alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-23-00360-CR

__________________

IN RE RONNIE ADAM CLOUD

__________________________________________________________________

Original Proceeding

128th District Court of Orange County, Texas

Trial Cause Nos. A990214 and A990217

__________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In an original proceeding filed in this Court, Ronnie Adam Cloud filed a 

petition seeking what Cloud calls “a common law writ of error” and “a bill of 

review.” In his filing, he argues that he is a “natural living man,” his final felony 

convictions in Trial Cause Numbers A990214 and A990217 are void, and he 

contends he was indicted and prosecuted by individual corporations acting ultra vires 
2

and not by natural persons. He also mentions he is seeking a recovery of money on 

what he calls a “counterclaim.”1

The exclusive State felony post-conviction judicial remedy available in Texas

is by application for a writ of habeas corpus under the procedure set out in article 

11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See Ex parte Adams, 768 S.W.2d 

281, 287 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989); see also Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07. 

This Court does not have jurisdiction over post-conviction habeas corpus 

proceedings. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.05.

This Court has original jurisdiction to issue only such writs as are necessary 

to enforce our jurisdiction. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221(a). Cloud has not 

identified a final judgment or appealable order from which Cloud might perfect a 

timely appeal at this time. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.220; Tex. Code Crim. 

Proc. Ann. art. 44.02. Neither our original jurisdiction nor our appellate jurisdiction 

is implicated in the original petition Cloud filed with this Court. Accordingly, we 

dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction.

1 We address Cloud’s identical claims regarding what he says are three 

convictions out of Jefferson County in a separate proceeding filed in this Court as 

Number 09-23-00361-CR.
3

PETITION DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on December 5, 2023

Opinion Delivered December 6, 2023

Do Not Publish

Before Golemon, C.J., Johnson and Wright, JJ.
EX-10.16



 Exhibit 10.16 

Spousal Consent 
 The
undersigned, Li Nan (ID card No. ***), is the lawful spouse of Li Jianguang (ID card No. ***). I hereby unconditionally and irrevocably agree to the execution of the following documents (hereinafter referred to as the “Transaction
Documents”) by Li Jianguang on November 25, 2013, and the disposal of the equity interests of Beijing Tarena Jinqiao Technology Co., Ltd. (“Beijing Tarena”) held by Li Jianguang and registered in his name according to
the following documents: 
  

	 	(1)	Amended and Restated Equity Interest Pledge Agreement entered into between Li Jianguang, Tarena Technologies Inc. (hereinafter referred to as the “WFOE”) and Beijing Tarena; 


 

	 	(2)	Amended and Restated Exclusive Option Agreement entered into between Li Jianguang, the WFOE, Beijing Tarena and Tarena International, Inc.; 


 

	 	(3)	Power of Attorney executed by Li Jianguang; 

  

	 	(4)	Amended and Restated Loan Agreement entered into between Li Jianguang and WFOE. 

 I hereby
undertake not to make any assertions in connection with the equity interests of Beijing Tarena which are held by Li Jianguang. I hereby further confirm that Li Jianguang can perform the Transaction Documents and further amend or terminate the
Transaction Documents absent authorization or consent from me. 
 I hereby undertake to execute all necessary documents and take all
necessary actions to ensure appropriate performance of the Transaction Documents (as amended form time to time). 
 I hereby agree and
undertake that if I obtain any equity interests of Beijing Tarena which are held by Li Jianguang for any reasons, I shall be bound by the Transaction Documents and the Amended and Restated Exclusive Business Cooperation Agreement entered into
between the WFOE and Beijing Tarena as of November 25, 2013 (“Exclusive Business Cooperation Agreement”) (as amended from time to time) and comply with the obligations thereunder as a shareholder of Beijing Tarena. For this
purpose, upon the WFOE’s request, I shall sign a series of written documents in substantially the same format and content as the Transaction Documents and Exclusive Business Cooperation Agreement (as amended from time to time). 

    /s/ Li Nan             

Date: November 25, 2013
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Robert C. COLLINS.

No. 61152.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 11, 1978.

In re: Robert C. Collins applying for writ of habeas corpus. Parish of Bossier.

Writ denied.
#### Sylvia SILVERS, individually, and as Trustee, Appellant, v. Martin BLUMENTHAL, Appellee.

No. 70-612.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 22, 1971.

