alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The State *v.*Scott, *et al.*

The statement, indorsed on an indictment for trespass on personal property, that it was found on the testimony of several persons — naming them— whose property was not injured, and signed hy the prosecuting attorney, though not a literal is a substantial compliance with the statute.

*Appeal from Yell Circuit Court.*

Hon. Thomas Boles, Circuit Judge.

Jordan, Attorney General, for the State.

Clendenin, J.

The defendants were indicted in the circuit court for a trespass on personal property. They moved to quash the indictment, because the name of the prosecutor was not indorsed on the indictment, and because it was not stated at the end of the indictment that the same is found upon the testimony of a witness other than the owner of the property injured, and signed by the prosecuting attorney. The motion to quash was sustained, the indictment quashed, and the defendant discharged. To this judgment of the circuit court the State excepted, and incorporated in her bill of exceptions, the indictment and motion to quash, and appealed.

Section 89, chapter 52, Digest of Arkansas, declares that: “ No indictment for any trespass oh the person or property of another, not amounting to a felony, shall be preferred, unless the name of the prosecutor be indorsed thereon, except ■ on the information or knowledge of one or more of the grand jury, or on the information of some public officer, in the necessary discharge of his duty, or on the testimony of some witness, other than the party injured; in which case, a statement of the fact shall be made at the end of the indictment, and signed by the attorney for the State.”

*108It is a requirement of the law, that the name of the prosecutor shall be indorsed on the indictment, or that the names of the witnesses upon whose testimony it was found, other than the party injured, shall be stated, and that a statement of the fact shall be made at the end of the indictment; and the question is presented by the record, whether it has been done. In a literal sense it has not; because the name of the prosecutor is not indorsed, nor is the statement required made, at the end of the indictment; but we learn from the bill of exceptions, that the statement, “ this indictment is found on the testimony of "W\ C. Scott, *et al.,*persons whose property was not injured,” and “ signed by the prosecuting attorney,” was indorsed on the back of the indictment. This indorsement was, we think, a substantial compliance with the statute, and the indictment, therefore, was sufficient, and the motion to quash was improperly sustained by the circuit court, and for this error the judgment of that court must be reversed.
##### 



CERTIFICATION 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 results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the
periods expressed in the Report.
  /s/ Marshall O. LarsenName:
    Marshall O. LarsenTitle:
    Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Scott E. KuechleName:
    Scott E. KuechleTitle:
    Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
[No. 356-3.

Division Three.

April 5, 1972.]

#### John Berry *et al., Appellants,*v. Clarence Dumdai *et al., Respondents.*
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 268 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                  House Calendar No. 96

103d CONGRESS

  1st Session

                              H. RES. 268

                          [Report No. 103-274]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the 
bill (H.R. 2491) making appropriations for the Departments of Veterans 
 Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry independent 
agencies, boards, commissions, corporations, and offices for the fiscal 
        year ending September 30, 1994, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            October 5, 1993

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

                                                  House Calendar No. 96
103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 268

                          [Report No. 103-274]

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the 
bill (H.R. 2491) making appropriations for the Departments of Veterans 
 Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry independent 
agencies, boards, commissions, corporations, and offices for the fiscal 
        year ending September 30, 1994, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 5, 1993

  Ms. Slaughter, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 
resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the 
bill (H.R. 2491) making appropriations for the Departments of Veterans 
 Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry independent 
agencies, boards, commissions, corporations, and offices for the fiscal 
        year ending September 30, 1994, and for other purposes.

