alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### WELLS *et al. v.*TAYLOR *et al.; et vice versa.*

*746Nos. 11967, 11968.

October 7, 1937.

*Bynum & Franlcum*and *Sam*Kimzey, for plaintiff.

*Hamilton Kimzey*and *Herbert B.*Kimzey, for defendant.

*748Bell, Justice.

Under the facts shown in the preceding statement, the order reinstating the motion for new trial was erroneous. The court had dismissed the motion for new trial on May 8, 1937, at a time and place regularly assigned for hearing, and the judge was without jurisdiction on a later day and in vacation to reinstate the motion. *Phœnix Bank*v. *Shirling,*146 *Ga.*163 (91 S. E. 23); *Hinson*v. *Tanner,*147 *Ga.*804 (95 S. E. 687); *Sheffield*v. *Sheffield,*148 *Ga.*466 (97 S. E. 76); *Union Banking Co.*v. *Weaver,*148 *Ga.*684 (97 S. E. 855); *Blakely Hardwood Lumber Co.*v. *Reynolds Co.,*173 *Ga.*602 (2), 608 (160 S. E. 775); *Cahoon*v. *Wills,*179 *Ga.*195 (175 S. E. 563); *Hicks*v. *Sadler,*45 *Ga.**749*App.*835 (166 S. E. 223). Since the order reinstating the motion was void for want of jurisdiction, it is immaterial that the reason given in the order of dismissal was based upon error or misapprehension. *Arnold*v. *Kendrick,*50 *Ga.*293 (2). Therefore the judgment must be reversed on the cross-bill of exceptions; and since this ruling will dispose of the entire case, no decision will ■be made on the main bill. Nor is it necessary to pass upon the request for a diminution of the record, relating solely to the main bill. The present case differs on its facts from *Berrien County Bank*v. *Alexander,*154 *Ga.*775 (115 S. E. 648), and *Luke*v. *Luke,*158 *Ga.*103 (3) (123 S. E. 716), where the orders vacating or modifying previous judgments were passed in term, and during the same terms respectively at which such judgments were rendered. Under the applicable decisions, this court can not do otherwise than to sustain the assignments of error as made in the cross-bill and dismiss the main bill of exceptions. See also *Robertson*v. *Robertson,*176 *Ga.*602 (168 S. E. 570).

*Judgment reversed on the cross-bill of exceptions. Main bill of exceptions dismissed.*

*All the Justices concur.*

Bussell, Chief Justice, and Jenkins, Justice, concurring specially.. *We*concur in the .judgment, because we believe the plaintiffs in the main bill of exceptions, who were movants in the motion for new trial, still have an adequate remedy.
**Exhibit32.2**

 

#### Certification Pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asAdopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Norcross Safety Products L.L.C. (the “Registrant”) on Form10-Q for the period ended July 2, 2005, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David F. Myers, Jr., Chief FinancialOfficer of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)           TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 
| Dated:  August 15, 2005 | By:    | /s/ DAVID F. MYERS, JR.                            |   |
|------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                         |   | David F. Myers, Jr.                                |
|                         |   | Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, |
|                         |   | Secretary and Manager                              |
|                         |   | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)       |

 

 

**A signed original of this written statementrequired by Section 906 has been provided to the Registrant and will beretained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.**

 

----
(Reap. Dec. 8322)

#### Edward S. Zerwekh Co. *v.*United States

Entry No. 8400.

(Decided July 8, 1954)

*Lawrence & Tuttle*for the plaintiff.

*Warren E. Burger,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Chief Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon an agreed statement of facts entered into by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto.

On the agreed facts I find the cost of production, as that value is defined in section 402 (f) 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 value was 801/19/5 English currency.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D 19

- 3361

_____________________________

R ONARD S TEPHEN S OFTLEIGH ,
Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA ,
Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Tatiana Salvador , Judge

.
September 29, 2020

P ER C URIAM

.

A FFIRMED

.

B.L. T HOMAS , M AKAR , and N ORDBY , JJ., concur

.

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

.

