alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Vernon Barley RENFRO, Jr.

No. 60798.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 17, 1978.

A. J. Boudreaux, Staff Appeals Atty., 24th Judicial Dist, Indigent Defender Bd., New Orleans, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., John M. Mam-oulides, Dist. Atty., Abbott J. Reeves, Director, Research and Appeals Division, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

On July 9, 1970, Vernon Barley Renfro, Jr., was indicted by the grand jury for the Parish of Jefferson for the murder of Robert Lee Maride in violation of La.R.S. 14:30. After trial by jury, he was found guilty of manslaughter and was sentenced to serve twenty-one (21) years at hard labor. Defendant appealed his conviction and sentence to this court which on April 10, 1973, annulled and set aside his sentence and remanded the case to the trial court for resentencing of defendant in accordance with law.1 Subsequently, defendant was sentenced to serve twenty-one (21) years at hard labor with credit given toward service of his sentence for time spent in actual custody prior to the imposition of sentence. On March 1,1977, he was granted an out of time appeal. Defendant relies on three assignments of error for reversal of his conviction and sentence.

We have reviewed the record and find no merit to defendant’s assignments of error. Accordingly, we affirm his conviction and sentence.

DECREE

The conviction and sentence are affirmed.

DENNIS, J., dissents and assigns reasons.

1

. 277 So.2d 655 (La.1973).

DENNIS, Justice,

dissenting.

The prosecuting attorney unlawfully cross-examined the defendant as to the details of a prior unrelated offense, La.R.S. 15:495, and improperly expressed his opinion that the defendant was “a cool calculated killer” during closing arguments. La.C. Cr.P. art. 774.

I respectfully dissent.
Hydraulic Institute Mission and Vision:

Vision: To be a global authority on pumps and pumping systems.

Mission: To be a value

‐ adding resource to member companies and pump users worldwide by:

 Developing and delivering comprehensive industry standards.

 Expanding knowledge by providing education and tools for the effective application, testing, installation,

operation and maintenance of pumps and pumping systems.

 Serving as a forum for the exchange of industry information.

The Hydraulic Institute is a non

‐ profit industry (trade) association established in 1917. HI and its members are

dedicated to excellence in the engineering, manufacture, and application of pumping equipment.

The Institute plays a leading role in the development of pump standards in North America and worldwide. HI

standards are developed within guidelines established by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). HI

members work through a number of technical committees to develop draft standards. The Institute uses the ANSI

Canvass Method, involving pump users and other interested parties to reach consensus on published standards. HI

standards are developed to define pump products, installation, operation, performance, testing, and pump life and

quality. ANSI/HI standards are widely referenced in other standards such as those of API, AWWA, ANSI B73, and

more are accepted throughout North America and applied worldwide. 

### M ost major U.S. pump manufacturers are

active members.

Website: www.Pumps.org
Exhibit 13.1






Certificate of CEO 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 on Form 20-F/A of Grupo Casa Saba S.A.B. de C.V. (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Gabriel Saba D’jamus, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Alejandro Sadurni Gomez, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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.
  By: /s/ Gabriel Saba D’jamus
 Name: Gabriel Saba D’jamus
 Title:  Chief Executive Officer
 Date:  September 23, 2011
 
 By: /s/ Alejandro Sadurni Gomez
 Name: Alejandro Sadurni Gomez
 Title:  Chief Financial Officer
 Date:  September 23, 2011
 
 
 This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
| (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 result of operations of the      Company. |
|-----------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:      October 29, 2008 |                         |   |
|-----------------------------|------------------------------|--------|
|                        | /s/ SAL PERISANO             |   |
|                        | Sal      Perisano            |   |
|                        | Chief      Executive Officer |   |
#### UNITED STATES of America, on behalf of and for the Use of Nathan H. SLOAN, Plaintiff, v. REGO BUILDING CORPORATION and National Surety Corporation, Defendants-Respondents, Utica Mutual Insurance Company, Petitioning IntervenerAppellant.

No. 202.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Feb. 1, 1937.

MacIntyre, McNally & Downey, of New York City (John V. Downey and James B. M. McNally, both of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.

Max E. Greenberg, of New York City, for respondents.

