alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
DISMISS; and Opinion Filed March 27, 2019.

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-18-01007-CV

DOROTHY J. HAIGHT, Appellant

V.

NATIONAL JUDGMENT RECOVERY CENTER, L.P. AS ASSIGNEE OF UNIFUND 

CCR PARTNERS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law

Rockwall County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1-18-0173

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Brown, Schenck, and Pedersen, III

Opinion by Justice Pedersen, III

Appellant’s brief has not been filed despite appellant being cautioned by order dated February 

14, 2019 that failure to file the brief, or an extension motion, by March 1, 2019 would result in 

dismissal of the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See 

id. 38.8(a)(1); 42.3(b), (c).

181007F.P05

/Bill Pedersen, III/

BILL PEDERSEN, III

JUSTICE
–2–

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

DOROTHY J. HAIGHT, Appellant

No. 05-18-01007-CV V.

NATIONAL JUDGMENT RECOVERY 

CENTER, L.P. AS ASSIGNEE OF 

UNIFUND CCR PARTNERS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law, 

Rockwall County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1-18-0173.

Opinion delivered by Justice Pedersen, III. 

Justices Brown and Schenck participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.

It is ORDERED that appellee NATIONAL JUDGMENT RECOVERY CENTER, L.P. 

AS ASSIGNEE OF UNIFUND CCR PARTNERS recover its costs of this appeal from appellant 

DOROTHY J. HAIGHT.

Judgment entered this 27th day of March, 2019.
Mission: Improving transportation to and within federal and tribal lands by providing technical services to the highway transportation community. This report only includes fiscal year (FY) 2013, FY 2014 and FY 2015, for updated information please visit : http://www.efl.fhwa.dot.gov/programs/fed-landsdelaware.aspxIf you have any questions please contact: Jacinda Russell, Access Program Manager 571-434-1543, Jacinda.Russell@dot.govProgramming Decision Committee (PDC) members: Jacinda Russell, Access Program Manager, Jacinda.Russell@dot.govAnn Gravatt, State Representative ann.gravatt@state.de.usRich Vetter, Local Representative rich.vetter@doverkentmpo.org

Federal Lands Access Program (FLA

P) 

Improving access to and within federal and tribal lands

Delaware 

MAP-21 Funding Authorized: FY 2013: $29,677 FY 2014: $29,900 FY 2015: $29,300 Federal land acreage for the five core FLMAs: 2.16% Federal public road miles: 11.4 Number of Federal public bridges: 5 Recreational visitation: 194,012 visitors per year 

The PDC establiincluded prefere “Shovel Re

Programminranking. 

 Projects that 

investments new project 

 Funds used f

improvemenaccess roads

 Projects that 

Policy Act (Nexisting StatProgram (ST

0K 0K 0K

30K

60K

89K

2013 2014 2015

Obligations Allocations

FLAP Project Selection Process

Each FLAP project is selected from a pool of applications submitted by the facility owner in response to a state-wide call for projects. The applications are screened, rated, and ranked using PDC approved rating criteria. Based upon these evaluations, the proposed projects are recommended for programming within the available funding for each state. Memorandum of Agreements (MOA) are coordinated and executed for each programmed project prior to obligation of FLAP funds. There was one call for projects, from November 25, 2013 until January 11, 2014, that generated one application totaling $3,050 funds requested, which was subsequently pulled from consideration by the facility owner.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF UNITED STATES LEATHER, INC. AS OF AND FOR
THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           1,054
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   34,923
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (2,587)
<INVENTORY>                                     43,330
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                78,720
<PP&E>                                          86,266
<DEPRECIATION>                                (43,886)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 127,380
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          195,627
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (78,269)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   127,380
<SALES>                                        305,476
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               305,476
<CGS>                                          297,103
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  297,103
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               129,885
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              19,119
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (140,631)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,273)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (139,358)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (139,358)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                              (1,393,580)
<EPS-DILUTED>                              (1,393,580)


</TABLE>
#### Aaron Patrick BALDREE, Jr., Appellant, v. Frances Prince BALDREE, Appellee.

No. 70-604.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Sept. 1, 1970.