_____________________________2 Andy Thomas, Public Defender , Tallahassee; Terry P. Roberts of the Law Office of Terry P. Roberts, Tallahassee; Candice Kaye Brower, Regional Conflict Counsel, Office of Regional Conflict Counsel, Tallahassee; and Randall Harvey Richardson

, Assistant Regional Conflict Counsel, Office of Regional Conflict Counsel, Jacksonville, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and David Welch

, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
No. 53658.

protest 144272-K (Tampa).

#### State of Ohio Department of Liquor Control *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6192
TREMAINE L. KITCHEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JAMES PEGUESE, Warden; SHAVELLA WATKINS, Sergeant; FRANK SIZER, Commissioner; CAROL JACKSON, ARC Coordinator; KENNY TOWNES; CAPTAIN GRANT; LIEUTENANT SPENCE; OFFICER JOHNSON; GHIRLCHILICH, Hearing Officer; OFFICER GREENE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (8:05-cv-00466-DKC) Submitted: April 19, 2006 Decided: May 17, 2006 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tremaine L. Kitchen, Appellant Pro Se. J. Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Stephanie Judith Lane Weber, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.- 2 - Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 3 - PER CURIAM: Tremaine L. Kitchen appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Kitchen v. Peguese , No. 8:05-cv-00466-DKC (D. Md. Nov. 23, 2005). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 31.1

 Certification of Lamar Sinkfield, President, CEO of Silver
   Screen Studios, Inc., pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss.1350, as
  adopted pursuant to ss. 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
                           2002.)
I, Lamar Sinkfield, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for
the quarter ending on September 30, 2004  of Silver Screen
Studios, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and
other financial information included in this quarterly
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
quarterly 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 I have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant
is made known to me by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this quarterly
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 quarterly report (the
"Evaluation Date"); and
c) presented in this quarterly report my conclusions about
the 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:
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 weaknesses 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 quarterly report whether or not
there were significant changes in internal controls or in
other factors that could significantly affect internal
controls subsequent to the date of our most recent
evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.
Date: November 15, 2004
By:/s/ Lamar Sinkfield
Lamar Sinkfield, President, acting CEO and a acting Director
Exhibit 32.1

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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of The First Marblehead Corporation (the "Company") for the
quarter ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Daniel Meyers, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of the
Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



Dated: November 9, 2010

/s/ DANIEL MEYERS Daniel Meyers Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to The First Marblehead Corporation and will be retained by The First
Marblehead Corporation and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
Exhibit 99.1  CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER  I, John Wilson, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 40-F of Sprott Physical Silver Trust (the Trust);  2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Trust as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The Trusts other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the Trust and have:  a)designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Trust, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  b)designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;  c)evaluated the effectiveness of the Trusts disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  d)disclosed in this report any change in the Trusts internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by this annual report that has materially affected or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Trusts internal control over financial reporting.  5. The Trusts other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Trusts auditors and the audit committee of the Trusts board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):  a)all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Trusts ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b)any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Trusts internal control over financial reporting.   Date: March 31, 2014  /s/   JOHN WILSONJohn   WilsonPrincipal   Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 65 (Thursday, April 5, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 16797]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-6288]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration


Manufacturing Subcommittee of the Advisory Committee for 
Pharmaceutical Science and Clinical Pharmacology (formerly called 
Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science); Notice of Meeting; 
Cancellation

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The meeting of the Manufacturing Subcommittee of the Advisory 
Committee for Pharmaceutical Science and Clinical Pharmacology 
scheduled for April 30, 2007, is cancelled. This meeting was announced 
in the Federal Register of March 5, 2007 (72 FR 9767).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Victoria Ferretti-Aceto, Center for 
Drug Evaluation and Research (HFD-21), Food and Drug Administration, 
5600 Fishers Lane (for express delivery, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1093), 
Rockville, MD 20857, 301-827-7001, FAX: 301-827-6776, e-mail: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3d4b545e49524f545c135b584f4f584949545c5e5849527d5b595c1355554e135a524b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d1a7b8b2a5bea3b8b0ffb7b4a3a3b4a5a5b8b0b2b4a5be91b7b5b0ffb9b9a2ffb6bea7">[email protected]</span></a>, or FDA Advisory Committee 
Information Line, 1-800-741-8138 (301-443-0572 in the Washington, DC 
area), code 3014512539. Please call the Information Line for up-to-date 
information on this meeting.

