alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk April 23, 2012

d0416 

# Order

April 23, 2012

143388(48)

WILLIAM H. SCHMITT and DELORES SCHMITT, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v SC: 143388 COA: 297562 Macomb CC: 2 009-002073-NI JAGUAR/LAND ROVER OF MACOMB, L.L.C., d/b/a JAGUAR/LAND ROVER OF LAKESIDE, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for r econsideration of this Court’s October 24, 2011 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was entered erroneously.
#### David ENGEL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 76-2276.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 6, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 16, 1978.

*594Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Kurt Marmar, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Anthony Musto, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before HAVERFIELD, NATHAN and KEHOE, JJ.

KEHOE, Judge.

Appellant, defendant bélow, brings this appeal contending that the trial court erred in entering a final judgment and imposing separate sentences for offenses which were facets of the same transaction. We note that the question of the propriety of the sentences imposed upon appellant was never raised in the trial court. It is a well settled principle of law that issues not raised at trial will not be reviewed on appeal. *Mariani*v. *Schleman,*94 So.2d 829 (Fla.1957). This principle has been specifically applied to attempts to challenge on appeal, as appellant does here, the legality of a sentence. *Jones v. State,*341 So.2d 846 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); and *Noble v. State,*338 So.2d 904 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976).

Based on these principles, the final judgment of conviction and sentences appealed are affirmed; however, this decision is without prejudice as to the question of the propriety of the sentences if the issue is otherwise properly' raised, e. g., by Fla.R. Crim.Pro. 3.850.

Affirmed.
**Certification Pursuant to **

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

**as Adopted Pursuant to**

**Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

     In connection with the Annual Report of Plaintree Systems Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the period ending March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned hereby certifies that to the best of his knowledge:

           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.

 

                Date: September 29, 2005
#### Ronald BOZIK v. STATE.

No. 38942.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 1969.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 3, 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 225 So.2d 176.
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION





In
connection with the periodic report of Skystar Bio-Pharmaceutical Company (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Weibing Lu, Chief
Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) of the Company, hereby certify
as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350
of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:





(1)           The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, 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 at the dates
and for the periods indicated.





Date:  November
      15, 2010
              /s/ Weibing LuWeibing
      LuChief
      Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)
EXHIBIT 32.2


                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sierra Resource Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter  ending March 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Paul W.
Andre, Treasurer 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, to my knowledge:

     (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.


Date: May 13, 2008



                                        By: /s/ PAUL W. ANDRE
                                            ___________________________
                                                Paul W. Andre
                                                Treasurer and
                                                Chief Financial Officer
#### CENTRAL INVESTMENTS, INC., Appellant, v. OLD SOUTHERN GOLF UTILITY CORP., a Florida corporation; Public Utilities Corporation, a Florida corporation; and Sunrise Golf Development Corporation, a Florida corporation, Appellees.

No. 2394.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

June 30, 1969.

*390John I. Jacobson of McCune, Hiaasen, Crum & Ferris, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Talbot D’Alemberte of Scott, McCarthy, Steel, Hector & Davis, Miami, for appel-lees.

PER CURIAM.

Issues present in this appeal concern a stockholder’s derivative action to enforce contractual rights and allegations of fraud.

Appellant claims a one-third interest in certain utility lines, based on a contract which was incidental to a conveyance of a large tract of land known as Sunrise Golf Village. Also, appellant claims that ap-pellees fraudulently transferred assets from one corporation to another effecting a deprivation of appellant’s minority stockholder interest in the corporation.

Appellees claim that appellant’s only interest was a one-third stock interest in the utility corporation and further contend that the transfer of assets was pursuant to sound business judgment.

We have reviewed the complicated and voluminous record, transcripts, briefs and argument of both parties and conclude that no reversible error has been shown.

Therefore, the final judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

WALDEN, C. J., McCAIN, J., and TROWBRIDGE, C. PFEIFFER, Associate Judge, concur.
I

STATE OF LOU1ISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, lilRST CIRCUIT

PARISH OF ASCENSION

VERSUS

WESLEY J. SIMONEAUX

NO. 2023 CW 0132

MARCH 13, 2023

In Re: Parish of

Ascension

2022600. 

Ascension, applying for supervisory writs, 

Parish Court, Farish of Ascension, No. 

I

BEFORE: THERIOT, CHUTZ, AND HESTER, JJ. 

STAY DENIED; WRIT DENIED. 

