been abandoned insofar as they relate to all other merchandise, to that extent the appeals are hereby dismissed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
Before the Third Division,

October 3, 1945

No. 50551.

#### Protests 13959-K, etc., of Fujii Junichi Shoten, Ltd., et al. (Honolulu).

*286Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is similar in all material respects to that the subject of *United States*v. *Nippon Co.*(32 C. C. P. A. 164, C. A. D. 303), which record was admitted in evidence herein. In accordance therewith certain items of the merchandise were held entitled to free entry under paragraph 1705 as kelp and other items were held dutiable at 10 percent under paragraph 15.40 as seaweeds, manufactured.
Before the Third Division,

October 10, 1950

No. 54744.

#### Olavarria & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 111660-K, etc. (Tampa).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of sugar sirups similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Olavarria & Co., Inc.*(37 C. C. P. A. 40, C. A. D. 417), the claim of'the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 58598.

protests 216706-K, etc. (New York).

#### Columbia Tire Co. and Excel Shipping Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

*467Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of speedometers and parts thereof similar in all material respects to the merchandise the subject of *Industrial Operations, Inc.*v. *United States*(30 Cust. Ct. 82, C. D. 1500), except that the speedometers and parts thereof in the cited case were designed and intended for use as parts of motorcycles whereas those at bar are intended for use as parts of automobiles, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
#### Josephine Sahler, *Respondent, v.*Jennie L. Williams and others, *Appellants.*

— Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered before another referee, costs to abide event. Opinion by Barker, J.
Before the Second Division,

May 26, 1954

No. 58127.

protest 19475A-K (New York).

#### National Lead Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

At the trial, it was stipulated that the “non-ferrous metal is the component material of chief value of the merchandise imported, and that it is not an ore or concentrate” and “that the regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury under Section 2 of Public Law 869, Eighty-First Congress, requiring submission of proof of use in remanufacturing by melting, have been duly and timely complied with.” The court found that the uncontroverted testimony of the plaintiff’s three witnesses, who not only were familiar with the importation in controversy but also had wide experience in the field of metallurgy, unqualifiedly categorized the merchandise as scrap metal which has no value in the condition as imported but must be remanufactured by melting; that the so-called antimonial lead in ingot form is encompassed by the definition of the word “scrap” in section 1 (b) of Public Law 869, insofar as the material is secondhand and fit only to be remanufactured; and that it is also within the provision of section 2 of Public Law 869 as articles of which metal is the component material of chief value, imported to be used in remanufaeture by melting. Accordingly, it was held unnecessary to decide which of the two provisions more aptly applies to the merchandise in controversy, inasmuch as freedom from duty is granted by law to merchandise which comes within the purview of either provision. Upon the record presented, it was held that the merchandise is entitled to free entry under Public Law 869, as claimed.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1)
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and2)
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date: November 5, 2007
    
    /s/ Heath B. ClarkeHeath B. ClarkeChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)/s/ Douglas S. NormanDouglas S. NormanChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
No. 65580.

#### Rohner Gehrig & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 60/23522 (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

Prom a review of the record in this case, the court found nothing tending in any way to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the classification by the collector. The protest was, therefore, overruled.
To the Board of Directors

Ableauctions.com, Inc. and Subsidiaries







Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm





We consent to the incorporation in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 of Ableauctions.com, Inc. and subsidiaries, which were filed with the Commission as numbers 333-117979, 333-114906, 333-32740, 333106102, 333-106101, 333-106005, 333-87800 and 333-32740, of our Independent Registered Public Accounting Firms Report dated March 15, 2006 covering the consolidated financial statements of Ableauctions.com, Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2005.







/s/ Cinnamon Jang Willoughby & Company



CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS



Burnaby, BC

March 31, 2006
EX-23.1

         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


Board of Directors
GamezNFlix, Inc.

We consent to the incorporation by reference of our independent
auditors' report dated April 12, 2004 on the consolidated balance
sheet as of December 31, 2003, and the related consolidated statements
of operations, changes in stockholders' (deficit) and cash flows the
year then ended, included in GamezNFlix, Inc.'s Form 10-KSB, into the
Company's previously filed registration statements on Form S-8 POS
(File No. 333-105157) and Form S-8 (File No. 333-105157).