Before MANTON, SWAN, and CHASE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Order affirmed.
EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS ACCESS PROGRAM

Application 

No. Project/Facility Name Project Type Federal Land Accessed Applicant County

Fiscal 

Year*

CT-04 Coltsville NP Wayfinding & 

Safety

Wayfinding Signs & 

Pedestrian 

Improvements

National Park Service - 

Coltsville National 

Historical Park

City of Hartford Hartford 2017

The Programming Decisions Committee (PDC) responsible for the Connecticut Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) has selected its multiyear 

Program of Projects. The projects identified for programming for the Connecticut FLAP are listed below in no particular order and include:

Connecticut Program of Projects for Federal Fiscal Years 2017-2020

* Fiscal Year Programmed/Project Schedule is subject to change

The next step in the process will be to develop project agreements between Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division and the State/Local Agency 

partners. The amount of funds allocated will depend on finalizing these project agreements. The Connecticut PDC does not have a firm date for the 

next Call for Projects under the Access Program. Please watch our website for updates in your state. https://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/programs/flap/

If you have any questions regarding the Call for Projects, please contact Mr. Lewis Grimm, Planning Team Leader, at 703-404-6289 or 

Lewis.Grimm@dot.gov. For questions regarding project agreements and funding, please contact Ms. Jacinda Russell, Access Program Manager, at 

571-434-1543 or Jacinda.Russell@dot.gov.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
registrant's financial statements included in the Form 10-K for the year-end
indicated below and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>1,000
       
<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                          12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                         JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                           DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         356
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                               27,327
<ALLOWANCES>                                   922
<INVENTORY>                                 19,106
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            49,379
<PP&E>                                      49,491
<DEPRECIATION>                              19,757
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             102,579
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       23,088
<BONDS>                                     49,876
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                  7,570
<COMMON>                                         3
<OTHER-SE>                                  (8,108)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               102,579
<SALES>                                    153,480
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           153,480
<CGS>                                      123,384
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              123,384
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            20,174
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           9,559
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                363
<INCOME-TAX>                                   143
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            220
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (236)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                (2.85)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                (2.36)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Mark J. Wattles, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this amended annual report on Form 10-K/A of Hollywood
Entertainment Corporation;

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

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant
as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.

Date: April 13, 2004

                            /s/ Mark J. Wattles
                            -----------------------
                            Mark J. Wattles
                            Chief Executive Officer
#### L. V. ROBERTSON, Petitioner, v. CITY OF MIAMI and the Florida Department of Commerce, Respondents.

No. 39849.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 7, 1970.

L. Barry Keyfetz, Ser, Greenspahn & Keyfetz, Miami, for petitioner.

Alan H. Rothstein, City Atty., Robert F. Clark, Asst. City Atty., Patrick H. Mears and J. Franklin Garner, Tallahassee, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

Upon review of the various orders emanating from this cause in conjunction with the record and transcripts filed here*150in, it is the judgment of this Court that the Compensation Order issued by the Judge of Industrial Claims on October 31, 1969, fully satisfies the mandate contained in the Compensation Order of the Industrial Relations Commission dated April IS, 1969. The Compensation Order of the Industrial Relations Commission dated May 21, 1970 is hereby vacated, and this cause is remanded to the Commission with directions that it now reach a decision based upon the merits without further delay.

Petitioner’s request for oral argument is denied.

Petition is granted for $350.00 in attorney’s fees.

It is so ordered.

ERVIN, C. J., and ROBERTS, CARLTON, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3559 

To repeal programs relating to funding for electric vehicle charging 

infrastructure, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 8, 2024 

Ms. ERNST introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To repeal programs relating to funding for electric vehicle 

charging infrastructure, 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, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Unplug the Electric 

5 Vehicle Charging Stations Program Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF CHARGING AND FUELING INFRASTRUC7 TURE GRANTS. 

8 (a) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 

9 11101(b) of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act 

10 (Public Law 117–58; 135 Stat. 444) is amended— 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 3559 IS

1 (1) in paragraph (1)— 

2 (A) by striking subparagraph (C); and 

3 (B) by redesignating subparagraphs (D) 

4 through (G) as subparagraphs (C) through (F), 

5 respectively; and 

6 (2) in paragraph (2)(B), by striking ‘‘para7 graph (1)(G)’’ and inserting ‘‘paragraph (1)(F)’’. 

8 (b) GRANT PROGRAM.—Section 151 of title 23, 

9 United States Code, is amended— 

10 (1) in subsection (e)(2), by striking ‘‘, including 

11 through funds awarded through the grant program 

12 under subsection (f),’’; and 

13 (2) by striking subsection (f). 

14 SEC. 3. REPEAL OF NATIONAL ELECTRIC VEHICLE INFRA15 STRUCTURE FORMULA PROGRAM. 

16 (a) RESCISSION.—The unobligated amounts made 

17 available under paragraph (2) in the matter under the 

18 heading ‘‘HIGHWAY INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMS’’ under 

19 the heading ‘‘FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION’’ 

20 under the heading ‘‘DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPOR21 TATION’’ in title VIII of division J of the Infrastructure 

22 Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117–58; 135 Stat. 

