alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In re ESTATE of Charles V. MAXCY, Deceased. Peggy MAXCY, as Guardian for Charles G. Maxcy, a Minor, et al., Appellants, v. H. James BRETT, as Attorney for Former Co-Executrix Irene Maxcy Wells O’Mara, Appellee.

No. 72-1058.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 27, 1973.

Timothy A. Johnson, Jr., and Carlton, Fields, Ward, Emmanuel, Smith & Cutler, Tampa, for appellants.

Robert D. Melton & Associates, Orlando, for appellee.

HOBSON, Judge.

On June 24, 1969, the County Judge entered an order allowing attorneys for Citizens National Bank of Orlando, co-executor of the estate of Charles V. Maxcy, *11$25,000 for ordinary services and $25,932 for extraordinary services. On the same day the lower court awarded appellee, as attorney for the co-executor, Irene H. Maxcy, $20,000 for ordinary and extraordinary services. On appeal this court reversed those orders and remanded the cause for further proceedings, requiring the County Judge to re-examine the entire matter of overall fees and restructure them in line with the views expressed in our opinion. In Re Estate of Maxcy, Fla. App.1970, 240 S.2d 93.

On October 19, 1972, the County Judge held a hearing, without notice to appellants’ attorney, and on November 27, 1972, entered an order awarding appellee $15,000 for his services rendered to the co-executor of the estate.

Appellants’ motion to vacate or, alternatively, for rehearing, was denied, and this appeal ensued.

The record on appeal shows that appellants were not afforded the opportunity to be heard on appellee’s petition for attorney’s fees when the lower court permitted the hearing to proceed without notice to appellants or their attorney, in violation of, F.S., § 734.01(2) F.S.A. By such ex parte hearing on the petition and the entry of the order thereon, appellants were denied due process of law. Fuentes v. Shevin, (1972) 407 U.S. 67, 92 S.Ct. 1983, 32 L.Ed.2d 556; Prunty v. State ex rel. Williams, Fla.App.1969, 226 So.2d 448; In re Estate of Nye, Fla.App.1972, 263 So.2d 252.

It is also clear that the County Judge did not comply with the mandate of this court, and therefore the order must be reversed. Sullivan v. Chase Federal Savings and Loan Ass’n., Fla.App.1961, 132 So.2d 341; Rinker Materials Corp. v. Holloway Materials Corp., Fla.App.1965, 175 So.2d 564; Posner v. Posner, Fla.1972, 257 So.2d 530.

On January 1, 1973, pursuant to Florida Constitution, Rev. Article V, Case No. 3080, styled In Re Estate of Charles V. Maxcy, .Deceased, in the County Judge’s Court, from which this appeal was taken, was transferred to the Circuit Court of the Tenth Judicial Circuit of the State of Florida while this appeal was pending. On January 31, 1973, that case was consolidated with two other cases pending in the Circuit Court.

Upon remand all issues of attorneys’ fees should be determined in accordance with our opinion in In Re Estate of Max-cy, reported in 240 So.2d 93.

Reversed and remanded.

MANN, C. J., and McNULTY, J., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.2

 

CERTIFICATIONS OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

UNDER SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Remedent, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2006 (the “Report”) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission,  I, Philippe Van Acker, 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 operations of the Company as of and for the period covered by this Report.

 

 

| Date:    November 20, 2006 | By:    | /s/ Philippe Van Acker        |   |
|------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------|--------|
|                                           |   | Philippe Van Acker            |
|                                           |   | Chief Financial Officer       |
|                                           |   | (Principal Financial Officer) |
#### Sylvia S. STRAUSS, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

No. 59.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Jan. 4, 1937.

Arthur B. Hyman, of New York City (Arthur B. Hyman and Charles H. Lieb, both of New York City, of counsel), for petitioner.

Robert H. Jackson, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Sewall Key and Joseph M. Jones, Sp. Assts. to the Atty. Gen., for respondent.

