alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Omer HENRY, Appellant, v. LEMAC BUILDERS, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 70-1070.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 9, 1971.

Rehearing Denied March 25, 1971.

Ainslee R. Ferdie, Coral Gables, for appellant.

Harvey Richman, Miami Beach, for ap-pellee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and BARK-DULL and HENDRY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This interlocutory appeal presents a question of venue. The appellant urges that the proper venue is Orange County where the defendant resides or Brevard County where the lease arose. The lease sets forth that the rent is to be paid in Dade County; therefore, an action to recover rent may be brought in Dade County. Williams v. Aeroland Oil Co., 155 Fla. 114, 20 So.2d 346 (1944); M. A. Kite Co. v. A. C. Samford, Inc., 130 So.2d 99 (Fla.App.1961).

Appellant also attempts to present a question as to the pendency of a prior suit on the same cause of action but that point is not supported by the record. We expressly decline to pass on the point. It must appear from the record that the trial court had an opportunity to rule upon the issue for this court to undertake a consideration of the point. Permenter v. Bank of Green Cove Springs, 136 So.2d *377*(Fla.App.1962).

Affirmed.
Panel rehearing granted

and rehearing en banc denied

in No. 03-1220 by order

filed 10/29/03
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-1057

GEORGE ROGER SIEGEL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

ARLINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY

PLANNING HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT, and Its

Agencies; CRESCENT RESOURCES, LLC; FRANK

LASCH, Mid/Atlantic Property Manager;

ARLINGTON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, 17th Circuit

Court and its Judges and Staff; UNITED STATES

CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION; SECRETARY OF THE

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR;

UNKNOWN AGENTS, and Officers of Department of

the Interior; COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA;

ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA; COMMONWEALTH

ATLANTIC PROPERTIES, INCORPORATED; CRESCENT

POTOMAC PROPERTIES, LLC; EDWARD M. SMITH, c/o

BM Smith & Associates,

Defendants - Appellees.

No. 03-1220

GEORGE ROGER SIEGEL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus
3

ARLINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY

PLANNING HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT, and Its

Agencies; CRESCENT RESOURCES, LLC; FRANK

LASCH, Mid/Atlantic Property Manager;

ARLINGTON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, 17th Circuit

Court and its Judges and Staff; UNITED STATES

CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION; SECRETARY OF THE

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR;

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; ARLINGTON COUNTY,

VIRGINIA; COMMONWEALTH ATLANTIC PROPERTIES,

INCORPORATED; CRESCENT POTOMAC PROPERTIES,

LLC; EDWARD M. SMITH, c/o BM Smith &

Associates; UNKNOWN AGENTS, and Officers of

Department of the Interior,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District

Judge. (CA-02-902-A)

Submitted: May 22, 2003 Decided: May 30, 2003

Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

George Roger Siegel, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
4

PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated cases, George Roger Siegel appeals two

orders of the district court. In No. 03-1057, he challenges the

district court’s order dismissing his complaint for lack of subject

matter jurisdiction. We review de novo the district court’s

decision to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. Tillman v. Resolution

Trust Corp., 37 F.3d 1032, 1034 (4th Cir. 1994). We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court. See Siegel v. Arlington

County Dep’t of Community Planning, No. CA-02-902-A (E.D. Va. filed

Dec. 2, 2003 & entered Dec. 5, 2002; filed Jan. 23, 2003 & entered

Jan. 24, 2003). In No. 03-1220, Siegel appeals the district court’s

order denying his motion to reconsider under Rule 60, Fed. R. Civ.

P. We review denial of a motion to reconsider for abuse of

discretion, Werner v. Carbo, 731 F.2d 204, 206 (4th Cir. 1984), and

we find no such abuse here. We deny Siegel’s motion to remand; 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 32(b)


          Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted

            Pursuant to Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Peter Szigeti,  the Chief Accounting Officer of Euroweb  International  Corp.
(the "Company"),  certify,  pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1)  the Annual  Report on Form  10-KSB of the Company for the fiscal year ended
     December 31, 2004 (the "Report")  fully complies with the  requirements  of
     Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
     78m or 78o(d)); and

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





Dated: March 30, 2005




                                           /s/Peter Szigeti
                                           -------------------
                                           Name: Peter Szigeti
                                           Title: Chief Accounting Officer
118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2868 