    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order to consider the conference report and amendments reported from 
conference in disagreement on the bill (H.R. 2491) making 
appropriations for the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and 
Urban Development, and for sundry independent agencies, boards, 
commissions, corporations, and offices for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 1994, and for other purposes. All points of order against 
the conference report and against its consideration are waived. The 
conference report, amendments in disagreement, and motions printed in 
the joint explanatory statement of the committee of conference to 
dispose of amendments in disagreement shall be considered as read.
```
Exhibit 32
                    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 Quarterly Report of Gold Standard, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending July 31, 2005, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Quarterly
Report"), I, Scott L. Smith, President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1) The Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
the Company.

Dated: 10-10-05                           /s/ Scott L. Smith
      --------------                     ---------------------------
                                         Scott L. Smith
                                         President and Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE JOHNSTON
INDUSTRIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF SEPTEMBER 28, 1996
AND FOR THE NINE MONTHS THEN ENDED AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-28-1996
<CASH>                                       3,510,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               43,372,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,823,000
<INVENTORY>                                 58,087,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           123,081,000
<PP&E>                                     227,588,000
<DEPRECIATION>                             100,357,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             272,004,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       43,119,000
<BONDS>                                    147,275,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      3,000
<COMMON>                                     1,250,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  57,785,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               272,004,000
<SALES>                                    242,844,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           242,844,000
<CGS>                                      198,781,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              198,781,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            17,534,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               235,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           8,173,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (712,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (424,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            912,000
<DISCONTINUED>                               2,532,000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                527,000
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,917,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .26
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### Ralph Miller HINE, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 43267.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 15, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 269 So.2d 783.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
#### STATE *vs.*ROBERT B. M'DONALD.

Liability of election officers for taking illegal votes.

New Castle,

May term, 1845.

The indictment was against defendant as presiding officer of an election, for knowingly and wilfully taking the illegal vote of one John Pontseller.

*556
      *The*Court.

—The ground on which the vote was objected to was want of residence. P. had resided in Wilmington, and left his home for Pennsylvania. For what purpose? was it a change of residence? This is to be collected from his acts and declarations. If he went with the intention to reside in Pennsylvania, or to give up his abode in Delaware; it was a loss of the residence, and he had no right to vote. Even if he went with a floating intention to return, it would be a loss of residence. (9th vol. 379.)

Did defendant take the vote knowing it to be an- illegal- vote? Defendant acted in a judicial capacity, and is not to be held liable criminally for a mere error in judgment; any more than a justice of the peace, juror, or judge. If, therefore, a presiding officer or judge of election, acting honestly from the best judgment he can form on the evidence before him, take a vote which turns out to be an illegal vote, he is not liable legally or morally. But if such officer, knowing a vote to be illegal, takes it corruptly, his position cannot protect him from the just punishment of his offence. The law requires the presiding officer at this election to call to his aid two freeholders whom it makes the judges of the election, equally with himself. Where, therefore, a vote is challenged, and two of the judges concur in rejecting it as an illegal vote, the presiding officer has no right to receive it; and, if he does receive it, and it turns out to be an illegal vote, it would be evidence of corruption. *(Dig.*177.)

The defendant was convicted, and fined $200.
H. Res. 167

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

June 8, 1993.

Resolved, That there is established one additional position of lieutenant on the Capitol Police for duty with respect

to the House of Representatives, to serve as agency training

representative for the Capitol Police. Each appointment to

the position shall be made—

(1) by the Capitol Police Board from among members and officers of the Capitol Police, with prior approval of the Committee on House Administration; and

(2) without regard to political affiliation and solely

on the basis of fitness to perform the duties of the position.

SEC. 2. (a)(1) The position of agency training representative, as established by the first section of House Resolution

320, is abolished.

(2) The former position of an officer or member serving

as agency training representative, as referred to in section 2

of House Resolution 320, is abolished.
2

•HRES 167 EH

(b) The resolution referred to in subsection (a) is House

Resolution 320, Ninety-ninth Congress, agreed to November

14, 1985, as enacted into permanent law by section 102 of

the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 1987 (as incorporated by reference in section 101(j) of Public Law 99–500

and section 101(j) of Public Law 99–591 (40 U.S.C. 206

note)).

SEC. 3. Until otherwise provided by law, there shall be

paid out of the contingent fund of the House such sums as

may be necessary to carry out this resolution.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### Dallas C. MEURER, Appellant, v. Gertrude M. MEURER, Appellee.

No. 73-842.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Sept. 28, 1973.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Broward County; George W. Tedder, Jr., Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
#### STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Boy Elijah O’STEEN, Appellee.

No. M-103.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Aug. 13, 1970.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and J. Christian Meffert, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.

A. C. Soud, Jr., Jacksonville, for appel-lee.