Before MANTON, L. HAND, and CHASE, Circuit Judges,

PER CURIAM.

Decision affirmed.
PUBLIC LAW 104–12—MAY 18, 1995 109 STAT. 161

Public Law 104–12

104th Congress

An Act

To provide a moratorium on certain class action lawsuits relating to the Truth

in Lending Act.

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 ‘‘Truth in Lending Class Action

Relief Act of 1995’’.

SEC. 2. MORATORIUM.

Section 130 of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1640)

is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

‘‘(i) CLASS ACTION MORATORIUM.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—During the period beginning on the date

of the enactment of the Truth in Lending Class Action Relief

Act of 1995 and ending on October 1, 1995, no court may

enter any order certifying any class in any action under this

title—

‘‘(A) which is brought in connection with any credit

transaction not under an open end credit plan which is

secured by a first lien on real property or a dwelling and

constitutes a refinancing or consolidation of an existing

extension of credit; and

‘‘(B) which is based on the alleged failure of a creditor—

‘‘(i) to include a charge actually incurred (in

connection with the transaction) in the finance charge

disclosed pursuant to section 128;

‘‘(ii) to properly make any other disclosure required

under section 128 as a result of the failure described

in clause (i); or

‘‘(iii) to provide proper notice of rescission rights

under section 125(a) due to the selection by the creditor

of the incorrect form from among the model forms

prescribed by the Board or from among forms based

on such model forms.

‘‘(2) EXCEPTIONS FOR CERTAIN ALLEGED VIOLATIONS.—Paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to any action—

‘‘(A) described in clause (i) or (ii) of paragraph (1)(B),

if the amount disclosed as the finance charge results in

an annual percentage rate that exceeds the tolerance provided in section 107(c); or

Effective date.

15 USC 1601

note.

Truth in Lending

Class Action

Relief Act of

1995.

Courts.

May 18, 1995

[H.R. 1380]
109 STAT. 162 PUBLIC LAW 104–12—MAY 18, 1995

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 1380:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 141 (1995):

Apr. 4, considered and passed House.

Apr. 24, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

‘‘(B) described in paragraph (1)(B)(iii), if— ‘‘(i) no notice relating to rescission rights under section 125(a) was provided in any form; or ‘‘(ii) proper notice was not provided for any reason

other than the reason described in such paragraph.

Approved May 18, 1995.
<Page>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.5

                   CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF ACCOUNTING OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                (SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

    The undersigned, J. Peter Lloyd, the Chief Accounting Officer of Keystone
Property Trust, (the "Registrant"), does hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that based upon a review of our 2002 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2002 of the Registrant, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report").

    (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 Registrant.

Date: March 27, 2003

                                          /s/ J. Peter Lloyd
                                          Vice President and Chief Accounting
                                          Officer
Our Mission:

APBP is a community of practitioners working to 

create more walkable, bikeable places. 

We foster peer knowledge sharing, advance 

technical expertise, and support the 

professional development of our members.

USDOT Summit on Pedestrian Safety 1
Member Benefits

• Monthly Webinar Series

• Policy work on behalf of practitioners

• Mentor Program

• APBP Conference and Walk Bike Places registration discounts

• Scholarships

• APBP Community List Serve

USDOT Summit on Pedestrian Safety 2
Policy Statements

• Automated Driving Systems

• Complete Streets

• E-Bikes

• Performance Measures

• Shared Micromobilty Systems

• Vision Zero

USDOT Summit on Pedestrian Safety 3

Available as Resources on 

apbp.org
Vision Zero Elements

• Anticipate Human Error

• Reduce or Eliminate Opportunities for Crashes and Crash Severity

• Create an Action Plan that lays out:

