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

### Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________ N O . 09
- 22
- 00173
- CV

__________________ TEXAS WINDSTORM INSURANCE ASSOCIATION , Appellant
V.
KEVIN KELLY AND TIFFANY KELLY , Appellee s

__________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 136th District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. D
- 203 ,415

__________________________________________________________________ ORDER
On May 19, 2022, the trial court signed an interlocutory order, which identifies controlling questions of law that, if resolved now, may materially advance the ultimate resolution o f the lawsuit should this Court decide to grant the request and allow the matter to be argued by interlocutory appeal. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(d) (Supp.); see also Tex. R. Civ. P. 168. On June 3, 2022, Texas Windstorm Insurance Associ ation asked this Court for permission to appeal the interlocutory order the trial court signed on May 19 , 202 2

. See Tex. R. App. P.2 28.3(a). The remaining part ies in the case, Kevin Kelly and Tiffany Kelly , re sponded in support of the request. See Tex. R. App. P. 28.3(f). The Court grants Texas Windstorm Insurance Association ’s petition seeking review through a permissive appeal of the trial court’s May 19 , 202 2 Summary Judgment Order with Permission to Appeal

. See Tex. R. App. P. 28.3(k). We deem the notice of appeal to have been filed as of the date the Court renders this Order. Id

. The record is due June 27, 202 2 . The brief of the appellant is due twenty days after the record is filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.6(a). The appellees ’ brief is due twenty days after the appellant files its brief. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.6(b). The Clerk of the Court shall file a copy of this Order with the trial court’s clerk. See Tex. R. App. P. 28.3(k).
ORDER ENT ERED June 1 7 , 202 2

. PER CURIAM Before Golemon, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
---



##### 



1




---



##### 



2




---



##### 



3




---



##### 



4




---



##### 



5




---



##### 



6




---



##### 



7




---



##### 



8




---



##### 



9




---



##### 



10




---



##### 



THE DETROIT EDISON COMPANYBy:
    /s/ Edward SolomonName:
    Edward SolomonTitle:
    Assistant Treasurer ATTEST:By:
    /s/ Sandra Kay EnnisName:
    Sandra Kay EnnisTitle:
    Corporate Secretary 11




---



##### 



THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON TRUST
COMPANY, N.A., as TrusteeBy:

/s/ J. Michael BanasName:
    J. Michael BanasTitle:
    Vice President ATTEST:By:
    /s/ Alexis M. JohnsonName:
    Alexis M. JohnsonTitle:
    Authorized Officer 12




---



##### 



EXHIBIT A
 No. R-
    
    $
   
        A-1




---



##### 



A-2




---



##### 



A-3




---



##### 



A-4




---



##### 



A-5




---



##### 



A-6




---



##### 



THE DETROIT EDISON COMPANY[Corporate Seal]By:Name:Title:  By:Name:Title: A-7




---



##### 



THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON TRUST COMPANY, N.A.
as TrusteeBy:Authorized Signatory 
 A-8




---



##### 



A-9
<PAGE>   1


                                                                   EXHIBIT 12-15


                           THE DETROIT EDISON COMPANY
                COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                              Year Ended December 31               
                                              ------------------------------------------------------

                                                    1998                1997                1996
                                                    ----                ----                ----

                                                           (Millions, except for ratio)

<S>                                           <C>                <C>                 <C>            
Net income................................... $           418    $            417    $           328
                                              ---------------    ----------------    ---------------
Taxes based on income:
   Current income taxes......................             280                 308                224
   Deferred taxes - net......................              (5)                 (6)                16
   Investment tax credit adjustments - net...             (15)                (14)               (15)
   Municipal and state.......................               3                   4                  3
                                              ---------------    ----------------    ---------------
     Total taxes based on income.............             263                 292                228
                                              ---------------    ----------------    ---------------
Fixed charges:
   Interest on long-term debt................             254                 262                275
   Amortization of debt discount, premium
     and expense.............................              11                  11                 12
   Other interest............................              13                   9                  4
   Interest factor of rents..................              34                  34                 34
                                              ---------------    ----------------    ---------------
     Total fixed charges.....................             312                 316                325
                                              ---------------    ----------------    ---------------
Earnings before taxes based on income
   and fixed charges......................... $           993    $          1,025    $           881
                                              ===============    ================    ===============

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges...........            3.18                3.24               2.71

</TABLE>
#### In the Interest of M. H., Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-1428.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 24, 1973.

Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender and Lewis S. Kinder, Asst. Public Defender and Gordon Selridge, Legal Intern, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Arnold R. Ginsberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before CHARLES CARROLL, HEN-DRY and HAVERFIELD, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was adjudicated delinquent and seeks reversal of his adjudication on the grounds that the evidence was insufficient to establish his guilt. We have carefully considered the briefs and argument of counsel in the light of the record on appeal and have concluded that there was sufficient competent evidence before the court to support the adjudication and to *700overcome the hypothesis of innocence. See Carr v. State, 45 Fla. 11, 34 So. 892 (1903) and Betancourt v. State, Fla.App.1969, 228 So.2d 124. Accordingly, the adjudication of delinquency is affirmed.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINING SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT NOVEMBER 30, 2000 (UNAUDITED) AND THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 2000
(UNAUDITED) IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-2000
<CASH>                                          11,925
<SECURITIES>                                   145,619
<RECEIVABLES>                                   32,621
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               215,446
<PP&E>                                          21,865
<DEPRECIATION>                                  16,400
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 266,056
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           35,884
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            34
<OTHER-SE>                                     230,138
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   266,056
<SALES>                                         48,356
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                65,810
<CGS>                                              732
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,268
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                39,936
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   4
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 24,711
<INCOME-TAX>                                     9,316
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             24,711
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    15,395
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.42


</TABLE>
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  In connection with this Quarterly Report of PDK Energy Inc., on Form 10-Q for the Quarter ending April 30, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Eric Joffe, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (1) Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the nine months ended April 30, 2012, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and April 30, 2012 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of WTTJ Corp.  May 8, 2012By:/s/ Eric JoffeEric JoffeChairman, President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
251 La. 672

#### Clara AGUILLARD et al. v. The HOME INDEMNITY COMPANY et al.

No. 48995.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 15, 1968.

In re: Hampton Fontenot and Clara Aguillard Fontenot applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit Parish of St. Landry. 203 So.2d 746.

The application is denied. According to the facts of the case, as found to be by the Court of Appeal, there appears no error of law in the judgment complained of.
#### CARNER v. RATNER.

No. 37228.

Supreme Court of Florida.

April 1968.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 207 So.2d 310.
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15** 
**- 757**  **9**

ROBERT COOPER ,
Plaintiff

- A ppellant ,

v.
RODERICK R. SOWERS; J. MICHAEL STOUFFER, Commissioner of Correction; BOBBY P. SHEARIN, Warden of North Branch Corr. Inst.; G. B. MCALPINE; N. A. KLINK; J. L. HARBAUGH; KEVIN L. LAMP, The Chaplain’s Office; PARRISH KAMMULF, Dietary Manager; MICHAEL GUTILLO; C. GILPIN; J. PAYNE; V. WHITEMANS; J. T. ZAIS; OFFICER BAUER; C. P. ROBINSON; JAMES SMITH; D. L. SMITH; JOHN/JANE D OES; KATHY JACOBS; MARY JO ROSE; P. H. PENNINGTON; FRANK B. BISHOP, JR., Warden of Western Correctional Institution; RANDY WATSON, Deputy Commissioner; E. LAMBERT; R. STOTLER; D. BEACHY; W. L. LEYDIG; RICHARD J. GRAHAM, JR.; JOHN/JANE DOE, a/k/a Stephanie Coates; L. MOULDIN, a/k/a Moulden; RANDY ADKINS; T. YUTZY; D. BITTINGER; D. BROADWATER; OFFICER GOLDEN, a/k/a Gonoas; ROBERT MANUEL; R. DOLLY; V. WARNICK, a/k/a Warnyck, Psychology Dept.; BRUCE LILLER, Psychology Dept.; MR. BANKS, Psychology Dept.; MS. HA RT; RONALD S. WEBER; J. SELLERS; KEITH ARNOLD; M. CADY,

Defendants

– Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore

. J. Frederick Motz , Senior District Judge. ( 1:13

- cv
- 03 87 2

- JFM )

Submitted : March 31, 2016 Decided: June 29, 2016

Before SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.2 Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Robert Cooper, Appellant Pro Se. Stephanie Judith Lane

- Weber, Assistant Attorney General , Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM:
Robert Cooper seeks to appeal the district court’s order
denying in part and granting in part Defendants’ motion for
summary judgment and dismissing some of Cooper’s claims . This
court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28

U.S.C. § 1291 (20 12 ), and certain interlocutory and collateral

orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (20 12 ); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v.
Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp

. , 337 U.S. 541 , 545

- 46 (1949). The

order Cooper seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an
appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we
dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with
oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately prese nted in the materials before this court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER





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





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2019 (the “Report”) of New Mountain Finance Corporation (the “Registrant”), as filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Robert A. Hamwee, the Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, 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 Registrant.




/s/ ROBERT A. HAMWEEName:Robert A. HamweeDate:May 6, 2019
#### Lillian GRACE and Erwin Grace, her husband, Appellants, v. LINCOLN FIELDS, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 66-663.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

May 16, 1967.

Rehearing Denied June 14, 1967.

*127Linet, Schwartz & Klein, North Miami Beach, for appellants.

