alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

December 6, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

131244 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. SHR LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellant, Justices 

v SC: 131244 

 COA: 258058 
 Otsego CC: 99-008060-CK 

MERCURY EXPLORATION COMPANY,

DOMINION RESERVES, INC., and

QUICKSILVER RESOURCES, INC., 

Defendants-Appellees. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 11, 2006 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. Because we 

conclude that plaintiff’s position on appeal is frivolous, we REMAND this case to the 

Otsego Circuit Court for an assessment against plaintiff of the costs and attorney fees 

incurred by defendants on appeal, along with an evidentiary hearing concerning the same, 

if requested by either party. 

We do not retain jurisdiction. 

t1129 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

December 6, 2006 

Clerk
EXHIBIT 3

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 of DOLPHIN PRODUCTIONS, INC., (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer of the Company certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:
(1) The Report fully complies with the 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 operation of the
Company.

Date: February 7, 2005.


      /s/ Richard H. Casper


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

    Richard H. Casper

    Chief Executive Officer







      /s/ Pamela Lindquist


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

    Pamela Lindquist

    Chief Financial Officer
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Matthew Ryan Blain, * From the 238th District

 Court of Midland County,

 Trial Court No. CR40859.

Vs. No. 11-14-00151-CR * July 3, 2014

The State of Texas, * Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

 (Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

 Willson, J., and Bailey, J.)

 This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that the appeal 

should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Therefore, in accordance with this 

court’s opinion, the appeal is dismissed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<CIK> 0001075954
<NAME> OSWEGO COUNTY BANCORP
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           4,988
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 1,300
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     17,024
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          15,567
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            15,251
<LOANS>                                         72,171
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,103
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 115,215
<DEPOSITS>                                      99,968
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                752
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             9
<OTHER-SE>                                      14,488
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 115,215
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  4,285
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,324
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   131
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 5,740
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               2,337
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,337
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            3,403
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       90
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  11
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  3,413
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    299
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         299
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       214
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.12)
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.35
<LOANS-NON>                                        962
<LOANS-PAST>                                        79
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   962
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,068
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       76
<RECOVERIES>                                        21
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                   90
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                              1103
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
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 of Adolor Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Bruce A. Peacock, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|(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/ Bruce A. Peacock   
|Bruce A. Peacock       
|Chief Executive Officer
|November 2, 2004
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 96-60140 Summary Calendar

_____________________
CUONG DUY NGUYEN,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

Respondent-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States Tax Court

(8231-94)

_________________________________________________________________ October 30, 1996 Before SMITH, DUHÉ, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Cuong Duy Nguyen filed a notice of appeal from the decision of

the United St ates Tax Court sustaining the Commissioner’s

determinatio n of deficiencies in tax and additions to tax for

fraud. But, Nguyen’s p ro se brief does not challenge the

correctness of the Tax Court’s decision; instead, he seeks $32

million in damages for emotional distress, loss of time and income,

men tal stress and loss of reputation, claiming that Internal- 2 -

Revenue Service emp loyees conspired with employees of his past

employers to discriminate against him because of his ethnicity.

His brief, includes, for example, a discussion of the Quebec

s eparatist movement. His brief also contains a totally improper

(bordering on, if not, contemptuous) and most offensive discussion

of sexual matters which are completely irrelevant to the

correctness of the Tax Court’s decision. Accordingly, the appeal

is DISMISSED as frivolous. S ee 5 TH C IR

. L OCAL R. 42.2. Appellant

risks the imposition of sanctions should he make further similar

filings.

DISMISSED; SANCTIONS WARNING ISSUED
#### In re FLORIDA RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (Rule 3.850—Model Form for Post Conviction Relief).

No. 49355-E.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Dec. 22, 1977.

PER CURIAM.

Appended to this order are amended and new rules of The Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. These rules shall govern all proceedings within their scope after 12:01 a. m. January 1, 1978.

It is so ordered.

OVERTON, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, ENGLAND, SUNDBERG, HATCHETT and KARL, JJ., concur.

APPENDIX



*553

*554

*555

*556

*557

*558

*559
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Clarence H. PRUITT.

No. 62320.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 9, 1978.