• Actionable strategies 

• Timelines

• Priorities

• Meaningful community engagement

• Emphasis on equity

• Measure and assess progress

USDOT Summit on Pedestrian Safety 4
Vision Zero Strategies that 

support a Safe System Approach 

• Context based speed limits – web-based tools such as USLIMITS2 

• Intersection improvements – marked crosswalks, raised medians and 

pedestrian refuge islands, leading pedestrian intervals, exclusive left turn 

phasing, pedestrian hybrid beacon, lighting, roundabouts 

• Separation of modes as roadways become more complex – sidewalks, 

shared use paths, separated bike lanes

• Road diets – reallocation of space to support improvements for walking 

and cycling

USDOT Summit on Pedestrian Safety 5
Future Events

• Professional Development Webinar Series

• Crash Reporting, Transit Station Connectivity, Cycle Highways, Night-time Street Safety, 

Speed Management

• Quarterly Policy Webinars on the latest developments in federal 

transportation policy and legislation

• 25th Anniversary Celebration

• 2021 APBP Conference (Minneapolis/St. Paul in August)

USDOT Summit on Pedestrian Safety 6
apbp.org

859-402-9819

USDOT Summit on Pedestrian Safety 7
Exhibit 32.2


                          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 The Bralorne  Mining  Company (the
"Company")  on Form  10-QSB for the period  ended May 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned,  in the  capacities  and  on  the  dates  indicated  below,  hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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: July 14, 2005


/s/ Michael Liu
------------------------------------
Michael Liu
Principal Financial Officer
Exhibit 99.1

                           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  Technest  Holdings,  Inc.  and
Subsidiaries  (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30,
2002 as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Mark Allen, Director of the Company,  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 result of  operations of the
Company.

/s/Mark Allen
Mark Allen
Director (Principal Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
December 30, 2002
FILED: November 3, 2015 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

___________________ No. 14

- 7410 (1:98- cr -00358- LMB -4)

(1:11- cv -01413- LMB) (1:09- cv -01008- LMB)

___________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff - Appellee

v. WILFREDO GONZALEZ LORA Defendant

- Appellant

___________________ O R D E R

___________________ The court previously denied rehearing and rehearing en banc and issued its mandate in this case on October 21, 2015. The court now recalls the mandate and grants panel rehearing pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 40. The clerk is directed to consolidate this case with No. 15-6137, United States v. Wilfredo Gonzalez Lora. Entered at the direction of the panel: Judge Duncan, Judge Diaz, and Senior Judge Davis. For the Court /s/ Patricia S. Connor, Clerk
From: Robe-rt Fling Fax: (281) 727-0082 To: +12024935142 Fax: +12024935142 

## S. ROBERT FLING, PLLC. ATTORNEY AT LAW TELEPHONE (281) 391-2003 FACSIMILE (281) 727-0082 PhysicalAddress: 5518 Fifth Street, Suite C Katy, Texas 77493



### Hon. Richard C. Goodwin Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Depmtment ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Ave., S.E. EastBuilding Ground Floor, Room E12-230 Washington, D.C. 20590 Facsimile: (202) 366-7536 Courtesy email Richard.goodwin@dot.gov Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20591 Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 WilburWright Building-Suite2WIOOO Facsimile: (202) 493-5142 Kyle Lomazow Office ofthe Regional Counsel Federal Aviation Administration 1601 Lind Ave. SW Renton, Washington 98057 Facsimile: (425) 227-1007 April28, 2014 Page 2 of 3 04128!2014 4:05

Mailing Address: P.O. Box 411 Katy, Texas 77492



### Re:; FM

### Docket: TED; FM 

### CaseNo. 2011WP700181; in theMatter of ChemSystems, Inc.; Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Please find attached, the signed agreement between Claimant and Respondent extending the period to respond to Complainants Motion for Decision or, in the Alternative Motionto LimitThe Issus at Hearingto Sanctions. Sincerely, IS!.>. 

