alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
May 10 , 2012



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

839 E. 19TH STREET, L.P. , Appellant

NO. 14

- 11

- 00349

- CV V.

SCOTT FRIEDSON D/B/A NATIONAL INCOME PROP ERTY, L.L.C. , Appellee

____________________ This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellee, Scott Friedson d/b/a National Income Property, L.L.C., signed January 19, 2011, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find the evidence is legally insuffic ient to support the judgment. We therefore order the judgment of the court below
REVERSED and RENDER judgment that appellee, Scott Friedson d/b/a National Income Property, L.L.C., take nothing on his claims against appellant, 839th E. 19th Street, L.P.

W e order appellee, Scott Friedson d/b/a National Income Property, L.L.C., to pay all costs incurred in this appeal. We further order this decision certified below for
observance.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM POWER PLUS
CORPORATION FOR THE 1997 FISCAL YEAR ENDED 31 JANUARY 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CURRENCY> CANADIAN
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                   1.37
<CASH>                                       4,341,243
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  202,319
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,809,529
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,748,940
<PP&E>                                       2,671,310
<DEPRECIATION>                                  19,153
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,043,854
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,715,813
<BONDS>                                      4,740,000<F4>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     7,398,300<F1><F2>
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,400,000<F3>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                11,043,854
<SALES>                                      4,080,598
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,080,598
<CGS>                                        2,389,115
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,389,115
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             6,854,623
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             391,100
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (5,687,427)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (5,687,427)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (5,687,427)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  ($2.54)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  ($2.54)
<FN>
<F1>COMMON SHARES WERE SUBJECT TO REVERSE-SPLIT OF 1 FOR 20 EFFECTIVE 1 NOV. 1996.
<F2>STATED CAPITAL WAS REDUCED BY $26,670,825.
<F3>AMOUNT OF EQUITY VALUE ARISING FROM CONVERTIBLE FEATURE IN L-T DEBT.
<F4>FACE AMOUNT IS $6 MILLION - SEE (F3).
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Election Commission

# DATE & TIME:

*Thursday, March 1, 2012 at 10 a.m.*

# PLACE: 

999 E Street NW., Washington, DC (ninth floor). 

# STATUS:

This meeting will be open to the public. 

# ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED:

  

Correction and Approval of the Minutes for the Meeting of February 16, 2012; 

Draft Advisory Opinion 2012-04: Justice Party of Mississippi; 

Draft Advisory Opinion 2012-03: ActRight; 

Draft Advisory Opinion 2012-01: Stop This Insanity, Inc. Employee Leadership Fund; 

Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum on Chris Dodd for President, Inc.; 

Management and Administrative Matters. 

Individuals who plan to attend and require special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should contact Shawn Woodhead Werth, Secretary, at (202) 694-1040, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting date. 

# PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION:

Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: (202) 694-1220. 

Shawn Woodhead Werth, 

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2012-4715 Filed 2-23-12; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
#### Robert BEST, Appellant, v. STATE of Oklahoma and Peter Douglas, Warden, Lexington Correctional Center, Oklahoma Department of Corrections, Appellees.

No. 65110.

Court of Appeals of Oklahoma.

March 31, 1987.

Robert Best, pro se.

*172Michael C. Turpén, Atty. Gen., Rozia M. McKinney, Asst. Atty. Gen., Oklahoma City, for appellees.

BACON, Judge.

This appeal is brought by a convicted felon while an inmate at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary at McAlester. The inmate had been caught with $300 in cash in a tube that was taped inside his pocket. The $300 was confiscated and deposited in the inmates’ welfare fund pursuant to Department of Corrections Policy No. OP-040109(2)(A)(2).

This “lawsuit” was commenced by filing a piece of paper titled “Petition for Conversion.” It names as defendant, “Pete Douglas, Warden LCC, et al.” Presumedly, it attempts to allege a suit for conversion and prays for delivery of the money, plus interest, plus compensation for the inmate’s time “expended in pursuit of the property.” The trial court dismissed the action and the inmate appeals.

The “propositions” of error raised by the inmate are ludicrous to say the least. Among his arguments is one that he was denied due process because he was denied the right to be transported from the prison to the courthouse to be personally present on a motion to dismiss. Such an argument deserves no further comment than to simply say it is frivolous. His other “propositions” have no more merit than his due process argument.

Oklahoma law clearly and necessarily gives the Director of the Oklahoma Department of Corrections the right to “prescribe rules for the conduct, management and operation of each institution.” 57 O.S. 1981 § 21. This same statute further makes this convicted felon guilty of another felony by having cash in his possession while in a state penal institution. Section 21 makes the money contraband just as if it was a gun, knife, bomb, or narcotic. Under these circumstances, we conclude that the confiscation was not only necessary and proper, but was not a denial of the inmate’s constitutional rights.

This convicted felon apparently thinks he has some special rights in court that law-abiding and taxpaying citizens do not have. Convicted felons who are inmates are also subject to the same laws that law-abiding and taxpaying citizens are subject to, and that is, when there is a frivolous appeal, costs can be awarded against the party making the frivolous appeal. We conclude that not only this suit but this appeal is frivolous and a waste of the attorney general’s time, the trial court’s time, and our time. The appellant is hereby directed to pay the costs of this appeal.