AN ACT 

To accept the request to revoke the charter of incorporation 

of the Lower Sioux Indian Community in the State of 

Minnesota at the request of that Community, and for 

other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

†S 2868 ES

1 SECTION 1. REVOCATION OF CHARTER OF INCORPORA2 TION OF THE LOWER SIOUX INDIAN COMMU3 NITY. 

4 The request of the Lower Sioux Indian Community 

5 in the State of Minnesota to surrender the charter of in6 corporation issued to that community and ratified on July 

7 17, 1937, pursuant to section 17 of the Act of June 18, 

8 1934 (commonly known as the ‘‘Indian Reorganization 

9 Act’’) (48 Stat. 988, chapter 576; 25 U.S.C. 5124), is 

10 hereby accepted and that charter of incorporation is here11 by revoked. 

Passed the Senate November 21, 2024. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2868 

AN ACT 

To accept the request to revoke the charter of inthat Community, and for other purposes. nity in the State of Minnesota at the request of corporation of the Lower Sioux Indian Commu-
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           6,558
<SECURITIES>                                    13,883
<RECEIVABLES>                                      147
<ALLOWANCES>                                         5
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                22,553
<PP&E>                                           5,202
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,074
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  25,727
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,395
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           275
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    25,727
<SALES>                                            879
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   879
<CGS>                                            1,159
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,092
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   6
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (7,850)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (7,850)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.29)


</TABLE>
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



I, David Hills, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of LookSmart, Ltd. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of LookSmart, Ltd.



Date: November 14, 2005By:

/s/ David B. HillsName:

David B. HillsTitle:

Chief Executive Officer




I, William B. Lonergan, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of LookSmart, Ltd. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2005 fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of
LookSmart, Ltd.



Date: November 14, 2005By:

/s/ William B. LonerganName:

William B. LonerganTitle:

Chief Financial Officer
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

February 22, 2019

No. 04

- 17

- 00674

- CV

Christopher Todd RUST,

Appellant

v.

Aslynn Tanis RUST,

Appellee

From the 451st Judicial District Cou rt, Kendall County, Texas

Trial Court No. 17

- 470

Honorable Bill R. Palmer, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Sitting: Sand ee Bryan Marion, Chie f Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Jus tice

Irene Rios, Justice

Beth Watkins, Justice

Liza A. Ro driguez, Justice

The panel has considered the Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing, and the motion is

DENIED.

_________________________________ Irene Rios , J ustice

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

court on this 22nd day of February, 2019

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOT TLE

, Clerk of Court
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>             5
<LEGEND>
        THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM KEY
TECHNOLOGY, INC.'S CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN ITS ANNUAL
REPORT ON FORM 10-K FOR THE PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000
<CURRENCY>                                   US DOLLARS

<S>                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                               OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                 SEP-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           5,419
<SECURITIES>                                       984
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,098
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (336)
<INVENTORY>                                     14,618
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                34,014
<PP&E>                                          20,804
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (12,222)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  44,420
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,041
<BONDS>                                            722
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,183
<OTHER-SE>                                      23,474
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    44,420
<SALES>                                         68,028
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                68,572
<CGS>                                           42,281
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   42,281
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                21,139
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  (117)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 108
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,161
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,632
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,529
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,529
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.75
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.75




</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 201 (Friday, October 17, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54101-54102]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27563]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP97-129-008]


Questar Pipeline Company; Notice of Tariff Filing

October 8, 1997.
    Take notice that on October 2, 1997, Questar Pipeline Company 
(Questar) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First 
Revised Volume No. 1, the below-listed tariff sheets to be effective 
November 1, 1997:

Proposed Tariff Sheets

Original Sheet Nos. 46C, 81B and 84A
First Revised Sheet Nos. 75A, 99A, 99B, 99C and 99D
Second Revised Sheet Nos. 43, 46B, 75B, 75C, 80A, 81A and 84
Third Revised Sheet Nos. 44 and 75
Fourth Revised Sheet Nos. 45 and 46A
Sixth Revised Sheet No. 46

