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

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-21-00227-CV

LON SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC., AND 

A-1 SYSTEMS, INC. D/B/A LON SMITH 

ROOFING AND CONSTRUCTION,

Appellants

V.

JOE KEY AND STACCI KEY, Appellees

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 236th District Court

of Tarrant County (236-267881-13)

April 14, 2022

Opinion by Justice Wallach

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no error in the part of the trial court’s judgment denying arbitration as to the class 

and individual claims. We affirm those portions of the trial court’s order denying 

Appellants Lon Smith & Associates, Inc., and A-1 Systems, Inc. d/b/a Lon Smith 

Roofing and Construction’s (“Smith”) Motion to Compel Arbitration as to the 

Appellees Joe Key’s and Stacci Key’s individual claims and denying Smith’s Motion to 
Compel Arbitration as to the class members. We dismiss for want of jurisdiction the

portion of Smith’s interlocutory appeal regarding the trial court’s order denying 

Smith’s Motion to Amend Class Certification. We order the case remanded to the trial 

court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

It is further ordered that Appellants Lon Smith & Associates, Inc., and A1 Systems, Inc. d/b/a Lon Smith Roofing and Construction shall pay all of the costs 

of this appeal, for which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By __/s/ Mike Wallach__________________

 Justice Mike Wallach
**Docket Number: FAA -**  **2014 -**  **0137**
#### Mark THOMAS, a minor, by and through his father and next friend, Walter Thomas, and Walter Thomas, individually, Appellants, v. MPS INDUSTRIES, INC., and William Snow, Appellees. Mark THOMAS, a minor, by and through his father and next friend, Walter Thomas, and Walter Thomas, individually, Appellants, v. William H. PASCOE, and William Hoge Pascoe, Appellees.

Nos. 70-51, 70-52.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 6, 1970.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 2, 1970.

Frates, Fay, Floyd & Pearson, and L. Edward McClellan, Jr., Miami, for appellants.

Blackwell, Walker & Gray and James E. Tribble, Miami, for MPS Industries Inc.

Dean, Adams, George & Wood, Miami, for William H. Pascoe and William Hoge Pascoe.

Before CHARLES CARROLL, BARK-DULL and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See and compare Hormovitis v. Mutual Lumber Company, Fla.App.1960, 120 So.2d 42; Harper v. Mangel, Fla.App.1963, 151 So.2d 346; Cahill v. Cooney, Fla.App.1966, 182 So.2d 32.
Exhibit 32  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SS. 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 AccelPath, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended December 31, 2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of the Company do hereby certify, to their best knowledge and belief, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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.  Date: April 3, 2014/s/ Gilbert SteedleyGilbert Steedley
Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer
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 Hooker Furniture Corporation (the
Company) Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending August 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Paul B. Toms, Jr., 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 (Section 906), that, to the best of my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                       |  |     |  |                                     
|---------------------- |  | --- |  | ------------------------------------
|Date: October 10, 2005 |  | By: |  | /s/ Paul B. Toms, Jr.               
|                       |  |     |  | Paul B. Toms, Jr.                   
|                       |  |     |  | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2898 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2898

 To amend the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 to authorize 
the Secretary of Agriculture to authorize the use of certain grants to 
   deliver peer-to-peer mental health support to individuals who are 
engaged in farming, ranching, farm work, and other occupations relating 
                            to agriculture.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 21, 2023

  Mr. Padilla introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
   referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 to authorize 
the Secretary of Agriculture to authorize the use of certain grants to 
   deliver peer-to-peer mental health support to individuals who are 
engaged in farming, ranching, farm work, and other occupations relating 
                            to agriculture.

    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 ``Supporting Farmworkers' Mental 
Health Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds that farmworkers--
            (1) are vital to the economy and food supply of the United 
        States; and
            (2) who are disproportionately affected by stress and 
        anxiety, often lack access to behavioral health care services.

SEC. 3. FARM AND RANCH STRESS ASSISTANCE NETWORK.