In re: Clarence H. Pruitt applying for writ of mandamus and certiorari. Parish of St. Mary.

Writ denied. Trial judge’s reasons for denial can be used in lieu of Boykin transcript.
**Exhibit 31.3**

 

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPALFINANCIAL OFFICER

 

I, Gregg Buckbinder, ChiefOperating Officer and principal financial officer of Millburn RidgefieldCorporation, the Managing Owner of The Millburn World Resource Trust (the“Trust”), do hereby certify that:

 

1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of The MillburnWorld Resource Trust;

 

2.  Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain anyuntrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisannual report;

 

3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this annual report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the Trust as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

 

4. The Trust’s other certifyingofficers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14)for the Trust and have:

 

  (a)  designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relatingto the Trust, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisannual report is being prepared;

 

  (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Trust’s disclosure controlsand procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of thisannual report (the “Evaluation Date”); and

 

  (c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluationas of the Evaluation Date;

 

5.  The Trust’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation, to the Trust’s auditors and the audit committeeof the Trust’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

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

 

  (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in the Trust’s internalcontrols; and

 

6.  The Trust’s other certifying officers and I have indicated inthis annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internalcontrols or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controlssubsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any correctiveactions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

 
| By:                      | /s/ Gregg  Buckbinder |   |
|--------------------------|-----------------------|--------|
|                     |
|                     |
| Gregg  Buckbinder        |
| Chief  Financial Officer |
| March 26,  2004          |

 

1

----
#### STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY and Joe Grooms, Appellants, v. Sarah BECTON, Appellee.

No. 76-2119.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 22, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 9, 1978.

James M. Hess, Thomas G. Kane, and James 0. Driscoll of Driscoll, Baugh, Lang-ston, Layton & Kane, P. A., Orlando, for appellants.

Bruce W. Jacobus of Ferrell and Jacobus, Melbourne, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

CROSS and DAUKSCH, JJ., concur.

ANSTEAD, J., dissents, with opinion.

ANSTEAD, Judge,

dissenting:

The appellee was successful in an action to establish a contract of insurance with the appellant, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. The critical issue was whether the appellee’s contract of insurance had lapsed for non-payment. The following judgment was entered:

> That the Plaintiff, SARAH BECTON, recover from the Defendant STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, the sum of $3,950.00, pursuant to the contractual terms of Coverage F under State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company’s Policy No. 2050 549-F14-59, for collision damage to her automobile. In the event this Judgment is reversed by an appellant court as to STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, then Judgment shall be entered for SARAH BECTON. and against Defendant JOE *564GROOMS in the amount of $3,950.00. In the event the Judgment entered against STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY is affirmed, or no appeal is taken, and the Judgment becomes final, then, Judgment shall be entered for JOE GROOMS and against Plaintiff, SARAH BECTON.

At the trial and prior to the entry of the final judgment the trial court expressed his reservations about the action. I believe the judgment is an expression of those reservations. As the trial court noted, the evidence is not clear as to the previous manner in which the parties had contracted for insurance or as to how premiums were paid. Under these circumstances I believe there should be a new trial.
TEN STIX INC.
                              A NEVADA CORPORATION
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Ten Stix Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David
Keaveney, Chief Executive Officer, President and Chief Financial Officer,
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; and

     (2)  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 authentication, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed from within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Ten Stix Inc.,
and will be retained by Ten Stix Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





Dated: November 22, 2004                    /s/ David Keaveney
       ___________________                  _________________________________
                                            By:   David Keaveney
                                            Its:  Chief Executive Officer,
                                                  President and Chief Financial
                                                  Officer
%Transmittance ' ' '
**~** w ""

**~ ~**  "" w ... "' en "" 00 co 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I ' ' ' ' ' I I ' I I ' ' I \ I ' ' I I I ' ' I I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I 1 1'1:s: \-1;;:::: **~i ~**  **~~** ;)> **~** 0 t7 (;! ::r**~~** _, **~** V\€-. -o(/\ **~** 8 a-?if _c:;, > --" §1 J> s 2962.34 2928.64' 0 ;::t: 2870.72 **~** 2818.18 \-"I 2735.36 s; "" r "' 0- - 0 r **~i**

::f l'" m (\ <<D:::>c3rr<DUl -"" Cl 0 3 0.:.o- t **1670.2~** ___) 1624. 9\1606.931 **§~** 1566.07 = 1511.16 1463.301 1422.62 1363.88 1299.51 -..___ __ 1184.38 **-------~** 1286.98 -- 1252.19 1126.38\_ §i **1054.86~--** 1015.10 97423 **~** =- -----· 859.32 815.01 3..B2 547.50
109TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2028

AN ACT

To provide for the reinstatement of a license for a certain

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission project.