Appeal dismissed.
Exhibit 32.1




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In connection with Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report of Empire Resorts, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Joseph A. D’Amato, as Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




April 30, 2010By:
/s/ Joseph A. D’AmatoJoseph A. D’AmatoChief Executive Officer and 
Chief Financial Officer
#### Stewart JAMIESON, John K. Blair, and A. C. Hindman, Independent Debentureholders and Unsecured Creditors Protective Committee, Interveners, Appellants, v. HAMILTON GAS COMPANY, a Corporation, Debtor, et al., Appellees.

No. 4087.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Oct. 6, 1936.

Arthur M. Boal, George Pfeil, and Ambrose C. Hindman, all of New.York City, and O’Connor & Thompson, of Charleston, W. Va., for appellants.

Stanley C. Morris, of Charleston, W. Va., for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Petition for appeal denied, with costs.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**Written Statement of the ChiefFinancial Officer**

 

I, Jason A. Jenne, asVice President and Chief Financial Officer of True Temper Sports, Inc.(the “Company”), state and certify that this Form 10-Q Quarterly Reportfor the period ended October 2, 2005, fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934and that the information contained in this Form 10-Q Quarterly Report forthe period ended October 2, 2005, fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| /s/   Jason  A. Jenne                                                   |   |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Jason A. Jenne                                                                         |
| Vice President, Chief  Financial  Officer and Treasurer  (Principal Financial Officer) |
| November 16, 2005                                                                 |

 

----
#### HUMBLE OIL & REFINING COMPANY, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. P. J. CHAPPUIS, II, et al., Defendants and Appellants.

No. 3171.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

May 27, 1970.

Domengeaux, Wright & Bienvenu, by D. Mark Bienvenu, Lafayette, P. J. Chap-puis, II, Crowley, for defendants-appellants.

Milling, Saal, Saunders, Benson & Woodward, by John McCollam, H. H. Hillyer, Jr., and Herschel L. Haag, II, Bernard J. Caillouett, and Edward de la Garza, New Orleans, Edwards, Edwards & Broadhurst, by Nolan J. Edwards, Crowley, for plaintiff-appellee.

ON MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS' APPEAL

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff appellee has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal on the grounds that only one of the multiple defendants appellants has filed the required suspensive appeal bond.

The pertinent facts show that on January 27, 1970, the district judge signed an order for a suspensive appeal by “P. J. Chappuis, II, et al.”, defendants in the above matter, conditioned on their furnishing bond in the sum of $1,000. A bond in the full required amount was filed by only one of the defendants, namely, P. J. Chappuis, II. Plaintiffs contend this appeal must be dismissed as to the appellants who did not furnish a bond.

We find no merit in plaintiff’s position. Our jurisprudence is established that only one appeal bond is required for multiple appellants from a single judgment. See Succession of Smith, 150 So.2d 842 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 1963) and the cases cited therein.

Neither of the two cases relied on by plaintiffs is in point. In Rosier v. Good Pine Lumber Company of Louisiana, 221 La. 531, 59 So.2d 826 (1952) no appeal bond whatever was filed. And in Brumfield v. Brumfield, 215 So.2d 655 (La.App. 1st Cir. 1968) the appeal bond was not timely filed.

For the reasons assigned, the motion to dismiss the appeal is denied.
# L_2006033EN.01008701.xml

| 4.2.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 33/87 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 33/87

---

Corrigendum to Directive 2005/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on ship-source pollution and on the introduction of penalties for infringements

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 255 of 30 September 2005
  )

On page 15, in Article 16, in the first paragraph:

for:

‘Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 1 March 2007 and forthwith inform the Commission thereof.’

read:

‘Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 1 April 2007 and forthwith inform the Commission thereof.’

---
#### Howard WATERS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-359.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 8, 1970.