Hansford D. Tyler, Jr., Miami, for appellant.

Myers, Kaplan, Porter, Levinson & Ken-in and Thomas R. Spencer, Jr., Miami, for appellee.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant-defendant Sylvia Silvers seeks review of a final summary judgment and amended final summary judgment entered in an action for damages for breach of an orally modified written brokerage contract concerning sale of stock. The action was brought by appellee-plaintiff Martin Blu-menthal, the broker.

It is not necessary for us to set forth the facts, many of which are undisputed. We have reviewed the record and briefs. We are of the view, and so hold, that there are genuine issues of material fact concerning the terms and validity of the subsequent oral modification of the written brokerage contract.

Therefore, it was improper to enter a summary judgment, and the order herein is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.
**TKP** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21 - 0 137 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee , v. SHELBY BRYAN RAGNER ,

Defendant and Appellant .

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30 - day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is granted an extension of time to and including June 20 , 2022 , within which to prepare, serve, and file the State’s response brief

.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 13 2022

05/13/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0137
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 30 (Thursday, February 13, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6830-6831]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-3628]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Coast Guard
[CGD13-96-002]


Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) Southwest Harbor 
Cleanup and Redevelopment Project

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of adoption of lead agency FEIS.

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

SUMMARY: As Federal authority for the permitting of bridges across 
navigable waters of the United States, the Coast Guard has adopted 
those portions of the Seattle District of the Army Corps of Engineers 
FEIS pertaining to the construction of a railroad bridge and a roadway 
bridge across the Duwamish East Waterway in Seattle, Washington.

[[Page 6831]]

The Coast Guard intends to issue a record of decision (ROD) 30 days 
from the date of the this notice.

ADDRESSES: The documents referred to in this notice are available for 
inspection and copying at the office of Commander (oan) Thirteenth 
Coast Guard District, 915 Second Avenue, Room 3510, Seattle, 
Washington. Normal office hours are between 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
John E. Mikesell, Chief, Plans and Programs Section, Aids to Navigation 
and Waterways Management Branch; Telephone: (206) 220-7272.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard intends to issue a record of 
decision (ROD) 30 days from the date of this notice. The impacts of the 
proposed bridges were evaluated as part of the FEIS prepared by the 
Seattle District of the Army Corps of Engineers, as lead Federal 
agency, for the Port of Seattle's Southwest Harbor Cleanup and 
Redevelopment Project. The FEIS was approved in November 1994. The 
Coast Guard provided notification of its intention to adopt those 
portions of the lead agency's FEIS pertaining to the bridges in Public 
Notice 95-N-03 dated April 26, 1995. The public notice was issued in 
accordance with Coast Guard standard procedure for the processing of 
bridge permit applications.
    This notice satisfies the recirculation requirements of the Council 
on Environmental Quality regulations found at 40 CFR 1506.3.

    Dated: February 3, 1997.
J. David Spade,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 13th Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 97-3628 Filed 2-23-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-14-M
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7041 

To provide that any termination of a director of a national research institute 

or national center of the National Institutes of Health be on the basis 

of malfeasance, neglect of office, or incapacity only. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 27, 2020 

Mr. WELCH (for himself, Mr. CONNOLLY, and Mr. LYNCH) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To provide that any termination of a director of a national 

research institute or national center of the National Institutes of Health be on the basis of malfeasance, neglect 

of office, or incapacity only. 

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 ‘‘National Institutes of 

5 Health Director Protection Act’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7041 IH

1 SEC. 2. REMOVAL OF DIRECTORS OF THE NATIONAL RE2 SEARCH INSTITUTE OR NATIONAL CENTER 

3 OF THE NIH. 

4 Section 405(a)(2)(E) of the Public Health Service 

5 Act (42 U.S.C. 284(a)(2)(E)) is amended— 

6 (1) in the heading of subparagraph (E), by 

7 striking ‘‘RULE OF CONSTRUCTION’’ and inserting 

8 ‘‘TERMINATION FOR CAUSE’’; and 

9 (2) by inserting ‘‘, except that any such termi10 nation may be made only on the basis of malfea11 sance by, neglect of office by, or incapacity of the di12 rector’’ before the period. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Barry E. BALLARD.

No. 61055.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 9, 1977.

In re: Barry E. Ballard applying for writs of certiorari, review and mandamus. Parish of Ouachita.

