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

Attorney General 

The Attorney General of Texas 

March 6, 1981 

Honorable II. L. Snow 

Willacy County Auditor 

courthouse 

Raymondville, Texas 78580 

Dear Mr. Snow: 

Opinion No. MW- 2 9 7 

Re: Whether the county may pay 

employees twice monthly 

You have asked the following question: 

Does the Willacy county auditor have the 

authority to pay employees of Willacy County on a 

twice-monthly basis? 

No statute diects the frequency at which county employees may be 

compensated. Article 391214 V.T.C.S., however, provides in section 1 that: 

the commissioners court of each county shall fix the 

amount of compensation, office expense, travel 

expense, and all other allowances for county and 

precinct officials and employees who are paid wholly 

from county funds. . . . 

In our opinion, the exclusive authority vested in the commissioners court to 

“fix the amount of compensation” implies a concomitant power to fix the 

frequency of the payment of such compensation. 

In Attorney General Opinion C-792 (19661, this office held that the 

Commissioners Court of Dallas County was empowered to determine 

whether employees of the county clerk’s office could be paid for overtime 

work or granted compensatory time therefor. In Attorney General Opinion 

MW-136 (1980), we held that the commissioners court could establish 

vacation policy as a part of compensation under article 391214 V.T.C.S. See 

also Attorney General Opinion H-860 (1976) (sick leave). Thus, since the 

commissioners court has broad authority to establish the manner of the 

payment of compensation, we believe that a county is authorized to pay the 

salaries of its employees on a twice-monthly basis. 

P. 949 
Honorable H. L. Snow - Page Two 

SUMMARY 

The commissioners court of a county is authorized to direct 

the payment of the salaries of county employees on a twicemonthly basis. 

&ZQ 

MARK WHITE 

Attorney General of Texas 

JOHN W. FAINTER, JR. 

First Assistant Attorney General 

RICHARD E. GRAY III 

Executive Assistant Attorney General 

Prepared by Rich Gilpin 

Assistant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMlTTEE 

Susan L. Garrison, Chairman 

Jon Bible 

Walter Davis 

Rich Gilpln 

Bruce Youngblood 

P. 950
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JERON BROWN,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 522 WAL 2016

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 6th day of July, 2017

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
Exhibit 32.1





Certification of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002





In connection with the quarterly report of Zenitech Corporation (the "Company”) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Hong Yang, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 result of operations of the Company.





Dated: May 16, 2011





By:
/s/ Hong Yang


Hong Yang


President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary, Treasurer and Director


(Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Earnest Lacy, Appellant.

? by the defendant from an amended judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Slavin, J.), rendered April 13, 1989, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, and imposing a *853sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fourth degree.

Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Bracken, J. P., Kooper, Lawrence, Balletta and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Richard Crespo, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dufficy, J.), both rendered April 9, 1990, convicting him of burglary in the second degree (two counts; one as to each indictment), upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Thompson, J. P., Kunzeman, Eiber, Rosenblatt and Ritter, JJ., concur.
ACCEPTED 12-14-00368-CR TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

TYLER, TEXAS 8/24/2015 2:32:00 PM CATHY LUSK CLERK
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
 
 The undersigned, Jacky Shenker, the President and Director (Principal Executive Officer) of Advanced Ventures Corp.  (the “Company”), certifies, under the standards set forth and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended  March 31 2011  fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in that Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 Date: June 14, 2011
By:
/s/ Jacky ShenkerName: Jacky ShenkerTitle: President and Director(Principal Executive Officer)
 
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 4.3


 


 


Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm


We consent to the
reference made to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Part B of the Prospectus
and to the use of our report dated December 2, 2016, in this Registration Statement (Form S-6 No. 333-213887) of Smart Trust 282,
comprising Smart Trust, Preferreds Plus Trust, Series 2.


 


/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP


 


Chicago, Illinois


December 2, 2016
**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 Annual Report of Applied Digital Solutions, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2004, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Scott R. Silverman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the Company.
 
 /s/
Scott R. Silverman
 Scott R.
Silverman
 Chief
Executive Officer
 March 8,
2005
 
 A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Applied Digital Solutions, Inc. and will be retained by Applied Digital
Solutions, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 171 (Tuesday, September 4, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 45001]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-19111]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration #15656; Colorado Disaster Number CO-00105 
Declaration of Economic Injury]


Administrative Declaration of an Economic Injury Disaster for the 
State of Colorado

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) 
declaration for the State of Colorado, dated 08/24/2018.
    Incident: 416 Wildfire.
    Incident Period: 06/01/2018 through 07/31/2018.

DATES: Issued on 08/24/2018.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 05/24/2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of 
the Administrator's EIDL declaration, applications for economic injury 
disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other 
locally announced locations.
    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected 
by the disaster:

Primary Counties: La Plata, San Juan.

