alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### NATCHITOCHES COLLECTIONS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. H. B. GORUM, Jr., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 3787.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

April 19, 1972.

Gahagan & Kelly, by Russell E. Gaha-gan, Natchitoches, for plaintiff-appellant.

Gerard F. Thomas, Jr., Natchitoches, for defendant-appellee.

Before SAVOY, MILLER and DO-MENGEAUX, JJ.

MILLER, Judge.

Plaintiff Natchitoches Collections, Inc., appeals the dismissal (on an exception of res judicata) of its motion to reopen a garnishment which had been dismissed. We affirm.

Plaintiff filed the garnishment petition on February 24, 1971 causing the Natchi-toches Parish School Board to admit that it employed defendant H. B. Gorum, Jr. and paid him $625.38 per month. Testimony taken on March 12, 1971 revealed that defendant was a bus driver and that his bus operating expenses consumed all but $254.-00 per month. It was held that this did not exceed the exemption. On March 30, 1971, judgment was signed recalling and can-celling the garnishment under the writ of fieri facias. There has been no appeal and that judgment is final.

On July 12, 1971 plaintiff filed this motion in the same proceeding seeking to reopen the question of garnishment of defendant’s disposable earnings. It was alleged that defendant received a pay raise effective July 1, 1971 and that Act 242 of 1970 amending LSA-R.S. 13:3881 (1) does not apply to a garnishment under a judgment based on a debt contracted prior to the effective date of that act.

The exception of res judicata was properly sustained because of the finality of the judgment dismissing, recalling and can-celling the garnishment under the writ of fieri facias previously issued.

*85Plaintiff argues that under LSA-R.S. 13:3923 the trial court retains jurisdiction and may reopen the case upon motion of any concerned party for evidence affecting the proper continuance of such judgment and may amend or set aside its judgment at any time in its discretion. This argument overlooks the fact that the provision in section 3923 (which dispenses with the filing of additional writs of garnishment) applies “in such cases” provided for in section 3922 where there has been “a judgment affecting the non-exempt portion” of the wages. The March 30, 1971 judgment did not affect the nonexempt portion of defendant’s wages. Instead it specifically terminated the garnishment.

The trial court’s judgment is affirmed. Costs are assessed to plaintiff appellant.

Affirmed.
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CertificationPursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title18, United States Code)**

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of *SOURCECORP*, Incorporated, a Delawarecorporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify that:

TheAnnual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 (the “Form 10-K”)of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information containedin the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.
| Date: March 31, 2005 | /s/ BARRY  EDWARDS                                      |
|---------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------|
|                      | Barry Edwards                                           |
|                      | *Executive Vice President and  Chief Financial Officer* |

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solelypursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002(subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title18, United States Code). 

----
262 La. 310

#### SKLAR PRODUCING CO., Inc. v. J. S. RUSHING et al.

No. 52567.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 22, 1972.

In re: Estate of J. S. Rushing applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, Parish of Webster. 262 So.2d 115.

Writ denied. The result is correct.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Billy T. LAMBERT.

No. 62078.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 28, 1978.

In re: Billy T. Lambert applying for writ of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and stay order. Caddo Parish.