/s/ Smith and Company
Smith and Company
Salt Lake City, Utah
April 16, 2004

                                  EX-23.1

         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



Board of Directors
GamezNFlix, Inc.

We consent to the incorporation by reference of our independent
auditors' report dated April 13, 2003 on the consolidated balance
sheet as of December 31, 2002, and the related consolidated statements
of operations, changes in stockholders' equity and cash flows the year
then ended, included in GamezNFlix, Inc.'s (formerly known as Point
Group Holdings, Incorporated) Form 10-KSB, into the Company's
previously filed registration statements on Form S-8 POS (File No.
333-105157) and Form S-8 (File No. 333-105157).

/s/ Beckstead and Watts, LLP
Beckstead and Watts, LLP
Las Vegas, Nevada
April 16, 2004
EE-RM/STD-94-403 

ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER 

PRODUCTS TEST PROCEDURE FOR CLOTHES WASHERS 

LIST #216AA 

MISSING FROM FILE
-82 -80 -78 -76

 38

 40

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲

▲

▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

08/01

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 01 Aug 06

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.86 N 77.06 W Meters AGL
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Habitat and environment of islands:primary and supplemental island sets**
 
Report | Plate | Locator | CD-ROM
 
SuDoc Number:I 19.16:1590
Item Number:0624 (online)
CGP systemNumber:001052752
 
April 16, 2018
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADDED BY

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Coast Financial Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2006
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Brian F. Grimes, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as added by § 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; and
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for
the period covered by the Report.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                    |  |     |  |                               
|------------------- |  | --- |  | ------------------------------
|Date: July 28, 2006 |  | By: |  | /s/ Brian F. Grimes           
|                    |  |     |  | Brian F. Grimes, President and
|                    |  |     |  | Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.2

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 this Report on Form 10-Q of Summit Financial Services Group, Inc. (the
Company), for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Steven C. Jacobs, Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, do hereby certify, to my knowledge that:



| | (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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                    
|----------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Steven C. Jacobs                                
|Steven C. Jacobs                                    
|Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|                                                    
|Dated: May 15, 2008
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

Kurtis T. Wilder,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 June 27, 2017

s0619

Order 

Clerk

June 27, 2017

154534

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 154534

COA: 334205

Wayne CC: 16-003006-FH

GARY GILMORE,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

By order of May 2, 2017, the prosecuting attorney was directed to answer the 

application for leave to appeal the September 13, 2016 order of the Court of Appeals. On 

order of the Court, the answer having been received, the application for leave to appeal is 

again considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, 

we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration, as on leave granted, of: 

(1) whether the defendant waived the question of his entitlement to an evidentiary 

hearing regarding the amount of restitution; and if not, (2) whether the Wayne Circuit 

Court erred in denying him such a hearing. See People v McKinley, 496 Mich 410 

(2014). In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the remaining question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

We further DIRECT the Court of Appeals to REMAND this case first to the 

Wayne Circuit Court, in accordance with Administrative Order 2003-03, so that the 

circuit court can determine whether the defendant is indigent and, if so, to appoint 

counsel to represent the defendant in the Court of Appeals. 

WILDER, J., did not participate because he was on the Court of Appeals panel.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service 

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Taxpayer Assistance Center Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel (TAP) will be conducted (via teleconference). The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service. 

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Tuesday, February 6, 2007. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dave Coffman at 1-888-912-1227, or 206-220-6096. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Assistance Center Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held Tuesday, February 6, 2007 from 9 a.m. Pacific Time to 10:30 a.m. Pacific Time via a telephone conference call. If you would like to have the TAP consider a written statement, please call 1-888-912-1227 or 206-220-6096, or write to Dave Coffman, TAP Office, 915 2nd Avenue, MS W-406, Seattle, WA 98174 or you can contact us at                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*                     Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate in the telephone conference call meeting must be made with Dave Coffman. Mr. Coffman can be reached at 1-888-912-1227 or 206-220-6096.                 

*The agenda will include the following:*                     Various IRS issues.                 

Dated: January 9, 2007. 

John Fay, 

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. E7-588 Filed 1-17-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P