alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The Metropolitan Trust Company, as Trustee, Etc., of Catherine Livingston Gould, Plaintiff, *v.*Catherine B. Rankin, as Executrix, Etc., et al., Defendants.

(Supreme Court, New York Special Term,

December, 1911.)

Wills — Interpretation and Construction — Designations and- descriptions of persons, objects and. purposes — Particular terms of doubtful meaning —“ Issue.”

Where, by her last will and testament, a gift of the income of a trust fund is. made for the benefit of the son of testatrix during his lifetime, with a direction that upon his death the remainder be transferred to his issue in such proportion as they would have received had he died intestate, and in case he dies without issue the remainder is bequeathed to other persons, the word “issue” should be interpreted as meaning descendants and not as limited to children only.

Action for an accounting.

Parsons, Clossen & Mcllvaine, for plaintiff.

Edward W. Bankin, for defendant Catherine B. Banlcin, as executrix.

*543Guy, J.

This is an action for an accounting. Decedent created a trust in the income of a trust fund for the benefit of her son dúring his lifetime. Upon his death she directed the remainder of the trust fund to be transferred to his issue in such proportion as they would have received had he died intestate seized and possessed thereof; in case the son died leaving no issue him surviving the remainder was bequeathed to certain persons; under one of whom defendant bank claims. One grandchild of the son survives. If issue is a word of purchase, meaning descendants, the whole fund in dispute goes to the grandchild; if it is a word of limitation meaning children only the portion of the fund in dispute goes to the defendant bank as the assignee thereof. I think under the terms of this will the defendant meant to use 'the word “ issue ” in its general sense, meaning thereby descendants, and not merely as a word of limitation restricting the beneficiaries thereof to children only. Soper v. Brown, 136 N. Y. 244, 248; Drake v. Drake, 134 id. 220, 224; New York Life Ins. & Trust Co. v. Viele, 161 id. 11, 19; Schmidt v. Jewett, 195 id. 486, 490. The account should be passed and the will construed in accordance with this opinion. Bindings (defendant People’s Bank) passed upon.

Judgment accordingly.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 276 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 276

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                      October 19, 1993.
    Resolved, That all points of order against the conference report to 
accompany the bill (H.R. 2519) making appropriations for the Departments of 
Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and related agencies for the fiscal 
year ending September 30, 1994, and for other purposes, are waived. The motions 
printed in the joint explanatory statement of the committee of conference to 
dispose of amendments in disagreement shall be considered as read.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
EXHIBIT 32.1  Certification Pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350
As Adopted Pursuant to
Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002    I, Frederick Pevow, Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer), certify that this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained herein fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Gateway Energy Corporation and its subsidiaries for the periods presented.   Date:  November 15, 2010/s/ Frederick M. Pevow Frederick M. Pevow Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 139 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 139

 Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to require a three-
  fifths vote to adopt any rule reported from the Committee on Rules 
        disallowing germane amendments to a bill or resolution.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 24, 1993

 Mr. Gilchrest (for himself, Mr. Solomon, Mr. Gingrich, Mr. Crane, Mr. 
  Livingston, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Wolf, Mr. Lightfoot, Mr. Ramstad, Mr. 
 Ewing, Mr. Oxley, Mr. McHugh, Mr. Diaz-Balart, Mr. Collins of Georgia 
    Mr. Baker of California, Mr. Bachus of Alabama, Mr. Zimmer, Mr. 
Boehlert, Mr. Allard, Mr. Herger, Mr. Ravenel, Mr. Weldon, Mr. Smith of 
 Texas, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Shays, Mr. Klug, Mr. Bartlett of Maryland, Mr. 
Coble, Mr. Hefley, Mr. Schaefer, Mr. Santorum, Mr. Kasich, Mr. Regula, 
  Mr. Kyl, Mr. Hastert, Mr. Saxton, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, Mr. Canady, Mr. 
   Emerson, Mr. Kolbe, Mr. Franks of Connecticut, Mr. Dornan and Mr. 
Gallegly) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
                           Committee on Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to require a three-
  fifths vote to adopt any rule reported from the Committee on Rules 
        disallowing germane amendments to a bill or resolution.

    Resolved, That clause 4 of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives is amended by adding at the end the following new 
paragraph:
    ``(e) The affirmative vote of three-fifths of those voting, a 
quorum being present, is required to adopt any rule or order reported 
by the Committee on Rules providing for the consideration of any bill 
or resolution that limits the right of Members to offer germane 
amendments filed with the Committee on Rules at least 3 calendar days 
before consideration of the bill or resolution that would otherwise be 
subject to amendment under House rules.''.