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

2

S 2028 ES

1 SECTION 1. REINSTATEMENT OF LICENSE FOR FEDERAL

2 ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

3 PROJECT.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding the time period

5 specified in section 13 of the Federal Power Act (16

6 U.S.C. 806) that would otherwise apply to project num7 bered 7307 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commis8 sion, the Commission shall, on the request of the licensee

9 for the project, in accordance with that section (including

10 the good faith, due diligence, and public interest require11 ments of that section and procedures established under

12 that section), extend the time required for commencement

13 of construction of the project until December 31, 2007.

14 (b) APPLICABILITY.—Subsection (a) shall apply to

15 the project on the expiration of any extension, issued by

16 the Commission under section 13 of the Federal Power

17 Act (16 U.S.C. 806), of the time required for commence18 ment of construction of the project.

19 (c) REINSTATEMENT OF TERMINATED LICENSE.—If

20 a license of the Commission for the project has been termi21 nated before the date of enactment of this Act, the Com22 mission shall—

23 (1) reinstate the license effective as of the date

24 of the termination of the license; and
†

3

S 2028 ES

1 (2) extend the time required for commencement

2 of construction of the project until December 31,

3 2007.

Passed the Senate November 16, 2006.

Attest:

Secretary.
109TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2028

AN ACT

To provide for the reinstatement of a license for a

project.certain Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State 

v. Parr, Slip Opinion No. 2020-Ohio-5130.] 

NOTICE 

This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an 

advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to 

promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 

South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or other 

formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be made before 

the opinion is published. 

SLIP OPINION NO. 2020-OHIO-5130

THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. PARR, APPELLANT.

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 

may be cited as State v. Parr, Slip Opinion No. 2020-Ohio-5130.] 

Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed on the authority of State v. Brown—

Discretionary appeal dismissed as having been improvidently accepted. 

(Nos. 2019-1428 and 2019-1597―Submitted October 27, 2020―Decided 

November 4, 2020.) 

CERTIFIED by and APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, 

No. 17AP-782, 2019-Ohio-4011. 

__________________ 

{¶ 1} In case No. 2019-1428, the judgment of the court of appeals is 

affirmed on the authority of State v. Brown, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2020-Ohio-4623, 

___ N.E.3d ___. 

{¶ 2} The discretionary appeal in case No. 2019-1597 is dismissed as 

having been improvidently accepted. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

2

O’CONNOR, C.J., and KENNEDY, FRENCH, FISCHER, DEWINE, DONNELLY, 

and STEWART, JJ., concur. 

_________________ 

Ron O’Brien, Franklin County Prosecuting Attorney, and Michael P. 

Walton, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 

Yeura R. Venters, Franklin County Public Defender, and Timothy E. Pierce, 

Assistant Public Defender, for appellant, Robert J. Parr. 

_________________
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. Section 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report ofSouth Shore Resources Inc.(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period endedJune 30, 2008as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I,Richard Wachter, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |   
| | 2. | The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| |   

Dated this 14thday of August, 2008.

RICHARD WACHTERRichard WachterChief Financial Officer























---
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1894 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.1894

                       One Hundred Ninth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
            the fourth day of January, two thousand and five

                                 An Act

 
 To amend part E of title IV of the Social Security Act to provide for 
  the making of foster care maintenance payments to private for-profit 
                                agencies.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Fair Access Foster Care Act of 
2005''.

SEC. 2. FOSTER CARE MAINTENANCE PAYMENTS TO PRIVATE FOR-PROFIT 
              AGENCIES.

    Section 472(b) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 672(b)) is 
amended by striking ``nonprofit'' each place it appears.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```