    Section 7522 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (7 
U.S.C. 5936) is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``farm work,'' after ``ranching,'' each 
        place it appears;
            (2) in subsection (b)--
                    (A) in paragraph (1)(D), by striking ``or'' at the 
                end;
                    (B) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph 
                (3);
                    (C) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
            ``(2) to initiate, expand, or sustain programs that deliver 
        peer-to-peer mental health support to individuals who are 
        engaged in farming, ranching, farm work, and other occupations 
        relating to agriculture; or''; and
                    (D) in paragraph (3) (as so redesignated), by 
                striking ``paragraph (1) and subsection (a)'' and 
                inserting ``paragraphs (1) and (2) and subsection 
                (a)''; and
            (3) in subsection (d), by striking ``2023'' and inserting 
        ``2028''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 10.6

	ARIZONA HEALTH CARE COST CONTAINMENT SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION
		     DIVISION OF BUSINESS AND FINANCE
		    SECTION A.     CONTRACT AMENDMENT

1. AMENDMENT    2. CONTRACT      3.   EFFECTIVE DATE      4. PROGRAM
   NUMBER:         NO.	              OF AMENDMENT:
   25              YH8-0001-08        January 1, 2003        OMC

5.  CONTRACTOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS:
    VHS Phoenix Health Plan, Inc.
    1209 S. Seventh Avenue
    Phoenix, AZ  85007

6.  PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: To amend Section B, Capitation Rates to
    include capitation rates for the HIFA Parents population,
    effective January 1, 2003..

7.  THE CONTRACT REFERENCED ABOVE IS AMENDED AS FOLLOWS:

A.  CAPITATION RATES:  The rates on page 2 of this amendment will be
    paid to Contractors for HIFA parents enrolled with Contractors
    on or after January 1, 2003.


    NOTE: Please sign and date both and then return one to:
    Michael Veit, MD 5700
    AHCCCS Contracts and Purchasing
    701 E Jefferson Street
    Phoenix AZ 85034

8.   EXCEPT  AS PROVIDED FOR HEREIN, ALL TERMS AND CONDITIONS  OF
THE  ORIGINAL  CONTRACT  NOT HERETOFORE  CHANGED  AND/OR  AMENDED
REMAIN UNCHANGED AND IN FULL EFFECT.

IN  WITNESS  WHEREOF  THE  PARTIES HERETO  SIGN  THEIR  NAMES  IN
AGREEMENT

9.  SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED       10. SIGNATURE OF AHCCCSA
    REPRESENTATIVE:                   CONTRACTING OFFICER:

TYPED NAME: NANCY NOVICK              MICHAEL VEIT

TITLE: CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER        CONTRACTS & PURCHASING
				      ADMINISTRATOR

DATE:  12/5/02	                      DATE:  November 29, 2002

<PAGE>

						     Page 2 of 2

	           ARIZONA HEALTH CARE COST CONTAINMENT SYSTEM
		     CAPITATION RATE SUMMARY - ACUTE RATES
		    Phoenix Health Plan/Community Connection
			  CYE '03 (Effective 1/01/03)

		HIFA	  HIFA	    HIFA
HIFA Rates:	14-44,F	  14-44,M   45+,M/F
-----------	-------	  -------   -------
8  Gila/Pinal	$180.12   $122.40   $347.92
12 Maricopa	$148.32   $110.67   $309.85

*Rates have been adjusted for $50,000 Reinsurance Deductible
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 13, 2020

No. 04-19-00518-CR

Camron Leo SANCHEZ-VASQUEZ,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CR8320

The Honorable Velia J. Meza, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Sitting: Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Beth Watkins, Justice

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

This court’s February 3, 2020, submission letter setting this appeal for formal submission 

and oral argument on March 26, 2020, at 9:00 a.m. is WITHDRAWN. All requests for oral 

argument are DENIED.

The above cause is set for formal submission ON BRIEFS ONLY before this court on 

March 26, 2020, before a panel consisting of Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Beth Watkins, 

and Justice Liza A. Rodriguez.

It is so ORDERED on March 13, 2020.

 PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: _________________________

 Michael A. Cruz

 Clerk of Court
#### Homer VIERS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-2194.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 19, 1978.

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

*473Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Calvin L. Fox, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before PEARSON, BARKDULL and KEHOE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

By this appeal, we are called upon to rule upon the propriety of a lifetime sentence for attempted first degree murder. This sentence is in excess of that provided by the statutes. See: Sections 777.04(4)(a) and 775.082(3)(b), Florida Statutes (1977).

Therefore, the sentence be and the same is hereby set aside. In all other respects, the adjudications and sentence on the second degree murder conviction are affirmed. The matter is returned to the trial court for an appropriate sentence on the conviction for attempted first degree murder.