    Dated: March 29, 2007.
Randall W. Lutter,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. E7-6288 Filed 4-4-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Gabriel Guerriero, Appellant.

[633 NYS2d 597]

—Appeal by the *561defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Robinson, J.), rendered February 25, 1994, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, grand larceny in the fourth degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, and unlawful possession of marihuana, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant, a passenger in the complainant’s taxicab, told the complainant to get out of the car "or I’ll kill you”, and pointed to his back, along his waist, as his female companion announced that the defendant had a gun. The complainant testified: "I didn’t take any chance. I just got out [of the taxicab]”. The defendant’s gesture which, under the circumstances, "conspicuously and consciously conveyed the impression” that the defendant was reaching for a gun, was sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt of robbery in the second degree upon the theory that the defendant displayed what appeared to be a firearm *(People v Lopez,*73 NY2d 214, 222; *see,*Penal Law § 160.10 [2] [b]; *People v Haney,*162 AD2d 613; *People v Smith,*142 ADd 619; *People v Hazel,*133 AD2d 847).

During the course of the trial the defendant asked for leave to admit in evidence the Grand Jury testimony of his deceased codefendant. The defendant asserted that the Grand Jury testimony was admissible pursuant to the principles enunciated in *People v Tinh Phan*(150 Misc 2d 435, 438-439, *affd*208 AD2d 659), which held that a defendant may introduce secondary forms of evidence such as Grand Jury testimony in evidence in a criminal proceeding if "the evidence is material to the defense”, the People had a full and fair opportunity to cross-examine the witness before the Grand Jury, and the witness is no longer available. There is no ruling on the record denying that application, but counsel later noted on the record that the application had been denied. Consequently the issue of the admissibility of that testimony *(cf, People v Terry,*148 AD2d 478) was preserved for appellate review.

However, the application was properly denied since the Grand Jury testimony was not material to the defendant’s defense. The codefendant did not contradict the victim or any of the other witnesses for the prosecution in any material respect *(see, Rosario v Kuhlman,*839 F2d 918). At one point the codefendant testified that the victim armed himself with a crowbar. However, he acknowledged that he "didn’t see this” and that the information regarding the crowbar had been told to him after the event. The codefendant’s testimony as to what *562other people told him was inadmissible as hearsay *(see,*Annotation, *Former Testimony Used at Subsequent Trial as Subject to Ordinary Objections and Exceptions,*40 ALR4th 514).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Thompson, Hart and Goldstein, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 58 (Tuesday, March 27, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 14322]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-5586]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 5730]


Fine Arts Committee Notice of Meeting

    The Fine Arts Committee of the Department of State will meet on 
April 20, 2007 at 2:30 p.m. in the Henry Clay Room of the Harry S. 
Truman Building, 2201 C Street NW, Washington, DC. The meeting will 
last until approximately 3:30 p.m. and is open to the public.
    The agenda for the committee meeting will include a summary of the 
work of the Fine Arts Office since its last meeting on February 20, 
2007 and the announcement of gifts and loans of furnishings as well as 
financial contributions from January 1, 2007 through March 31, 2007.
    Public access to the Department of State is strictly controlled and 
space is limited. Members of the public wishing to take part in the 
meeting should telephone the Fine Arts Office at (202) 647-1990 or send 
an e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#430031222a242b2a2f2f2e250330372237266d242c35"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a4e7d6c5cdc3cccdc8c8c9c2e4d7d0c5d0c18ac3cbd2">[email protected]</span></a> by April 13 to make arrangements to 
enter the building. The public may take part in the discussion as long 
as time permits and at the discretion of the chairman.

    Dated: March 16, 2007.
Gail F. Serfaty,
Secretary, Fine Arts Committee, Department of State.
 [FR Doc. E7-5586 Filed 3-26-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-35-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**Exhibit 31.2**
**CERTIFICATIONS**
I, George V. Migausky, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of BioVerisCorporation; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under whichsuch statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsiblefor establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:
     (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed underour supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly duringthe period in which this report is being prepared;
     (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and
     (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, 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 theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
     (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses inthe design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and
     (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.   /s/ George V. Migausky August 17, 2004George V. Migausky DateVice President and Chief Financial Officer