## Roberuuw S. RobertFlingPhysical Address: 5518 Fifth Street, Suite C Katy, Texas 77493
Kyle Lomazow General Attorney 

## S. ROBERT FLING,PLLC. ATTORNEY AT LAW TELEPHONE (281) 391-2003 FACSIMILE (281) 727-0082

April 25, 2014

Office of the Regional Counsel FAANorthwestMountain Region 1601 Lind Ave. SW, ANM"7 Renton, Washington 98057 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 411 Katy, Texas 77492

Re:; FAA Docket: TBD; FAA CaseNo. 2011WP700181; In theMatter of ChemSystems, Inc.; Mr. Lomazow, _:}(' Per our conversation on Apri'l' 23, 2014, counsel for the Federal Aviation Administration, Mr. Kyle E. Lomazow, has agreed to extend the due date for Respondent Chemsystems, Inc.'s response to Complainant's Motion for Decision or in the Alternative, Motion to Limit the Issues at the Hearing to Sanction to the date ofMay 5, 2014. Ifthe language above is atrue and correct account ofour conversation and agreement, please sign below. Th k you for your accommodation.

CC: Hon. Richard C. Goodwin Office of**Hearings~ M~20**  U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200NewJersey Ave., S.E. East Building Ground Floor, Room El2-230 Washington, D.C. 20590 Facsimile: (202)366-7536

SQ:t**t~OZ:/83/tO** £ JO £ a611d Sincerely, IS/S.**Rob-er<~** S. Robert Fling Counsel for Chemsystems, Inc.

C:SOO-LGL**(~SG)** :xe:JFrom: Robert Fling Fax: (281) 727-0082 To: +12024935142 Fax: +12024935142 Page 1 of 3 04/28/2014 4:05 

# \FAX IDate: 

## I04/28/2014 

# IPages including cover sheet: J3 

## To: +12024935142 

## From: Robert Fling S. Robert Fling, Attorney at P.O. Box 411 Katy 

## TX 77492

Phone Phone +1 (281) 391-2003 

### Fax Number +12024935142 

### Fax Number (281) 727-0082



### NOTE:

FAA Docket: TBD; ChemSystems, Inc.; FAA Case No. 2011WP700181; In the Matter of

Send and receive faxes with RingCentral, www.ringcentral.com
ARS HomeNatural Resources and Sustainable Agricultural SystemsWater Availability and Watershed ManagementResearch

----

Program Team
- Teferi Tsegaye, co-Lead
2022 Research Highlights
- Combating AMR
- Optimizing Agricultural Water Use and Management
- Reducing Labor and Advancing Precision Agriculture
Program Inputs
-                 CEAP             
-                 USDA PMT             
-                 Customer Workshop             
-                 Long-Term Agroecosystem Research (LTAR) Network             
Program Planning
-                 Action Plans             
Program Reports
-                 Accomplishment Reports             
-                 Annual Reports             
-                 Assessment Reports             
-                 Strategic Vision             
Project Information
- List of Projects in this Program
- List of Project Annual Reports in this program

**Listed below are the Annual Reports for currently active projects directly assigned to this National Program.**
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 194 (Tuesday, October 7, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 52331]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-26476]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. ES97-44-002]


Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc.; Notice Of Filing

October 1, 1997.
    Take notice that on September 26, 1997, Orange and Rockland 
Utilities, Inc. (O&R), filed an amendment to its application for 
authorization to issue securities in the above-captioned docket. The 
only change to the previously-approved application is a request by O&R 
that the authorization level be increased from $150.0 million to $200.0 
million.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C., 20426, 
in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 18 CFR 385.214). All such 
motions or protests must be filed on or before October 10, 1997. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining he 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of the filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection.
Lois D. Cashhell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-26476 Filed 10-6-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.11

                     AMENDMENT TO THE LAND LEASE AGREEMENT

        Based on the principles of equality, mutual benefit and paid
utilization, Weifang Neo-Luck (Group) Corporation ("Party A") and Weifang Fuhua
Amusement Park Co., Ltd. ("Party B"), after friendly negotiations, hereby enter
into this Amendment (the "Amendment") to the Land Lease Agreement concluded
between Party A and Party B, dated October 30, 2000 (the "Lease Agreement").