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT

FOR THE COURT

MRT

WRC

CHH
STEAM ELECTRIC

C B I R E P L AC E M E NT P A G E

EPA

- HQ

- OW

- 20 09

- 0819

DCN:

________________________________________

T H E FO LL OW ING H AS BEE N R E M O V E D BE CAUSE IT

C O N T AINS C O N F ID E N T IAL B USIN E SS IN FO RMA T I O N

(C B I) P E R 4 0 C F R P ART 2

, SU B P ART B

. SE 04 331A0 39
#### Willie J. DARDEN, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Adult Corrections, State of Florida, Respondent.

No. 70-354.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 3, 1970.

Willie J. Darden, in pro. per.

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner alleges that he has previously filed a motion in the trial court under CrPR 1.850, 33 F.S.A. which set forth the same allegations as are contained in this petition. It is alleged that petitioner’s motion under CrPR 1.850 was denied by the trial court without an evidentiary hearing. The order denying petitioner’s motion under CrPR 1.850 was not appealed to this court.

All of the allegations except one (hereinafter discussed) are of the type which are properly considered by way of a motion under CrPR 1.850. Therefore, this petition for writ of habeas corpus is not the proper method for challenging the alleged errors.

Petitioner’s allegation, alluded to above as not properly raised under CrPR 1.850, urges that the trial court erred in denying his motion under CrPR 1.850 without affording him an evidentiary hearing. If this case were in the posture of a direct *140appeal from such order the position taken by the petitioner might well be valid.

We have carefully examined this petition and there are no allegations contained therein which would bring it under the holding in Baggett v. Wainwright, Fla.1969, 229 So.2d 239, whereby the petitioner should be afforded an appellate review of the trial court’s order denying petitioner’s motion under CrPR 1.850.

For the foregoing reasons the petition is denied.

HOBSON, C. J., and LILES and MANN, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          16,643
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  143,983
<ALLOWANCES>                                     7,703
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               120,942
<PP&E>                                         270,024
<DEPRECIATION>                                  19,835
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,054,205
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           48,478
<BONDS>                                        924,154
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          215,550
<PREFERRED>                                          1
<COMMON>                                           247
<OTHER-SE>                                     660,865
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,054,205
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               374,118
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  319,085
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                63,098
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 4,483
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              59,749
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (8,065)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       416
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (7,649)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (2,333)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (41,146)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.51)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.51)


</TABLE>
**Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record**

**Plant ID 03095**  **Removed from Public**  **(Non-CBI) Docket** **1 Copyright** 

**Flag 2**  **File Name Description**  x 03095\03095_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

03095\03095_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist 03095\03095_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted x 03095\03095_Part A.xls Plant submitted survey file x 03095\03095_Part B.xls Plant submitted survey file x 03095\03095_Part C.xls Plant submitted survey file x 03095\03095_Part D.xls Plant submitted survey file x 03095\03095_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file x 03095\Supplemental Documents\03095 follow up questions.doc Draft Questions for Follow Up x 03095\Supplemental Documents\03095 steam electric ICR questionnaire follow up.rtf Email communications regarding questions on the survey response x x 03095\Supplemental Documents\D-1 Merrimack Station WWT-A.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey x x 03095\Supplemental Documents\D-2 Merrimack Station POND-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 03095\Supplemental Documents\MAP-1 Merrimack Station Facility Diagram.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey x x 03095\Supplemental Documents\MAP-2 Merrimack Station Facility Diagram.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey x x 03095\Supplemental Documents\WB-1 Merrimack Station water balance.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

03095\Supplemental Documents\CoverLetter.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database

. 2Copyright documents are available from the docket.
**Exhibit      32.2**

**CERTIFICATION**

|   | (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d),                as                applicable, 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                at the dates and for the periods indicated. |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: May 15, 2008  | /s/ Bennet P.                Tchaikovsky                                               |
|--------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                     | Bennet                  P. TchaikovskyChief                  Financial Officer(Principal                  Financial and Accounting Officer)                                                                                                  |
|                     |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         |

----
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D21-3531

_____________________________

JASON TREVON WHARTON,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County.

James M. Colaw, Judge.

September 28, 2022

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

KELSEY, JAY, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Jason Trevon Wharton, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Julian E. Markham, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Exhibit
10.1
 AMENDED AND RESTATED
CENTRAL BANCORP, INC.
DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN FOR NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS
 1. PURPOSE.
   ADMINISTRATION.
 ELIGIBILITY; EFFECTIVE DATE.
 DIRECTORS DEFERRAL.




---



##### 



ESTABLISHMENT OF TRUST; DIRECTORS ACCOUNTS.
  
 UNSECURED GENERAL CREDITOR.
 DISTRIBUTION.
 
 2




---



##### 



NON-ASSIGNABLE.
 EXPENSES.
 PARTIES.
 LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY AND THE BANK.
 3




---



##### 



TERMINATION; AMENDMENT.
 