Contiguous Counties:
    Colorado: Archuleta, Dolores, Hinsdale, Montezuma, Ouray, San 
Miguel.
    New Mexico: San Juan.
    The Interest Rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Businesses and Small Agricultural Cooperatives without             3.610
 Credit Available Elsewhere.............................
Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available                  2.500
 Elsewhere..............................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number assigned to this disaster for economic injury is 156560.
    The States which received an EIDL Declaration # are Colorado, New 
Mexico.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

    Dated: August 24, 2018.
Linda E. McMahon,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018-19111 Filed 8-31-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
#### The Ind. Dist. of Altoona v. The Dist. Tp. of Delaware.

1. Appeal: estoppel. If the party recovering a judgment shall accept the amount thereof-, he cannot afterward appeal. ,

*Appeal from Polls Circuit Court.*

Thursday, October 5.

The plaintiff recovered in the court below a judgment against the defendant for the sum of $150.57 and costs, which judgment was paid. Afterward the plaintiff appealed to this court, and a motion is now made to dismiss the appeal.

*M. D. McHenry db Son,*for appellant.

• *Phillips, Goode db Phillips,*for appellee.

Servers, Oh. J.

'The Oode, § § 3212 and 3213, provide that an appeal may be dismissed, on motion of the appellee, whenever it appears the appellant has no further right to pros*202ecute the appeal; and appellee may, by a verified answer or affidavit, plead or present facts which render the taking of the appeal improper or destroy the appellant’s right of further prosecuting the same.

In *M. & M. R. R. Co. v.*Byington, *14*Iowa, 572, it was held, where damages had been assessed by a sheriff’s jury which had been paid to the defendant, that he could not thereafter appeal to the District Court; and in *Borgalthous v. Ins. Co.,*36 Iowa, 250, it was held, that where a judgment had been rendered against a garnishee in the District Court, which judgment he paid, he thereby waived all error in the rendition of the judgment.

In principle, there is no difference between those cases and the one at bar; the only difference being that, in the last case, the defendant paid the amount of the judgment appealed from, and in the case at bar the plaintiff received and accepted the amount of the judgment appealed from. The fact that in the former a new or re-trial might be necessary if the case was reversed, and not in the latter, can make no difference. Nor is the decision in *Borgalthous v. Ins. Co., supra,*placed on that ground. But it is expressly held, that by the payment of the judgment all errors were waived. Why should not the same rule prevail where the other party has received and accepted the amount of such judgment?

The argument amounts to this: To the original judgment both parties excepted — if the defendant paid the judgment it amounts to a waiver of error on his part, but the acceptance of the amount so paid by the plaintiff will not amount to such waiver on his part. Such cannot be the rule, but it must, under the circumstances, be reciprocal.

In *Goldsmith v. Clausen, 14*Iowa, 278, the clerk in computing the amount due made a mistake, and the judgment was rendered for a sum less than the amount due. The defendant paid the amount of the judgment and the plaintiff filed a motion to correct the judgment. It does not appear that the plaintiff had accepted the money from the clerk.

The appeal must be

Dismissed.
Exhibit 32.2
 
 Certification of Principal Financial Officer
 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 5V Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Chi Wu, 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/ Chi WuChi Wu
Principal Financial Officer

May 23, 2011
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3984 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3984

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              June 7, 1994

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the building located at 216 Coleman Avenue in Waveland, 
 Mississippi, for the period of time during which it houses operations 
  of the United States Postal Service, as the ``John Longo, Jr. Post 
                               Office''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The building located at 216 Coleman Avenue in Waveland, 
Mississippi, shall, for the period of time during which it houses 
operations of the United States Postal Service, be known and designated 
as the ``John Longo, Jr. Post Office''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the building referred to in section 1 
shall, with respect to the period referred to in section 1, be deemed 
to be a reference to the John Longo, Jr. Post Office.

            Passed the House of Representatives May 23, 1994.

            Attest:

                                           DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
REPORT FOR APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEES - REMAINING BALANCES
(OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT CORPORATION (PIC)

All Data through 03/31/2019, Amounts Rounded to the Nearest Whole Dollar

Pursuant to Public Law H.J-Res.31, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019 ‘Linke

REMAINING AMOUNT OF STATUTORY CAP

OPIC Statutory Limitation - 22 USC 2195(a)(1)(A) +29,000,000,000
ESTIMATED Exposure as of 03/31/2019 - Guaranteed Lender Data Pending (Note 1) 23,100,960,842
$s 5,899,039,158

REMAINING UNOBLIGATED & AVAILABLE BALANCES OF RESOURCES

Treasury Fiscal Year Fiscal Year
‘Symbol Appropriation End of Availability
Subsidy / Program Budget
071-0100-x 1998 (No Year) 110,565
071-010-1719 2017 2019 208,322
071-010-1820 2018 2020 20,000,000
TOTAL $ 20,318,887