PER CURIAM.

This court having consolidated for appeal this case and 14 others wherein the same defendant was charged with 15 separate offenses arising out of one search and seizure and one arrest, and the same principles of law being applicable, the order appealed from in this case is reversed pursuant to our decision in State of Florida v. O’Steen, 238 So.2d 434, opinion filed this date.

Reversed.

JOHNSON, C. J., and WIGGINTON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.2

Certification

I, Howard E. Ehler, certify that:

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of GeoResources, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2009, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Howard E. Ehler, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 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 results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Howard E. EhlerHoward E. EhlerChief Financial OfficerMay 8, 2009




38
Proposed Rule: Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Subpart W

Meeting Documentation: Interstate Natural Gas Association of America 07/22/10

Date Staff Contact 

Information (Name, 

email, phone #)

Name of 

Organization 

(Attach list of all 

attendees names 

and emails if 

possible) 

Summary of Discussion (e.g., applicability, 

reporting requirements, etc.)

Written 

Comments 

Provided?

Did they

also submit 

to Docket?

Date sent to

EPA- CCD

07/22/10

Roger Fernandez Lisa Beal

INGAA

INGAA simply went over their official comments 

that they submitted to the docket. 

Written 

comments 

were submitted 

to the docket.

June 10, 2010
# C_2020271EN.01004601.xml

| 17.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 271/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 271/46

---

Action brought on 29 June 2020 — Hypo Vorarlberg Bank v SRB

(Case T-394/20)

(2020/C 271/58)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Hypo Vorarlberg Bank AG (Bregenz, Austria) (represented by: G. Eisenberger und A. Brenneis, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board (SRB)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the Single Resolution Board of 15 April 2020 on the calculation of the 2020 ex ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/2020/24), including the annexes thereto, in any event in so far as the contested decision, including the annexes thereto, concerns the contribution to be paid by the applicant; and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Single Resolution Board of 15 April 2020 on the calculation of the 2020 ex ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/2020/24), including the annexes thereto, in any event in so far as the contested decision, including the annexes thereto, concerns the contribution to be paid by the applicant; and

| — | order the Single Resolution Board to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Single Resolution Board to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law, which are essentially identical or similar to the pleas in law put forward in Case T-479/19, Hypo Vorarlberg Bank v SRB. (1).

---

(1)  OJ 2019 C 305, p. 58

---
GPO Home
                Inspector General
                
            Report Fraud, Waste and Abuse
            
        
            Overview
            
        
            OIG Leadership
            
        
            Investigations
            
        
            Audits
            
        
            Inspections
            
        
            Semiannual Reports to Congress
            
        
            Plans and Reports
            
        
            Recommendations
            
        
            Whistleblower Protection Program
            
        
            FAQs about the OIG
            
        
            Complaint Form 
  GPO Home Inspector General
 Report Fraud, Waste and Abuse
                        
                    
                        Overview
                        
                    
                        OIG Leadership
                        
                    
                        Investigations
                        
                    
                        Audits
                        
                    
                        Inspections
                        
                    
                        Semiannual Reports to Congress
                        
                    
                        Plans and Reports
                        
                    
                        Recommendations
                        
                    
                        Whistleblower Protection Program
                        
                    
                        FAQs about the OIG
 Stay Informed - New OIG Reports Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse What's New 24-03 GPO Telework Program Audit - March 15, 2024
    23-0004-I  Facebook Scam Investigation summary - February 29, 2024
    24-0001-I Management Implication Report – Rights Advisements -  February 15, 2024
    24-02 - The Indoor Air Quality Report -  February 14, 2024
 Facebook
    **
    Twitter
    **
    Instagram
    **
    You Tube
    **
    Pinterest
    **
    Linkedin
    **U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
Accessibility | Privacy | COOP  | Inspector General
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Joe BUCKNER, Jr. v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 54015.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 14, 1973.

In re: Joe Buckner, Jr. applying for writs of habeas corpus, certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and other remedial writs.

Writ refused. Based upon the evidence taken, the ruling of the trial judge is correct.
#### Jesus LOPEZ and Alfonsa Lopez, his wife, Appellants, v. Robert RUSSELL, d/b/a Russell Realty, Appellee.

No. 71-78.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 28, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### BARTKE’S INC. v. HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AVIATION AUTHORITY.

No. 38945.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Sept. 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 225 So.2d 174.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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 Quarterly Report of Fresenius Medical Care Holdings, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ben
J. Lipps, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

      (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.


/s/ Ben J. Lipps
----------------------------------
Ben J. Lipps
Chief Executive Officer
May 15, 2003
#### Louis LOMBARD et al., Petitioners, v. Emanuel PUSHKIN et al., Respondents.

No. 44174.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 17, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 279 So.2d 79.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
H. Res. 335

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

February 2, 1994.

Resolved, That Representative Vernon J. Ehlers of

Michigan be and is hereby elected to the following standing

committees of the House of Representatives: The Committee

on Science, Space, and Technology and the Committee on

Public Works and Transportation.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### INTERNATIONAL ERECTORS, INC., a corporation of Florida, George W. Ford and Virginia L. Ford, Appellants, v. AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF FORT LAUDERDALE, Florida, and Home Owners Insurance Company, a corporation, Appellees.

No. 72-717.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 4, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.