  NOTICES; GOVERNING LAW.
   CLAIMS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES.
 Claims Procedure
 Review Procedure
 4




---



##### 



AGGREGATION OF EMPLOYERS.
 SECTION 409A.
 5
#### WHELCHEL ELECTRIC, INC., Appellant, v. AIR COMFORT, INC., Appellee.

No. 69-464.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

Oct. 22, 1969.

Appeal dismissed.
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

v. 3:22-CR-318 

(JUDGE MARIANI) 

VICTOR BLANCO, 

Defendant. 

Y!:J ORDER 

AND NOW, THIS /0 DAY OF JULY, 2023, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 

1. For the reasons set forth in this Court's accompanying memorandum opinion, 

Defendant Victor Bianco's Motion to Suppress Statements (Doc. 40) is GRANTED 

IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: 

a. Defendant's motion to suppress his statement that he associates with 

members of the Sureno gang, made to Lt. Turner during the post-incident 

preliminary interview on August 24, 2022, is GRANTED. 

b. Defendant's motion to suppress his statement that "I'm a Sureno. I don't 

sign shit", made to Lt. Turner on September 2, 2022 is DENIED. 

2. Trial in this action will be scheduled at the request of any party following the 

expiration of the deadline for co-Defendant Isaac Carreno to file pre-trial motions 

(see Doc. 53) or, if Defendant Carreno files one or more pre-trial motions, following 

the disposition of those pre-trial motions. The time between the date of this Order 

and the expiration of the deadline for Defendant Carreno to filed pre-trial motions 

Case 3:22-cr-00318-RDM Document 55 Filed 07/10/23 Page 1 of 2
or, if pre-trial motions are filed , the time between the date of this Order and the 

date upon which Defendant Carreno's pre-trial motion(s) are decided, is excluded 

from Speedy Trial calculations pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(6) and (7). 

Ro ert D. Mar-i-aR· 

United States District Judge 

2 

Case 3:22-cr-00318-RDM Document 55 Filed 07/10/23 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE PEPSI
BOTTLING GROUP, INC. CONDENSED  COMBINED  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS FOR THE 12 WEEKS
ENDED MARCH 21, 1998 AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY  BY  REFERENCE  TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001076405
<NAME>                        THE PEPSI BOTTLING GROUP, INC.
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-26-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-21-1998
<CASH>                                         83
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  808
<ALLOWANCES>                                   47
<INVENTORY>                                    289
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1,328
<PP&E>                                         3,980
<DEPRECIATION>                                 2,061
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 7,278
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,070
<BONDS>                                        133
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (185)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   7,278
<SALES>                                        1,340
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1,340
<CGS>                                          777
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  777
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               3
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             52
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (13)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (7)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.11)
        

</TABLE>
#### Mary E. MITCHELL, Petitioner, v. The DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE of the State of Florida; Earl P. Schoenberger, Jr., the Chairman of the Board of the Department of Public Welfare of the State of Florida; and Emmett S. Roberts, Director, the Department of Public Welfare of the State of Florida, Respondents.

No. 69-171.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

Nov. 19, 1969.

T. Michael Foster, Gerald S. J. Cassidy and Michael Kantor, Fort Myers, for petitioner.

S. Strome Maxwell, Jacksonville, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court on petition for writ of certiorari upon the transcript of record, briefs, and argument of counsel, to review the order of the Department of Public Welfare of the State of Florida in said cause, bearing date of July 19, 1967, and same having been considered, it is ordered that said petition be and the same is hereby denied.

PIERCE, A. C. J., and MANN and McNULTY, JJ., concur.
#### Ervin JOHNSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-622.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Dec. 2, 1977.

Jack 0. Johnson, Public Defender, Bar-tow, and Ellen Condon, Asst. Public Defender, Tampa, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Mary Jo M. Gallay, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The order revoking appellant’s probation and sentencing him to prison is affirmed, but this case is remanded for resentencing of appellant. The present sentence does not specifically set forth the period of credit time to be allowed as required by Section 921.161(1) Florida Statutes (1975); *Brooks v. State,*349 So.2d 794 (Fla.2d DCA 1977). The appellant does not have to be present at resentencing.

GRIMES, Acting C. J., and SCHEB and DANAHY, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                           4,355
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,071
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (229)
<INVENTORY>                                        177
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,908
<PP&E>                                           2,922
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (763)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  20,869
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,834
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           37,322
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             2
<OTHER-SE>                                       8,243
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    20,869
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,248
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,999
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  34
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,732)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        10
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,742)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,742)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (4.32)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (4.32)


</TABLE>