                                 <all>
```
#### Lawrence COOK, Appellant, v. Dr. A. D. PURCELL et al., Appellees.

No. 71-541.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 21, 1971.

Appeal from Circuit Court for Broward County; Lavon Ward, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
**EXHIBIT      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|  | (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                and |
|--|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

|                                                                                                |   |   |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| /s/                R. DAVID RUSSELL                                                            |   |   |        |
| R.                David Russell                                                                     |   |   |        |
| President                and Chief Executive Officer                March                  30, 2007 |   |   |        |

|                                                                                                                                                                                  |   |   |   |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| /s/                MELVYN WILLIAMS                                                                                                                                               |   |   |        |
| Melvyn                Williams                                                                                                                                                        |   |   |        |
| Chief                Financial Officer and Senior Vice                President-Finance                  and Corporate Development                  March                    30, 2007 |   |   |        |

----
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 158 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 158

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                        April 22, 1993.
    Resolved, That the following named Members, Resident Commissioner, and 
Delegates, be, and they are hereby, elected to the following standing committees 
of the House of Representatives:
    Committee on District of Columbia: Ronald V. Dellums, California, to rank 
following Fortney Stark of California.
    Committee on Education and Labor: Robert A. Underwood, Guam.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
PROGRAM 2591S TERM: July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015

TITLE LIBRARY BOOKBINDING

BASIS OF

ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION AWARD UNIT RATE COST UNIT RATE COST

I. LIBRARY BINDING:

(a) Double‐Fan Adhesive Binding (including removal of

existing binding (if applicable), casing‐in of text

blocks, and lettering):

(1) Monograph or Monograph Set...each volume 220 14.50 3,190.00 21.00 4,620.00

(2) Periodicals...each volume 181 14.50 2,624.50 21.00 3,801.00

(b) Mending sheets...each sheet 7 1.50 10.50 2.00 14.00(c) Pickup and Delivery to WPAFB, OH...each order 6 0.00 0.00 100.00 600.00

CONTRACTORS TOTALS $5,825.00 $9,035.00

DISCOUNT 0.00% $0.00 0.00% $0.00

DISCOUNTED TOTALS Net‐30 $5,825.00 Net $9,035.00

Chesterland, OH

BRIDGEPORT NAT'L LIBRARY

Agawam, MA

AWARDED CONTRACTOR

HF GROUP LLC
#### STATE of Florida ex rel. Anthony ESPERTI, Petitioner, v. The Honorable J. H. WILLSON, Judge of the Circuit Court of the Tenth Judicial Circuit In and For Polk County, Florida, Respondent.

No. 41644.

Supreme Court of Florida.

July 5, 1972.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari dismissed.

ROBERTS, C. J., and ERVIN, CARLTON, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
H. Res. 226

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

July 27, 1993.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule

XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 2667) making emergency supplemental appropriations for relief from the major, widespread flooding in the

Midwest for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1993, and

for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the

bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill

and the amendments made in order by this resolution and

shall not exceed ninety minutes equally divided and controlled

by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. After general debate the bill shall

be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule and

shall be considered as read. The modification to the bill printed in part 1 of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be considered as adopted in the
2

HRES 226 EH

House and in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order

against the bill, as modified, are waived. No amendment to

the bill, as modified, shall be in order except the amendment

printed in part 2 of the report. The amendment printed in

part 2 of the report may be offered only by the named proponent or a designee, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided

and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, and shall

not be subject to amendment. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and

report the bill, as modified, to the House with such amendment as may have been adopted. The previous question shall

be considered as ordered on the bill and amendment thereto

to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### Willie MOORE, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, Respondent.

No. 70-838.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Dec. 17, 1970.

Habeas corpus denied.
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION of CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT to SECTION 1350 of CHAPTER 63 of TITLE 18 of the UNITED
STATES CODE,

as ADOPTED PURSUANT to

SECTION 906 of THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Quarterly Report
of Frischs Restaurants, Inc. (the Registrant) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 11, 2005 (the Report), the undersigned officer of the Registrant certifies, pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of
Title 18 of the United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 Registrant.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|               |  |     |  |                                                   
|-------------- |  | --- |  | --------------------------------------------------
|March 27, 2006 |  | By: |  | /s/ Donald H. Walker                              
|               |  |     |  | Donald H. Walker                                  
|               |  |     |  | Vice President-Finance and Chief Financial
Officer

This certification is being furnished as required by Rule 13a  14(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (Exchange Act) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code, and shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to the liability of that