Blackwell, Walker & Gray and James E. Tribble, Miami, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, CHARLES CARROLL and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the plaintiffs below from an adverse summary judgment. Plaintiffs were lessees of an apartment in a building owned and operated by the defendant. The plaintiff Lillian Grace was injured when she fell in the private parking lot maintained by the defendant. The fall occurred after she left her car and was proceeding from the parking lot to the apartment building. The walkway from the lot was blocked by a parked car. Bumper logs had been placed at the edge of the lot where it bordered on the grass. The edge of the lot was sandy. The bumper log at the point where the plaintiff Lillian Grace was leaving the lot was partially rotten, and a piece of the log had fallen from the log and become lodged in the sand. The plaintiff Lillian Grace fell when she tripped over that partially buried piece of wood. The order granting summary judgment does not disclose whether the trial court concluded that the defendant had proved conclusively that no genuine issues of fact existed with regard to negligence of the defendant, or that the evidence submitted established beyond issue that the plaintiff Lillian Grace was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law. See Holl v. Talcott, Fla.1966, 191 So.2d 40, 43; and opinion on rehearing, at pp. 47-48. In our opinion neither of those conclusions would be justified on the record, from examination of which it appears there were genuine issues of fact bearing on negligence and contributory negligence which could not properly be resolved or tried on the hearing on motion for summary judgment. Accordingly, the judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of Daniels Corporate Advisory, Inc. (the "Company") does hereby certify, to the best of such officer's knowledge, that:



1. The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Daniels Corporate Advisory Company, Inc. (the Company) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, 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.



Dated: July 20, 2015



/s/ Arthur D. Viola



|                            
|----------------------------
|Chief Executive Officer     
|and  Chief Financial Officer



The certifications set forth above are being furnished as an exhibit solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed to be "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, nor shall they be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Daniels Corporate Advisory Company, Inc. and will be retained by Daniels Corporate Advisory Company, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-13-00563-CR

Rene GONZALES,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012CR8313

Honorable Philip A. Kazen Jr., Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Delivered and Filed: October 9, 2013

DISMISSED

The trial court’s certification in this appeal states that “this criminal case is a plea-bargain 

case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” The clerk’s record contains a written plea bargain, 

and the punishment assessed did not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and 

agreed to by the defendant; therefore, the trial court’s certification accurately reflects that the 

underlying case is a plea-bargain case. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). 
04-13-00563-CR

Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure states “The appeal must be 

dismissed if a certification that shows the defendant has a right of appeal has not been made part 

of the record under these rules.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). 

On August 30, 2013, we ordered that this appeal would be dismissed pursuant to rule 

25.2(d) unless an amended trial court certification showing that the appellant has the right of appeal 

was made part of the appellate record by September 30, 2013. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d), 37.1; 

see also Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 

174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.). 

On September 24, 2013, Appellant’s retained counsel filed a response stating that before 

Appellant accepted the plea offer, counsel had thoroughly explained to Appellant that by entering 

into the plea agreement Appellant would waive his right to appeal. 

Given the record and Appellant’s response, Rule 25.2(d) requires this court to dismiss this 

appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH

- 2 -
II

Calendar No. 709

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3499

[Report No. 103–396]

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 21 (legislative day, JULY 20), 1994

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

OCTOBER 3 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 12), 1994

Reported by Mr. GLENN, without amendment

AN ACT

To amend the Defense Department Overseas Teachers Pay

and Personnel Practices Act.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. LEAVE FOR DODDS TEACHERS.

4 Section 6 of the Defense Department Overseas

5 Teachers Pay and Personnel Practices Act (20 U.S.C.

6 904) is amended—

7 (1) in subsection (a) by inserting ‘‘(or, if such

8 teacher is employed in a supervisory position or
2

•HR 3499 RS

1 higher, not less than ten and not more than thir2 teen)’’ after ‘‘ten’’;

3 (2) in subsection (d) by striking ‘‘of the mili4 tary department concerned’’ and inserting ‘‘of De5 fense’’; and

6 (3) by adding at the end the following:

7 ‘‘(h) The Director of Dependents’ Education, in con8 sultation with the Director of the Office of Personnel Man9 agement—

10 ‘‘(1) shall establish for teachers a voluntary

11 leave transfer program similar to the one under sub12 chapter III of chapter 63 of title 5, United States

13 Code; and

14 ‘‘(2) may establish for teachers a voluntary

15 leave bank program similar to the one under sub16 chapter IV of chapter 63 of title 5, United States

17 Code.

18 Only leave described in the last sentence of subsection (c)

19 of this section (relating to leave that may be used by a

20 teacher for any purpose) may be transferred under any

21 program established under this subsection.’’.

Passed the House of Representatives July 19, 1994.

Attest: DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

Clerk.

Calendar No. 709

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3499

[Report No. 103–396]

AN ACT

To amend the Defense Department Overseas

Teachers Pay and Personnel Practices Act.

OCTOBER 3 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 12), 1994

Reported without amendment
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.3

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

    We consent to the inclusion in this registration statement on Form S-1 of
HomeCom Communications, Inc. of our report, dated June 4, 1999, on our audits of
the financial statements of Premier Financial Services, Inc., First
Institutional Marketing, Inc., and All Things Financial, Inc. We also consent to
the reference to our firm under the caption "Experts."

Andrew Shebay & Company, PLLC
Houston, Texas
August 28, 2000