Affirmed in part; reversed in part, with directions.
1.99. £bS i Fl.- RV E80 pest.
a hobs 2d me, Begun = 202, Hanhec Ll
FFL. Ldgclagphdery ape Gers.” N86, TRIMRUCLA,
te fy = 860018, AV0-2 440 2 pS ELM Lak.
Allin P/sHtr., Moun foe. plete p hese sé, 28—Ay plead
203) Aceuads ca csP360 , FAC AW) | “Teoh Cat (ene, CCA,
VIG,)

Jomah leh Avac_



_ Vonve - wink

Poct - o\hte peduer poise (seh weve)

Chanrooar2 = 556 APM

naa: SS
<=

EGS Whats Von ico. 32S.sea
e—__+ 1. Qoct dmgitno and)
SOG ERE CONN A Geys.) S13

SOL GRecm A (NAY) sci9

E96--CKECM_} Yfcee |
/ IG-22
SOL- i SRECON__B 12 6®

GO. |GCRECm A 2o258



Sranoee~ _
=>

\

Nowicol 3:S' sue)
“Ct gn ea
ORES An | —Oeys) Se |
; <r Li GRE A (MAY i ys
BOL GeECM) een. 5
Bima veel

J §oLeiLG@eEcom me.

GolL...GRECM A

CLEC mir _.

~£.0:.t ELEC ON 2... , Ts $2.
___UNGED fo LECaver ayers be
w Anat)

ECS -\pxa|aa Venree.

Sete CRreem 3
EQ Le EC LEC Mln%

Sol. CREECH b
FOL CrECm_\a
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ARTHUR PARKER, )

)

Petitioner, )

) Civil Action No. 05-344 Erie

v. )

)

JAMES F. SHERMAN, )

)

Respondent. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

This habeas corpus action was received by the Clerk of Court on November 16,

2005, and was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter for

report and recommendation in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1), and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrates. 

The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 13], filed on July

31, 2006, recommended that Petitioner’s Petition be dismissed and that a certificate of

appealability be denied. The parties were allowed ten (10) days from the date of

service to file objections. Service was made on Petitioner by certified mail and on

Respondent. No objections were filed. After de novo review of the petition and

documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation, the following

order is entered:

AND NOW, this 18th day of August, 2006; 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas

Corpus is DISMISSED and a certificate of appealability is DENIED. 

The Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 13] of Magistrate Judge Baxter, filed

on July 31, 2006, is adopted as the opinion of the Court.

 s/ Sean J. McLaughlin

United States District Judge

cm: All parties of record

Susan Paradise Baxter, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 1:05-cv-00344-SJM-SPB Document 14 Filed 08/18/06 Page 1 of 1
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 3269 

To prohibit funding for the Government of Ukraine for the nationalization 

of strategic assets. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 9, 2023 

Mr. MARSHALL introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations 

A BILL 

To prohibit funding for the Government of Ukraine for the 

nationalization of strategic assets. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Prohibiting National5 ization of American Companies and Investments Act of 

6 2023’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 3269 IS

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS BY THE GOVERN2 MENT OF UKRAINE FOR THE NATIONALIZA3 TION OF UNITED STATES ASSETS. 

4 No amounts appropriated or otherwise made avail5 able by a law enacted before, on, or after the date of the 

6 enactment of this Act, may be used by the Government 

7 of Ukraine for the nationalization, expropriation, forced 

8 liquidation, seizure, or imposition of any restrictions on 

9 shareholders rights to execute governance over, assets or 

10 property in Ukraine that is owned directly or indirectly 

11 by United States investors, including shareholder interests 

12 in any publicly traded company. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
Exhibit 24.1





POWER OF ATTORNEY





KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that each of the undersigned
officers and directors of Shiloh Industries, Inc., a Delaware corporation, hereby constitutes and appoints Theodore K. Zampetis, Stephen E. Graham, David J. Hessler and Thomas C. Daniels, and each of them, as his true and lawful attorney or
attorneys-in-fact, with full power of substitution and revocation, for each of the undersigned and in the name, place and stead of each of the undersigned, to sign on behalf of each of the undersigned an Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal
year ended October 31, 2002 pursuant to Section 13 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and to sign any and all amendments to such Annual Report, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with
the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting to said attorney or attorneys-in-fact, and each of them, full power and authority to do so and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as
fully to all intents and purposes as the undersigned might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorney or attorneys-in-fact or any of them or their substitute or substitutes may lawfully do or cause to be done by
virtue thereof.





This power of attorney may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an
original with respect to the person executing it.





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have hereunto set their
hands as of the 12th day of December 2002.





Signature

Title/s/    THEODORE K.
ZAMPETIS Theodore K.
Zampetis

President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) and Director/s/    STEPHEN E.
GRAHAM Stephen E.
Graham

Chief Financial Officer (Principal Accounting Officer and Principal Financial Officer)/s/    CURTIS E.
MOLL Curtis E.
Moll

Chairman of the Board and Director/s/    MAYNARD H. MURCH,
IV Maynard H. Murch, IV

Director/s/    RONALD C.
HOUSER Ronald C.
Houser

Director/s/    DAVID J.
HESSLER David J.
Hessler

Director/s/    JAMES A.
KARMAN James A.
Karman

Director/s/    JOHN J.
TANIS John J.
Tanis

Director/s/    DIETER
KAESGEN Dieter
Kaesgen

Director
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

BUWLUS A. MUHAMMAD, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) Civil Action No. 05-243 Erie

v. )

)

DISTRICT JUSTICE )

JOSEPH LEFAIVER, )

)

Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

This motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis was received by the Clerk of

Court on August 22, 2005, and was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Susan

Paradise Baxter for report and recommendation in accordance with the Magistrates Act,

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrates. 