Granted in part and denied in part. Applicant is entitled to be furnished with a transcript of the grand jury proceedings favorable to applicant and which are material and relevant to the issue of guilt or punishment. In all other respects the application is denied.
```

[Federal Register: May 19, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 96)]
[Notices]               
[Page 27998-27999]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr19my10-42]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

 
Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Oak Ridge 
Reservation

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental 
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Oak Ridge 
Reservation. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 
Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in 
the Federal Register.

DATES: Wednesday, June 9, 2010, 6 p.m.

ADDRESSES: DOE Information Center, 475 Oak Ridge Turnpike, Oak Ridge, 
Tennessee.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia J. Halsey, Federal 
Coordinator, Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations Office, P.O. Box 
2001, EM-90, Oak Ridge, TN 37831. Phone (865) 576-4025; Fax (865) 576-
2347 or e-mail: halseypj@oro.doe.gov or check the Web site at http://www.oakridge.doe.gov/em/ssab.

[[Page 27999]]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make 
recommendations to DOE-EM and site management in the areas of 
environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities.
    Tentative Agenda: The main meeting presentation will be Long-Term 
Stewardship for Contaminated Areas on the Oak Ridge Reservation.
    Public Participation: The EM SSAB, Oak Ridge, welcomes the 
attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will 
make every effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or 
special needs. If you require special accommodations due to a 
disability, please contact Patricia J. Halsey at least seven days in 
advance of the meeting at the phone number listed above. Written 
statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the 
meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to the 
agenda item should contact Patricia J. Halsey at the address or 
telephone number listed above. Requests must be received five days 
prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include 
the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer 
is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate 
the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public 
comments will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their 
comments.
    Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing or calling Patricia 
J. Halsey at the address and phone number listed above. Minutes will 
also be available at the following Web site: http://www.oakridge.doe.gov/em/ssab/minutes.htm.

    Issued at Washington, DC, on May 14, 2010.
Rachel Samuel,
Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-12015 Filed 5-18-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 17, 2021

No. 04-20-00311-CV

Margaret Fay GUIDRY,

Appellant

v.

Edward James GUIDRY, Jr.,

Appellee

From the 452nd District Court, Menard County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018-05589

James L. Rex, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The appellee’s brief was due on October 18, 2021. Neither the appellee’s brief nor 

a motion for extension of time to file the appellee’s brief has been filed. This appeal will 

be set “at issue” in ten days. If the appellee’s brief and a written response stating a 

reasonable explanation for failing to timely file the brief is not filed within ten (10) days

from the date of this order, this appeal will be set for submission without an appellee’s 

brief.

_________________________________

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

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

court on this 17th day of November, 2021.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 756

To provide for the utilization of the latest available census data in certain

laws related to urban mass transportation.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 3, 1993

Mr. BACCHUS of Florida (for himself, Mr. GIBBONS, Mr. HUTTO, Mr. HASTINGS, Mrs. MEEK, Mr. JOHNSTON of Florida, Mr. DEUTSCH, Ms. BROWN

of Florida, Mr. SHAW, Mr. PETERSON of Florida, and Mr. GOSS) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Public

Works and Transportation

A BILL

To provide for the utilization of the latest available census

data in certain laws related to urban mass transportation.

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 ‘‘Federal Transit Fair

5 Share Act of 1993’’.

6 SEC. 2. FEDERAL TRANSIT ACT.

7 (a) GRANT PROGRAM.—Section 5(a) of the Federal

8 Transit Act (49 U.S.C. App. 1604(a)) is amended—
2

•HR 756 IH

1 (1) in paragraph (1)(A)(i) by striking ‘‘Federal

2 census’’ and inserting ‘‘estimates prepared by the

3 Department of Commerce’’;

4 (2) in paragraph (2)(A)(i)(1) by striking ‘‘Fed5 eral census’’ and inserting ‘‘estimates prepared by

6 the Department of Commerce’’; and

7 (3) in paragraph (2)(A)(ii)(1) by striking ‘‘Fed8 eral census’’ and inserting ‘‘estimates prepared by

9 the Department of Commerce’’.

10 (b) BLOCK GRANTS.—Section 9(d)(1) of the Federal

11 Transit Act (49 U.S.C. App. 1607a(d)(1)) is amended by

12 striking ‘‘Federal census’’ and inserting ‘‘estimates pre13 pared by the Department of Commerce’’.

14 (c) FORMULA GRANT PROGRAM FOR AREAS OTHER

15 THAN URBANIZED AREAS.—Section 18(a) of the Federal

16 Transit Act (49 U.S.C. App. 1614(a)) is amended by

17 striking ‘‘Federal census’’ and inserting ‘‘estimates pre18 pared by the Department of Commerce’’.

Æ
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Ervin Joseph LOUIS.

No. 54414.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 1, 1974.

In re: Ervin Joseph Louis applying for remedial writs.

Writ granted. See Order.

ORDER

Considering the application of the relator, Ervin Joseph Louis, the writ is granted, and an out-of-time appeal is ordered for the appeal of his conviction and sentence to this Court. The trial judge is authorized to grant the relator sufficient time to perfect his bills of exceptions.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
financial statements of Speedway Motorsports, Inc for the year ended
December 31, 1996 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          22,252
<SECURITIES>                                     2,447
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,919
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      6,218
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                63,858
<PP&E>                                         335,691
<DEPRECIATION>                                  47,330
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 409,284
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           60,214
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           413
<OTHER-SE>                                     204,322
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   409,284