Howard Waters, in pro. per.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and BARKDULL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to withdraw as counsel for the indigent defendant-appellant, and having furnished appellant with a copy of the public defender’s memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellant a reasonable specified time within *105which to raise any points that he chose in support of his appeal, and the appellant having failed to respond thereto, on consideration thereof upon full examination of the proceedings, we conclude there is no merit to the appeal from Cr.PR 1.850, 33 F.S.A. and that it is wholly frivolous. Whereupon, the public defender’s said motion to withdraw is granted, and the order or judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.
|  |  | [if !vml]>[endif]>

You have  reached the Federal Depository Library Program Electronic Collection  (FDLP/EC) Archive. This archive assures ongoing access to publications in the  FDLP/EC. Access to publications in the archive is available through GPO's  suite of cataloging and locator services, including the Catalog of U.S.  Government Publications (CGP).
Title: United    States--east coast, Georgia, Tybee Island to Doboy    Sound
 
SuDocs Number: C 55.418/7:11509/
Item    Number:[if !vml]>[endif]>0191-B-13    (online)
GPO    System Number: 000869880
 
 
 
[if !vml]>[endif]>
11509-8-1992.jpg
2012-04-19 14:36
29M
 
[if !vml]>[endif]>
11509-8-1992.pdf
2012-04-20 10:26
29M
 
[if !vml]>[endif]>
11509-8-1994.jpg
2012-04-19 14:36
30M
 
[if !vml]>[endif]>
11509-8-1994.pdf
2012-04-20 10:27
30M
 
 
 
17K
 

 
A service of the Superintendent of Documents,  U.S. Government Printing Office..

 

Last updated:  June, 8, 2020  Page Name:  http://permanent.access.gpo.gov/
perm |
|--|--|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### Melody Rogers HOWELL and Terrell W. Howell, Appellant, v. Robert H. ALLEN, M.D., Appellee.

No. II-378.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 27, 1978.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 8, 1978.

Roderic G. Magie and Louis K. Rosen-bloum of Levin, Warfield, Middlebrooks, Mabie, Rosenbloum & Magie, Pensacola, for appellant.

A. G. Condon, Jr., of Holsberry, Emmanuel, Sheppard & Condon, Pensacola, for ap-pellee.

CAWTHON, VICTOR M., Associate Judge.

The petitioners herein filed a medical malpractice claim against the respondent on June 3, 1977, and the respondent’s counsel accepted service of process. An answer was not filed until August 10, 1977.

Both counsel state that counsel for the petitioners agreed that the respondent should have additional time in which to file his answer, but the petitioners contend and this court agrees that the statutory requirement1 that the answers to Medical Malpractice Claims must be filed within 20 days is jurisdictional and that the failure to meet jurisdictional requirements can be raised at any point in the proceedings and cannot be waived by agreement of counsel, *Latorra v. Patrick,*359 So.2d 463 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978).

Certiorari is granted, and the jurisdiction of the Medical Mediation Panel having terminated prior to its having conducted a hearing, the decision of the panel is hereby vacated.

MILLS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN, J., concur.

1

. § 768.44(l)(c), Florida Statutes.
#### Charles William ROBINSON v. Connie Diane Cole ROBINSON.

No. 50508.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

March 1, 1978.

Rex K. Jones, Hattiesburg, for appellant.

Aultman, Pope, Aultman & Tyner, Lawrence C. Gunn, Jr., Hattiesburg, for appel-lee.

Before PATTERSON, C. J., and WALKER and BOWLING, JJ.

AFFIRMED.
**THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS**

**Post Office Box 12248**

**Austin, Texas 78711**

**(512) 463-1312**

November 2, 2007

Mr. Geoffrey L. Harrison

Susman Godfrey, L.L.P.

1000 Louisiana, Suite 5100

Houston, TX 77002-5096

Mr. Jon Christian Amberson

Jon Christian Amberson, P.C.

2135 E. Hildebrand Ave.

San Antonio, TX 78209

Honorable Craig T. Enoch

Winstead Sechrest & Minick, P.C.

401 Congress Avenue, Suite 2100

Austin, TX 78701

Mr. John F. Carroll

111 West Olmos Drive

San Antonio, TX 78212

Mr. Rolando Cantu

Rolando Cantu & Associates, P.L.L.C.

9805 N. 10th Street

McAllen, TX 78504

RE:Case Number:  06-0178

Court of Appeals Number:  13-05-00419-CV

Trial Court Number:  C-203-05-D

Style:FOREST OIL CORPORATION AND DANIEL B. WORDEN

v.