23 1419) are rescinded. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•S 3559 IS

1 (b) TERMINATION.—Notwithstanding any other pro2 vision of law, beginning on the date of enactment of this 

3 Act— 

4 (1) the program under paragraph (2) in the 

5 matter under the heading ‘‘HIGHWAY INFRASTRUC6 TURE PROGRAMS’’ under the heading ‘‘FEDERAL

7 HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION’’ under the heading 

8 ‘‘DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION’’ in 

9 title VIII of division J of the Infrastructure Invest10 ment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117–58; 135 Stat. 

11 1419) is terminated; and 

12 (2) no funds may used to carry out that pro13 gram. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
#### Bernard R. FLEISHER and Frances H. Fleisher, his wife, Petitioners, v. I. David BALDING, also known as Ivor David Balding, and Claude L. Balding, his wife, Respondents.

No. 44205.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 22, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 279 So.2d 883.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, ADKINS and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 18

- 00109

- C V

JIMMY JOSEPH NEWELL , Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

From the 54th District Court McLennan County, Texas Trial Court No. 2017

- 1307

- C2

ORDER ON REHEARING

We dismissed Jimmy Joseph Newell’s appeal. See Newell v. State , No. 10

- 18

- 00109

- CR, 2018 Tex. App. LEXIS 2421 ( Tex. App.

— Waco Apr il 4, 2018 , no pet. h. ) . Newell filed
a motion for rehearing, and the State filed a response.
After reviewing the motion for rehearing and the response, we grant Newell’s
motion for rehearing, withdraw our opinion and judgment is sued April 4, 2018, reinstate
this appeal , and change the case designation from CR to CV. See Harrell v. State , 286
S.W.3d 315, 321 (Tex. 2009) ; Johnson v. Tenth Judicial Dist. Court of Appeals at Waco , 280Newell v. State Page 2

S.W.3d 866, 874 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) ; Ramirez v. State , 318 S.W.3d 906, 908 (Tex. App.

—

Waco 2010 , no pet. )

.

PER CURIAM
Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins Motion granted Order issued and filed J une 6 , 2018
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANTTO**

**SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

** **

In connectionwith the annual report of Washington Group International, Inc. (the “Company”)on Form 10-K for the year ended January 2, 2004, as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of theundersigned officers of the Company certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that, to such officer’s knowledge:

 

(1)          The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

 

(2)          The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods presented inthe Report.

 

 
| March 5,  2004 |                                   |
|----------------|----------------------------------------|
|           |                                   |
|           | /s/ Stephen  G. Hanks                  |
|           | Stephen G.  Hanks                      |
|           | President  and Chief Executive Officer |

 

 
|   | /s/ George  H. Juetten                                |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------|
|   | George H.  Juetten                                    |
|   | Executive  Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

The foregoingcertification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, andis not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

 

----
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

HECTOR HUERTAS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) Civil Action No. 09-139 Erie

v. )

)

RAYMOND J. SOBINA, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

This civil rights action was received by the Clerk of Court on June 11, 2009, 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. 37], filed on July

14, 2010, recommended that the Defendants’ motion to dismiss [Doc. No. 17] be

granted in part and denied in part. Specifically, the Magistrate Judge recommended

that the motion be granted as to Defendants Sobina and Varner, and with respect to the

Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process claim. It was recommended

that the motion be denied as to Defendant Henry, and with respect to his exhaustion

and Eleventh Amendment immunity arguments. It was further recommended that the

Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment [Doc. No. 23] be denied. The parties

were allowed fourteen (14) days in which to file objections, and Plaintiff filed objections

on August 2, 2010 [Doc. No. 39]. After de novo review of the motion and documents in

the case, together with the Report and Recommendations and objections thereto, the

following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 20 day of August, 2010; 

th

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Defendants’ motion to dismiss [Doc. No. 17]

is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; the motion is GRANTED as to Defendants

Sobina and Varner and with respect to the Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment procedural

due process claim; it is DENIED as to Defendant Henry and with respect to his

Case 1:09-cv-00139-SJM-SPB Document 40 Filed 08/20/10 Page 1 of 2
exhaustion and Eleventh Amendment immunity arguments. The Clerk of Courts is

directed to terminate Defendants Sobina and Varner from this action.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary

judgment [Doc. No. 23] is DENIED. 

The Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 37] of Magistrate Judge Baxter, filed

on July 14, 2010, 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

2

Case 1:09-cv-00139-SJM-SPB Document 40 Filed 08/20/10 Page 2 of 2