<SALES>                                         13,248
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               102,113
<CGS>                                            8,005
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   62,771
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (1,316)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 43,057
<INCOME-TAX>                                    16,652
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             26,405
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    26,405
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .64
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .64
        

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20 - 0082 CITY OF BILLINGS,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. KATRINA LYNN HOFMAN,

Defendant and Appellant
.

ORDER Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including May 2 7 , 20 20 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

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

April 20 2020

04/20/2020

Case Number: DA 20-0082
Exhibit 23.1


                  Report and Consent of Independent Auditors



We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)
of Liberty Financial Companies, Inc. of our report dated February 3, 1998,
included in the 1997 Annual Report to Shareholders of Liberty Financial
Companies, Inc.

Our audit also included the 1996 and 1997 financial statement schedules of
Liberty Financial Companies, Inc. listed in Item 14(a). These schedules are the
responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion based on our audit. In our opinion, the 1996 and 1997 financial
statement schedules referred to above, when considered in relation to the basic
financial statements taken as a whole, present fairly in all material respects
the information set forth therein.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 33-90626) pertaining to the Liberty Financial Companies, Inc.
1990 Stock Option Plan, the Liberty Financial Companies, Inc. 1995 Stock
Incentive Plan and the Liberty Financial Companies, Inc. 1995 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan and in the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-20067)
pertaining to the Liberty Financial Companies, Inc. Dividend Reinvestment Plan
of our report dated February 3, 1998 with respect to the 1996 and 1997
consolidated financial statements incorporated herein by reference, and our
report included in the preceding paragraph with respect to said financial
statement schedules included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Liberty
Financial Companies, Inc.




                                        Ernst & Young LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
March 25, 1998
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. OR18-9-000]

With respect to the proceedings pending before the Commission in the above-captioned docket, Dr. Emma Nicholson from the Office of Energy Policy and Innovation is designated as non-decisional in deliberations by the Commission in this docket. Accordingly, pursuant to 18 CFR 385.2202 (2017), as non-decisional staff, Dr. Nicholson will not participate in an advisory capacity in the Commission's review of any future filings in the above-referenced docket, including offers of settlement or settlement agreements. Likewise, pursuant to 18 CFR 385.2201 (2017), Dr. Nicholson is prohibited from communicating with advisory staff concerning any deliberations in these dockets.

Dated: June 14, 2018.

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2018-13207 Filed 6-19-18; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
**Exhibit 99.2**

 

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connectionwith the Annual Report of Gasel Transportation Lines, Inc. (the “Company”) onForm 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, S.Gene Thompson, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Reportfully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 
|   | /s/ S. Gene  Thompson                       |   |
|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | S. Gene  Thompson, Vice President & CFO |
|   | March 27,  2003                             |

 

----
Exhibit
      10.143





March
      22,
      2006





Don
      Meiners


401
      Full
      Moon Way


Danville,
      CA 94506





Re:  Amendment
      to Severance Agreement





Dear
      Don:





You
      and
      Wave Wireless Corporation (the “Company”) are parties to a Severance Agreement
      dated November 3, 2004, a copy of which is attached hereto (the “Agreement”).
      This letter agreement supercedes the Agreement. Upon execution of this
      Agreement, the Agreement shall terminate and be of no force and effect.





In
      the
      event of your termination from the Company for any reason at any time after
      the
      closing of the merger with Wave Rider Communications, Inc., you will receive
      three (3) month’s severance. In addition, the Company will pay your COBRA for a
      period of six (6) months following your termination.





In
      the
      event you’re employment with the Company is terminated involuntarily, your
      shares of restricted common stock shall vest 100%. In the event your employment
      is voluntarily terminated, your restricted stock shall continue to vest for
      a
      period of six (6) months following the date of termination.





If
      you
      agree that this letter accurately sets forth our agreement as to the matters
      set
      forth herein, please indicate your acceptance by signing in the space set forth
      below, and returning a copy hereof to Company.


Sincerely,WAVE WIRELESS CORPORATION/s/ Daniel
              W.
              RumseyDaniel
              W. Rumsey




ACCEPTED
      AND AGREED TO


AS
      OF THE
      DATE HEREOF:




/s/
      Don Meiners


Don
      Meiners
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   Exhibit 10.37

                             CONTINGENT BONUS PLAN

In January 1995, the Compensation and Option Committee of the Company approved
long-term contingent bonuses applicable to Messrs. Newman, McAtee and Kagan.
The aggregate amounts of such bonuses which may be earned by Messrs. Newman,
McAtee and Kagan are $216,904, $123,176 and $206,000, respectively.  Each such
individual would be entitled to receive 25% of his aggregate potential bonus on
or after October 31, 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1998, on a cumulative basis, but only
if the conditions discussed below are satisfied.  The bonuses will be
considered earned by the executive officer and payable by the Company only if
(i) each respective bonus is utilized to pay the exercise price of stock
options for the purchase of Common Stock and (ii) the executive officer has
remained in the continuous employment of the Company until the date when each
such bonus, or portion thereof, is paid.  The bonuses may be payable in one or
more installments as and when the executive officer elects to exercise stock
options, provided that the conditions to the receipt of the bonus have been
satisfied on the payment date thereof.