JAMES ARGYLE MCALLEN, EL RUCIO LAND AND CATTLE COMPANY, INC., SAN JUANITO LAND PARTNERSHIP, AND MCALLEN TRUST PARTNERSHIP

Dear Counsel:

Today the Supreme Court of Texas issued the enclosed stay order in the above-referenced case.  

Sincerely,

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

by Claudia Jenks, Chief Deputy Clerk

Enclosure

cc:Ms. Cathy Wilborn

Mr. Omar Guerrero

Mr. Joseph R. Knight

**Case No. 06-0178Page 2**
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3442 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 3442

To amend the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to require the Secretary of 
  Agriculture to make timely decisions on applications of retail food 
  stores to accept benefits from recipients of supplemental nutrition 
    assistance through on-line transactions, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            December 7, 2023

Mr. Booker (for himself and 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 and Nutrition Act of 2008 to require the Secretary of 
  Agriculture to make timely decisions on applications of retail food 
  stores to accept benefits from recipients of supplemental nutrition 
    assistance through on-line transactions, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Timely Review of SNAP Online 
Retailer Applications Act of 2023''.

SEC. 2. DEADLINE FOR DECISIONS ON APPLICATIONS TO ACCEPT BENEFITS 
              THROUGH ON-LINE TRANSACTIONS.

    Section 7(k) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 
2016(k)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(5) Timely review of applications.--
                    ``(A) In general.--In implementing paragraph (1), 
                the Secretary, to the maximum extent practicable, shall 
                make a determination of approval or non-approval of an 
                application of a retail food store to accept benefits 
                from recipients of supplemental nutrition assistance 
                through on-line transactions not later than 180 days 
                after the Secretary receives that application.
                    ``(B) Notification of congress.--If the Secretary 
                is not able to make a determination described in 
                subparagraph (A) by the deadline described in that 
                subparagraph, the Secretary shall submit to the 
                Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of 
                the Senate and the Committee on Agriculture of the 
                House of Representatives a written notification that 
                includes an explanation of the reasons why the 
                Secretary was not able to make the determination by the 
                applicable deadline.''.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 196 (Thursday, October 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 52712]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-26747]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. CP97-279-001]


Warren Transportation, Inc.; Notice of Tariff Filing

October 3, 1997.
    Take notice that on September 30, 1997, Warren Transportation, Inc. 
(WTI), 1000 Louisiana, Suite 5800, Houston, Texas 77002, filed its FERC 
Gas Tariff, Original Volume No. 1, to be effective on November 1, 1997. 
WTI states that the filing is in compliance with the Commission's 
September 15, 1997, ``Order Issuing Certificates'' in Docket Nos. CP97-
279-00, et al., 80 FERC para. 61,292.
    The September 15th Order required that WTI revise the proposed 
billing determinants in its rate calculation, resulting in a Maximum 
FTS rate of $0.9503 and Maximum ITS rate of $0.0312. WTI states it has 
revised Original Sheet No. 5 of its FERC Gas Tariff from the pro forma 
filing version to reflect these Commission approved rates. WTI also 
states it filed a revised version of Original Sheet No. 11 to reflect 
that WTI will comply with the Commission's policy providing shippers 
the opportunity to review negotiated rates by filing all negotiated 
rate agreements at the Commission. WTI also filed a revised version of 
Original Sheet Nos. 1 and 190 to reflect an update in the tariff 
contact and in its shared officers. Finally, the September 15th Order 
required that WTI update its tariff to conform to the existing GISB 
Standards that have been approved by the Commission in Order Nos. 587, 
et al. Accordingly, WTI states it has filed, to comply with the 
existing GISB Standards, a revised version of Original Sheet Nos. 34, 
64, 109, 148, 165 and 166.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to make any protest with 
reference to said application should on or before October 14, 1997, 
file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 
20426, a motion to intervene or a protest in accordance with the 
requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 
CFR 385.211 and 385.214) and the regulations under the Natural Gas Act 
(18 CFR 157.10). All protests filed with the Commission will be 
considered by it in determining the appropriate action to be taken but 
will not serve to make the protestants parties to the proceeding. Any 
person wishing to become a party in any proceeding herein must file a 
motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's rules. Copies 
of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for 
public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-26747 Filed 10-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M