I.  Lease Term

1. The lease term for the land leased by Party B from Party A shall be extended
by ten years: the lease termination date of October 31, 2005 stipulated in the
Lease Agreement shall hereby be extended to October 31, 2015. In the event that
Party B shall need to continue to use the land upon expiration of the lease
term, Party B shall have priority by submitting an application for extension 90
days before the term expires.

II. Rent Amount

    1.  The annual rent amount shall remain 5,000,000RMB within the original
        lease term, namely, from November 1, 2000 until October 31, 2005 , and

    2.  The annual rent amount shall increase by 5% every five years as of
        November 2005.

III.    Payment of Rent

    1.  The amount and payment terms of the monthly rent shall remain unchanged
        within the original lease term, namely, from November 1, 2000 until
        October 31, 2005, and

    2.  The monthly rent payment as of October 31, 2005 shall be the average
        monthly payment based on the annual rent amount.

No other term of the Lease Agreement shall be amended.

This Amendment shall be effective upon its execution.

Party A:       Weifang (Neo-Luck) Group Corporation (Seal)

Representative:



Party B:       Weifang Fuhua Amusement Park Co., Ltd. (Seal)

Representative: Yongxin Zhang

Date of Signature:  March 10, 2001
#### In the Matter of WINTHROP BUILDING CORPORATION, Debtor.

No. 5625.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

Oct. 5, 1936.

Matthias Concannon and William H. Dillon, both of Chicago, 111. (Joseph Fisher, of Chicago, 111., of counsel), for appellant.

Norman Asher and Allen R. Bloch, both of Chicago, 111., for appellee.

Before EVANS and SPARKS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This cause coming on to be heard upon the motion of Matthias Concannon, William H. Dillon and Joseph Fisher, attorneys for John O. Snook, as trustee, appellant, filed herein on July 27, 1936, for judgment in favor of said appellant, and it appearing to the court that due notice of said motion has been given to all parties entitled thereto and that appellees Thelma Karlin, Helen Broff, and Sam Bernstein have heretofore on March 5, 1936,' filed a confession of error, and the court now being fully advised in the premises,

It is ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the order entered on September 25, 1935, by the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, in the proceedings for the reorganization of 5625 Winthrop Building Corporation under section 77B of the Bankruptcy Act (11 U.S.C.A. § 207), known in said District Court as case No. 58939, by which order the petition of Thelma Karlin, Helen Broff, and Sam Bernstein for the reorganization of said 5625 Winthrop Building Corporation was found to be filed in good faith and was approved as properly filed under the terms and provisions of said section 77B, be and the same is hereby reversed, with costs to said John O. Snook, as trustee, appellant, and the cause is remanded to said District Court, which court is hereby ordered and instructed to dismiss said proceedings for reorganization known as case No. 58939 in said District Court.
No. 00-7261.

#### Zamarripa v. Busalaki et al.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 21.0

SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT

I.    EVANS OIL OF LOUISIANA, INC.
      100% Owned Subsidiary
      Incorporated in the State of Louisiana

II.   IN & OUT MINI MART, INC.
      100% Owned Subsidiary
      Incorporated in the State of Texas

III.  DIAMOND MINI MART, INC.
      100% Owned Subsidiary of In & Out Mini Mart, Inc.
      Incorporated in the State of Texas

IV.   EVANS OIL COMPANY, INC.
      100% Owned Subsidiary
      Incorporated in the State of Texas

V.    EDCO, INC.
      19% Owned Subsidiary of Evans Systems, Inc.
      81% Owned Subsidiary of Evans Oil Company, Inc.
      Incorporated in the State of Texas

VI.   WAY ENERGY SYSTEMS, INC.
      100% Owned Subsidiary
      Incorporated in the State of Delaware

VII.  EDCO ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS, INC.
      100% Owned Subsidiary
      Incorporated in the State of Texas

VIII. DISTRIBUTOR INFORMATION SYSTEMS CORPORATION
      100% Owned Subsidiary
      Incorporated in the State of Texas