Administrative Resources (Note 2)
71-4184X 2019 (No Year) $ 18,367,653,

DATA SOURCES & NOTES
Source: Unobligated Balances reported via SF133 Reports on Budget Execution and Budgetary Resources via MAX gov
See FY 2019 SF 133s at OMB MAX gov (public) link,
International Assistance Programs at link
(Cell A8 - Filter TAFS to symbols beginning as ‘71-0100’, see Line 2412 - Unexpired Unobligated Balance)

Subsidy Transactions - Amounts of Subsidy and Principal Obligated sourced from OPIC Financial Systems using
General Ledger date based reporting

Note 1: Exposure as of 3/31/2019 is estimated as reporting from Guaranteed Lenders is 45 days post quarter.

Note 2: FY 2019 Administrative Resources Budget as of 3/31/2018

Total OPIC appropriation, enacted 2018 73,200,000
OPIC Administrative Budget under CR through 2/15/2019 29,225,404
Carryforward Amount 19,751,505

603,256

Less 2019 Obligations Incufred as of 3/31/2019
$ 18,367,653
EXHIBIT 32.01











CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT 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 Annual Report of Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Spectrum Global Balanced L.P. (the “Partnership”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Walter Davis, President of Demeter Management LLC, the general partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my 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 Partnership.



















By:             /s/            Walter Davis





Name:                                Walter Davis


Title:                      President of Demeter Management LLC,


general partner of the registrant





Date:                      March 29, 2010
Exhibit 23.1
 
  CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
   
   We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-63758, 333-81326 and 333-128082) of Guided Therapeutics, Inc. (formerly SpectRx, Inc.) and its Subsidiary (the “Company”), of our report dated March 30, 2011, on our audit of the consolidated financial statements of the Company, which report appears in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the two years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 listed in the accompanying index.
  /s/ UHY LLPUHY LLPAtlanta, GeorgiaMarch 30, 2011
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY 

2000 TRAVERWOOD DRIVE 

ANN ARBOR, MI 48105-2498 

 OFFICE OF 

 AIR AND RADIATION 

February 9, 2010 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: Meeting with NRDC to discuss the EPA/NHTSA Proposed Rulemaking for 

Greenhouse Gas and CAFE Standards for Light-Duty Vehicles 

FROM: Robin Moran 

 Senior Policy Advisor 

 Assessment and Standards Division 

TO: EPA Docket # EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0472 

This memo documents a meeting held on November 12, 2009, between representatives of 

Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and EPA to discuss EPA’s proposed greenhouse 

gas emission standards for light-duty vehicles. The discussion topic was advanced technology 

vehicle credits, specifically the issues of emissions for electric vehicles and the electric portion 

of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and accounting for upstream emissions from the electricity 

generation sector. NRDC’s technical comments were captured in their public comments to the 

docket on the proposed rule. 

The meeting attendees included the following: 

Luke Tonachel, NRDC 

David Ganss, EPA 

Venu Ghanta, EPA 

Donald Kopinski, EPA 

Aaron Hula, EPA 

Zoltan Jung, EPA 

William Charmley, EPA 

Robin Moran, EPA
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3781 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3781

 To amend the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 
        to eliminate funding for highway demonstration projects.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 2, 1994

 Mr. Inglis of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 
      referred to the Committee on Public Works and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 
        to eliminate funding for highway demonstration projects.

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

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    Sections 1103(b), 1104(b), 1105(f), 1106(a)(2), 1106(b)(2), 
1107(b), and 1108(b) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation 
Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 2027-2063) are each amended by 
striking ``through 1997'' and inserting ``through 1993''.

SEC. 2. ALLOCATION PERCENTAGES.

    Sections 1103(c), 1104(c), 1105(g)(2), 1106(a)(3), 1106(b)(3), 
1107(c), and 1108(c) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation 
Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 2028-2063) are each amended by 
striking ``, 1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997''.

                                 <all>
```
Page 1 of 1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

Case No. DA 22 - 0509 ROBERT WINKOWITSCH,

Plaintiff and Appellee ,

- v GLACIER ELECTRIC CO - OP, INC.,

Defendant and Appellant . **ORDER GRANTING FIRST EXTENSION** 

Upon consideration of

Appellee’s First Motion for Extension of T ime Pursuant to Rule 26(1), M. R. App. P., and good cause appearing, **IT IS**  **HEREBY ORDERED**  that Appellee is granted an e xtension of

t ime up to and including July 12, 2023 within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellee ’s response brief on appeal. ELECTRONICALLY DATED AND SIGNED BELOW.

Electronically signed by: Bowen Greenwood Clerk of the Supreme Court June 6 2023

06/06/2023
Case Number: DA 22-0509