Denied.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7300 

To prevent Federal funds from being used to carry out Executive Order 

13925, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 22, 2020 

Mrs. TORRES of California introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Oversight and Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions 

as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To prevent Federal funds from being used to carry out 

Executive Order 13925, 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 ‘‘Defund Executive Or5 ders that Suppress Free Speech Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FEDERAL FUNDS TO IM7 PLEMENT EXECUTIVE ORDER 13925. 

8 No Federal funds may be obligated or expended for 

9 the salaries and expenses of any Federal employee who 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7300 IH

1 implements Executive Order 13925 (85 Fed. Reg. 34079; 

2 relating to Preventing Online Censorship). 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
255 La. 798

#### STATE of Louisiana v. Albert J. RISSER, Jr.

No. 50451.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 30, 1970.

In re: State of Louisiana applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus.

Writ refused. The showing made does not warrant the exercise of our supervisory jurisdiction.
## Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Division • Air Protection Branch 4244 International Parkway• Suite 120• Atlanta • Georgia 30354 404/363-7000 • Fax: 404/363-7100 Judson H. Turner, Director CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC HEARING I do hereby certify that a public hearing was held on December 9, 2014, concerning proposed amendments to Georgia's State Implementation Plan (SIP) pertaining to Emission InventorySIP Requirementand Requirementsfor Permit Program and Emission Statements. A public noticewas posted on GovDelivery.com, providing at least 30 daysfor reviewand comments.

es P. Johnston, P. E., Manager Ianning and Support Program Date
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 19, 2018

No. 04

- 18

- 00011

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF A.S.W., A CHILD

,

From the 37th Judicial District Cou rt, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017EM500477 The Honorable Eric Rodriguez, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

The court reporter has filed a notice stating appellant has not requested or paid for the preparation of the reporter’s record. We order appellant Albarah Williamson to provide wr itten proof to this court by January 29, 2018 that either (1) the reporter’s fee has been paid or arrangements have been made to pay the reporter’s fe e; or (2) appellant is entitled to the reporter’s record without prepayment of the reporter’s fee. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 20.1, 35.3(a). If appellant fails to file such proof within the time provided, appellant’s brief will be due 30 days

after the clerk’s re cord has been filed, and the court will only consider those issues or points raised in appellant’s brief that do not require a reporter’s record for a decision. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 37.3(c).

_________________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

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

court on this 19th day of January, 2018

.

________________________________ ___ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court
#### Arnold SPEARMAN, Petitioner, v. FIREMAN’S FUND AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY et al., Respondents.

No. 43528.

Supreme Court of Florida.

May 30, 1973.

Certiorari denied.

ERVIN, Acting C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7109 

To rescind certain amounts appropriated to the Department of Justice for 

fiscal year 2020, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 4, 2020 

Mr. NADLER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Appropriations 

A BILL 

To rescind certain amounts appropriated to the Department 

of Justice for fiscal year 2020, 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. IN GENERAL. 

4 Of the unobligated amounts available under the head5 ing ‘‘Department of Justice—General Administration— 

6 Salaries and Expenses’’ in division B of Public Law 116– 

7 93, $50,000,000 is hereby rescinded and shall be depos8 ited in the Treasury for the sole purpose of deficit reduc9 tion. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGION Ill 

1650 Arch Street 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029 

The Honorable Randy C. Huffman, Secretary 

West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection 

Division of Air Quality 

601 57th Street SE 

Charleston, West Virginia 24304-2943 

Dear Secretary Huffman: 

~JUN t 3 2013 

On May 1, 2013, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received a 

revision to the West Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP) from the West Virginia 

Department of Environmental Protection. The SIP revision pertains to the Regional Haze 5-Year 

Periodic Report covering 2008 -2013. EPA has determined that the submittal is administratively 

and technically complete, and is reviewing it to prepare a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 

If members of your staffhave any questions, they may direct them to Jacqueline Lewis, 

at (215) 814-2037. She is the principal contact for this rulemaking. 

cc: John Benedict WVDEP 

Sincerely, 

Diana Esher, Director 

Air Protection Division 

Customer Service Hotline: 1-800-438-2474
No. 10648.

#### McClure *v.*Walcutt.

Decided March 10, 1908.

Error to Circuit Court of Frank*395lin county.