    Questar states that the filing is being made in compliance with the 
September 24, 1997, OPR Director Letter Order in Docket No. RP97-129-
003.
    Questar states that the proposed tariff sheets implement the 
requirements of Order No. 587-C and comply with the Commission's 
September 24 directive to (1) correct a typographical error in Standard 
2.3.31 and (2) revise the tariff language that incorporates GISB 
Standard 2.3.9.
    Questar states further that a copy of this filing has been served 
upon its customers, the Public Service Commission of Utah and the 
Wyoming Public Service Commission.
    Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

[[Page 54102]]

888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with 
Section 385.211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. 
All such protests must be filed in accordance with Section 154.210 
Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission 
in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve 
to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Copies of this filing 
are on file with the Commission and are available for public 
inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-27563 Filed 10-16-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 200 (Thursday, October 16, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 53788]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27428]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Health Resources and Services Administration


Announcement of Technical Assistance Workshops for Programs 
Administered by the Division of Disadvantaged Assistance, Bureau of 
Health Professions

SUMMARY: The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) 
announces that technical assistance workshops will be held for new and 
renewal applicants for the fiscal year (FY) 1998 competitive grant 
cycles for the Health Careers Opportunity Program.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Division of Disadvantaged Assistance, 
Bureau of Health Professions, Health Resources and Services 
Administration, Parklawn Building, Room 8A-09, 5600 Fishers Lane, 
Rockville, Maryland 20857, (301) 443-4493 or
    (301) 443-2100.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Division of Disadvantaged Assistance 
will be conducting application preparation technical assistance 
workshops for new and renewal applicants for the FY 1998 competitive 
grant cycles for the Health Careers Opportunity Program. The workshops 
are scheduled as follows:
    DoubleTree Hotel, Rockville, MD, (301) 468-1100, October 9-10, 
1997; Harvey Hotel, Atlanta, GA, (770) 955-1700, October 16-17, 1997; 
Embassy Suites, Houston, TX, (713) 995-0123, October 20-21, 1997; and 
Embassy Suites Airport, Los Angeles, CA, (310) 215-1000, October 23-24, 
1997.
    The program will commence at 8:30 a.m. each day. Attendees must 
make their own hotel reservations. Please reference the ``Health 
Careers Opportunity Program Technical Assistance Workshops.'' Expenses 
incurred by the attendees will not be supported by the Federal 
Government. Participation in the technical assistance workshops does 
not assure approval and funding of applications submitted for 
competitive review.

    Dated: October 9, 1997.
Jane M. Harrison,
Acting Director, Division of Policy Review and Coordination.
[FR Doc. 97-27428 Filed 10-15-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-15-P
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2011-1318 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2010-NM-274-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

No Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
<PAGE>   1


                                                                      Exhibit 23




                         Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)
of The Town and Country Trust of our report dated January 29, 1999 included in
the 1998 Annual Report to Shareholders of The Town and Country Trust. 

Our audits also included the financial statement schedule of The Town and
Country Trust listed in Item 14(a). This schedule is the responsibility of the
Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our
audits. In our opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to above, when
considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole,
presents fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein. 

We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 33-82932) pertaining to The Town and Country Trust Amended and
Restated 1993 Long Term Incentive Plan of our report dated January 29, 1999,
with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of The Town
and Country Trust included or incorporated by reference in the Annual Report
(Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1998. 


                                             /s/ Ernst & Young LLP


Baltimore, Maryland
March 29, 1999
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 200 (Thursday, October 16, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53834-53835]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27414]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Report No. 2232]


Petitions for Reconsideration and Clarification of Action in 
Rulemaking Proceedings

October 10, 1997.
    Petitions for reconsideration and clarification have been filed in 
the Commission's rulemaking proceedings listed in this Public Notice 
and published pursuant to 47 CFR Section 1.429(e). The full text of 
these documents are available for viewing and copying in Room 239, 1919 
M Street, NW., Washington, DC or may be purchased from the Commission's 
copy contractor, ITS, Inc. (202) 857-3800. Oppositions to these 
petitions must be filed October 31, 1997. See Section 1.4(b)(1) of the 
commission's rule (4 CFR 1.4(b)(1)). Replies to an opposition must be 
filed within 10 days after the time for filing oppositions has expired.
    Subject: Policy and Rules concerning the Interstate, Interexchange 
Marketplace Universal Service.
    Implementation of Section 254(g) of the Communications Act of 1934, 
as amended (CC Docket No. 96-61).
    Number of Petitions Filed: 7.


[[Page 53835]]


Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-27414 Filed 10-15-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-M