Section. This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act, except as other otherwise stated in such filing.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 15

- 00102

- CV

Cathy GIDDINGS

, Appellant

v.

Ralph CURTIS , M.D.,

Appellee

From the 73rd Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012

- CI

- 06825

Honorable John D. Gabriel, Jr., Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE MARTINEZ

, JUSTICE ALVAREZ , AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is

AFFIRMED. Costs of this appeal are taxed against Appellant Cathy Giddings.

SIGNED November 10 , 2015.

_____________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.a



                                     CONSENT


We have issued our report dated June 1, 2001 (except for Note R for which the
date is July 27, 2001), accompanying the consolidated financial statements of
NBO, Inc. and Subsidiary for the years ended March 31, 2001 and 2000 contained
in the Registration Statement on Form 10-SB. We consent to the use of the
aforementioned report in the Registration Statement on Form 10-SB.



                                              /s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP

Salt Lake City, Utah
August 1, 2001
Petition for Exemption 14 CFR 11.81 

Mr. Kevin Ingraham 

502 Valley Road

Cos Cob, CT 06807

Cell phone: (203) 536-1004

Email: Kevin.Ingraham44@gmail.com

Additionally I request an exemption to utilize my UAS to capture photos for real estate and sales 

purposes. 

I seek limited relief to operate the UAS to take aerial photographs of different homes and 

properties. At all times I will comply with FAA standards and will not enter premises without 

full permission of both the owners and occupants. 

These photographs help both real estate agents and purchasers and sellers as a whole. In a town 

with large estates with substantial property, many times UAS photos can capture images that 

cannot be obtained through affordable methods. 

This would benefit the public as a whole, because it would reduce the air traffic over residential 

areas. Many firms utilize helicopters and film crews in order obtain aerial photographs of the 

properties they wish to sell. In this instance a UAS can be used which would guarantee far less 

noise and it will also travel over a much more limited space ensuring the privacy of other 

residents in the area. A UAS can be used on the premises and kept within its property lines. A 

helicopter however has to fly great distances and can cause great disruption. 

The UAS will be operated within all FAA standards. The average height necessary to take the 

desired photographs is roughly 50-60 feet. The highest I have ever operated my UAS is 100 feet, 

which is within the FAA regulations. 

Summary: 

UAS operation can reduce air traffic over residential neighborhoods while still providing 

individuals with the information they need prior to buying or selling a residence. UAS’s can be 

operated at a safe distance while still ensuring the privacy of other homeowners, which 

helicopter operation cannot guarantee. After obtaining permission from homeowner’s and 

occupants a UAS can accomplish in minutes what would take helicopters hours, while greatly

reducing cost and inconvenience to neighboring residents.
#### William G. BROUSSARD v. H. D. O’BRYAN et al. and Vermilion Dairymen’s Cooperative Association, Modern Cleaners and Laundry, Inc.

No. 53150.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 1, 1973.

In re: William G. Broussard and Modern Cleaners and Laundry, Inc. applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Vermilion. 270 So.2d 127.

Application denied. The result is correct.
**REGULATORY EVALUATION**

**Directorate Identifier:** 2012

- NM

- 186

- AD

**Executive Order 12866:** Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significant? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. I s it appropriate t o include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES ( ) explain NO (X)
IV

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 160

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States

should seek a final and conclusive account of the whereabouts and definitive fate of Raoul Wallenberg.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 28, 1993

Mr. ENGEL submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Foreign Affairs

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that

the United States should seek a final and conclusive

account of the whereabouts and definitive fate of Raoul

Wallenberg.

Whereas Raoul Wallenberg, a Swedish citizen and diplomat,

was responsible for saving the lives of 15,000 Hungarian

Jews through the issuance of Swedish passports and for

helping an additional 100,000 Hungarian Jews escape

Nazi authorities during World War II;

Whereas on January 17, 1945, Raoul Wallenberg was taken

into ‘‘protective custody’’ by Soviet troops, in violation of

all international standards of diplomatic immunity;

Whereas Raoul Wallenberg was later arrested by Soviet

troops on charges of spying, and finally taken to
2

•HRES 160 IH

Lubyanka Prison in Moscow, where he was reported to

have died on July 17, 1947, of a heart attack;

Whereas conflicting reports and information have surfaced

over the last 45 years claiming that Raoul Wallenberg

was executed by Soviet authorities or in fact is still alive

in the former Soviet Union;

Whereas the Soviet Union has now ceased to exist and has

been succeeded by the Commonwealth of Independent

States which has pursued democratic reform while seeking to address Soviet atrocities of the past; and

Whereas the time has come to finally put an end to all speculation and confusion as to the fate of Raoul Wallenberg:

Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

2 (1) gratefully acknowledges the cooperation of

3 the Soviet and now Russian authorities in providing

4 records and personal effects of Raoul Wallenberg to

5 his family;

6 (2) requests that the President pursue, through

7 diplomatic discussions with the Government of the

8 Russian Federation, an investigation into the where9 abouts and definitive fate of Raoul Wallenberg; and

10 (3) requests that the results of this investiga11 tion be made public.

Æ
#### Leslie H. COVINGTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-589.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 10, 1970.

Walter O. Bazemore, Fort Myers, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Michael N. Kavouklis, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lakeland, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Moffett v. State, Fla. App. 1965, 179 So.2d 408; Kelly v. State, Fla.App.1967, 202 So.2d 901; Tennant v. State, Fla.App. 1967, 205 So.2d 324.

LILES, Acting C. J., and MANN and McNULTY, JJ., concur.