*Messrs. Huggins, .Huggins & Johnson,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. J. A. Godown*and *Messrs. Pugh & Pugh,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Si-iauck, C. J., Price, Crew and Davis, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>
 
                                 EXHIBIT 10.75



                              ADDENDUM TO CONTRACT

10/23/96

Dear Don Gold:

This letter is to confirm the terms of your addendum to your contract dated
February 21, 1995 and your employment with Trimark Pictures, Inc.

TITLE:    Senior Vice President, Sales & Marketing, Domestic Home Video
------                                                                 

BASE SALARY:   An annual base salary of $143,000 continued from your salary
-----------                                                                
increase on July 15, 1996 through January 2, 1997; Increase to $156,000 annually
effective from January 3, 1997 up to and including January 3, 1998.

BONUS:  You will receive your "Performance Bonus" based on the attached
-----                                                                  
schedule, as well as the "Sell-Thru" Bonus Program outlined in your original
contract dated 10/07/96, which will remain in effect through the end of Term.
(Note:  Beginning July 15, 1996 through January 2, 1997, you will be paid a pro-
rated amount of the attached schedule for your Performance Bonus.)  From January
3, 1997 to January 3, 1998 the bonus will be paid over a calendar year, per the
attached schedules.

STOCK OPTIONS:   Trimark will request that the Option Committee authorize an
-------------                                                               
additional 3,000 shares of company stock to vest over a three (3) year period
beginning July 15, 1997.

This agreement shall be binding and implemented as an addendum to your original
contract as outlined above.

Sincerely,



Tim Swain
Executive Vice President
<PAGE>
 
If the above meets with your approval, please countersign this letter and return
the fully executed letter to me.

AGREED AND ACCEPTED BY:


 
-------------------------                  --------------------------------
Donald B. Gold                             Date
###-##-####
Exhibit 32

 Certification of CEO and CFO Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
                                    of 2002

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

      In connection with the quarterly  report of DataMetrics  Corporation  (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period  ending  January 31, 2007 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Daniel
Bertram,  the Chief Executive  Officer of the Company,  and Edward Kroning,  the
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) that:

            (1)   The Report fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section
                  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and 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.

         DATAMETRICS CORPORATION

         By:   Daniel Bertram
            --------------------------------
               Daniel Bertram, CEO

         Dated: March 17, 2007

         By:   Edward Kroning
            --------------------------------
               Edward Kroning, CFO

         Dated: March 17, 2007


                                 Page 21 of 21
**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 Form 10-Q of Dean Holding Company (the “Company”) for the quarter endedJune 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), I, Barry A. Fromberg, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.              /s/ BARRY A. FROMBERG   Barry A. Fromberg   *Chief Financial Officer*   Date: August 15, 2005Note: This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002 and shall not be deemed filed, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
#### Leo ROBINSON, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 43382.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 28, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 270 So.2d 761.

ROBERTS, Acting C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD and McCAIN, JJ., concur.

ERVIN, J., dissents.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 21-3158

___________________________

Justin R. Eoff

llllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

Keith Mallett, CO, Cummins Unit, ADC

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee

Patrick Pierre, Sergeant, Cummins Unit, ADC (originally named as Pierre)

lllllDefendant

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Pine Bluff

 ____________

 Submitted: November 28, 2022

Filed: December 2, 2022

[Unpublished]

____________

Before COLLOTON, GRUENDER, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.
Arkansas inmate Justin Eoff appeals the judgment entered by the district court1

following a favorable jury verdict in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action asserting claims of

excessive force. On appeal, he challenges the amount of nominal and punitive

damages awarded him by the jury. After careful review of the record and the parties’

arguments on appeal, we conclude that Eoff waived his challenge to the jury verdict

by failing to request a new trial. See Kozlov v. Associated Wholesale Grocers, Inc.,

818 F.3d 380, 391 (8th Cir. 2016) (concluding an inadequate jury award challenge is

waived by failing to request a new trial). We also conclude that Eoff has not shown

that the damages awarded resulted in a plain injustice or shocking result. See id.;

Westcott v. Crinklaw, 133 F.3d 658, 662 (8th Cir. 1998) (holding that, absent

exceptional circumstances like “plain injustice” or a “monstrous” or “shocking” result,

the adequacy of a jury verdict must first be presented to the trial court in a new trial

motion to preserve the issue for appellate review). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th

Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

1

The Honorable Brian S. Miller, United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Arkansas.

-2-