The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 2], filed on

August 31, 2005, recommended that the matter be dismissed as legally frivolous and

that the motion be denied. The parties were allowed ten (10) days from the date of

service to file objections. Service was made on Plaintiff by certified mail and on

Defendants. Objections were filed by Plaintiff on September 9, 2005. After de novo

review of the motion and documents in the case, together with the Report and

Recommendation and objections thereto, the following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 20th day of September, 2005;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in

forma pauperis [Doc. No. 1] is DENIED, and the matter is DISMISSED as legally

frivolous in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). 

The Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 2] of Magistrate Judge Baxter, filed

on August 31, 2005, is adopted as the opinion of the Court.

 s/ Sean J. McLaughlin

United States District Judge

cm: All parties of record

Susan Paradise Baxter, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 1:05-cv-00243-SJM-SPB Document 4 Filed 09/20/05 Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    Exhibit 23.2


                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS

         We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement of TransTexas Gas Corporation (the "Company") on Form S-3 (33-91494)
of, and the references to, our reserve report dated February 1, 1998 ("Reserve
Report"), and to the use of our name under the caption "Experts" and elsewhere
therein in the form and context in which they appear. We also consent to the
references to our Reserve Report and to the use of our name in the Company's
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended January 31, 1998 in the form and
context in which they appear.

                                     Netherland, Sewell & Associates, Inc.


                                     By: /s/ DANNY SIMMONS
                                        ----------------------------------------

Houston, Texas
April 30, 1998
#### ARKANSAS OAK FLOORING CO. v. PRITZEN.

No. 10727.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Jan. 27, 1937.

M. L. Reinberger, of Pine Bluff, Ark. (N. J. Gantt, Jr., of Pine Bluff, Ark., on the brief), for appellant.

William R. Donham, of Little Rock, Ark. (Arnold Fink, of Pine Bluff, Ark., on the brief), for appellee.

Before SANBORN, WOODROUGH, and BOOTH, Circuit Judges.

SANBORN, Circuit Judge.

G. F. Pritzen, as plaintiff, brought this action against the Arkansas Oak Flooring Company and Henry Clanton, its foreman, as defendants, to recover damages for personal injuries sustained while in the employ of the company. The injuries were alleged to have occurred while the plaintiff was replacing a belt upon an end-matching machine in the company’s mill, at Clanton’s direction, and to have resulted from the negligence of the defendants. The action was commenced in the circuit court of Jefferson county, Ark., and removed by the defendant company to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. The defendant company denied that it was negligent, and alleged that' the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence and that the injuries complained of were occasioned by a risk of his employment which he had assumed. The plaintiff dismissed as to the defendant Clanton. The case was tried to a jury, which returned a verdict for the plaintiff, and from the judgment entered thereon this appeal was taken.

The only error specified and argued was the failure of the court below to include in its charge the following instruc: tion to the jury: “In addition to the risks ordinarily incident to his employment, the plaintiff also assumed such extraordinary risks as were open' or apparent to him, and if you find from the evidence that the danger of replacing the belt was obvious to the plaintiff, then you are instructed that this danger was one of the risks assumed by him as an employee for which the defendant is not liable.”

While the record shows that this instruction was included in a list of requested instructions handed to the trial court by the defendant at the commencement of the trial, it fails to show that the defendant at any time directed the court’s attention to the instructions requested or secured from the court any ruling thereon, or that the defendant took any exception to the failure of the court to give the instruction which it is now claimed should have been given. It appears from the record that at the conclusion of the charge to the jury, the court said to counsel, “Anything further?” Counsel for defendant responded, “Nothing further.” There does not appear anywhere in the record a single exception to the charge or to the failure of the court to" give any requested instruction. Under the circumstances, there is nothing before this court for review. Hall v. Ætna Life Ins. Co. (C.C.A.8) 85 F.(2d) 447; United States v. Atkinson, 297 U.S. 157, 56 S. Ct. 391, 80 L.Ed. 555; Garrett Const. Co. v. Aldridge (C.C.A.8) 73 F.(2d) 814.

The judgment is affirmed.