Affirmed.

REIF, J., concurs.

MEANS, P.J., concurs in part and dissents in part.

MEANS, P.J.,

concurring in part and dissenting in part

I concur only in affirming the trial court’s order of dismissal.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,

J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk December 21, 2009

1214 

# Order

December 21, 2009

139733

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 139733 COA: 293041 Saginaw CC: 08-031834-FH MARCUS DESHAUN SPIVEY, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the August 13, 2009 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented shou ld be reviewed by this Court.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

April 13, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

132203 Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan JUDITH KUZNAR and JOSEPH KUZNAR, Plaintiffs-Appellees, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman,
Justices

v SC: 132203 COA: 259501 Wayne CC: 03-333448-NO RAKSHA CORPORATIO N, d/b/a CROWN PHARMACY, and VALERIE RANDALL, Defendants-Appellants.

_____________ _______________ ___________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 22, 2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is GRANTED. The parties shall include among the issues to be briefed whether a pharmacy is a " licensed health facility" under MCL 600.5838a, and whether, in light of MCL 333.17741, the pharmacist is a necessary party to a claim against a pharmacy for dispensing the wron g drug. Persons or groups interested in the determination of the issues presented in this case may move the Court for permission to file briefs amicus curiae.

l0410 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

April 13, 2007

Clerk
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL

AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent,

v.

SANDY PERRANOSKI SAULSBERRY, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 21-0022 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Yuma County

No. S1400CR201701124

The Honorable Stephen J. Rouff, Judge Pro Tempore

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Yuma County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix

By Charles Platt

Counsel for Respondent

Sanford P. Saulsberry, Florence

Petitioner

FILED 6-10-2021
STATE v. SAULSBERRY

Decision of the Court

2

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Paul J. McMurdie, Judge Cynthia J. Bailey, and Judge 

Lawrence F. Winthrop delivered the following decision.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Sanford P. Saulsberry seeks review of the superior 

court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief, filed pursuant 

to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32. This is Petitioner’s first petition.

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this court will 

not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post-conviction relief. 

State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19 (2012). It is the petitioner’s burden 

to show that the superior court abused its discretion by denying the petition 

for post-conviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, 538, ¶ 1 (App. 

2011) (petitioner has burden of establishing abuse of discretion on review).

¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior 

court’s order denying the petition for post-conviction relief, and the petition 

for review. We find the petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion. 

¶4 We grant review but deny relief.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLAImages

# DLA Images

Search

Search

                                  - All Images 
                                  - Other 

                                  - Upload Date
                                  - Photo Date
                                  - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (3.88 MB)

Tags:celebration, Marine Corps, band, birthday

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
EXHIBIT 23.01
 

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 33-46702) pertaining to the 1990 Stock Option Plan of Law Companies 
Group, Inc., the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-48096) pertaining to 
the Employee Stock Purchase Plan of Law Companies Group, Inc., and the 
Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-99114) pertaining to the 401(k) Savings
Plan of Law Companies Group, Inc. of our report dated March 26, 1998, with 
respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Law Companies 
Group, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended 
December 31, 1997.


                                        /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
                                        ---------------------
                                          Ernst & Young LLP
Atlanta, Georgia
March 30, 1998
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of AppleREIT Seven, Inc., (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter endingMarch 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18U.S.C Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that: (1) the Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities andExchange Act of 1934; and (2) the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company as of March 31, 2010, and for the period thenended.

 
| /s/    GLADE M. KNIGHT |   |
|--------------------------------------------|--------|
| **Glade M. Knight**                        |   |
| **Chief Executive Officer**                |   |
|                                       |   |
| May 5, 2010                           |   |
|                                       |   |
| /s/    BRYAN PEERY     |   |
| **Bryan Peery**                            |   |
| **Chief Financial Officer**                |   |
|                                       |   |
| May 5, 2010                           |   |

 

1

----
EXHIBIT 21



                      SUBSIDIARIES OF AZTAR CORPORATION

The Company has no parent corporation.  In addition to the subsidiaries listed
below, the Company has ten other wholly-owned subsidiaries.  The unnamed
subsidiaries, considered in the aggregate, would not constitute a significant
subsidiary.

                                                           Jurisdiction of
                                                            Incorporation 
            Name                                           or Organization
            ----                                           ---------------

Adamar Garage Corporation                                     Delaware

Adamar of Nevada                                              Nevada

Adamar of New Jersey, Inc.                                    New Jersey
     dba TropWorld Casino and Entertainment Resort

Atlantic-Deauville, Inc.                                      New Jersey

Aztar Development Corporation                                 Delaware

Aztar Indiana Gaming Corporation                              Indiana

Aztar Missouri Gaming Corporation                             Missouri

Hotel Ramada of Nevada                                        Nevada
     dba Tropicana Resort and Casino

Ramada Express, Inc.                                          Nevada
     dba Ramada Express Hotel and Casino

Ramada New Jersey, Inc.                                       New Jersey

Ramada New Jersey Holdings Corporation                        Delaware
Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Please post this proposal from Gulfstream International

Airlines.
```

[Federal Register: June 25, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 122)]
[Notices]               
[Page 36464]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr25jn10-111]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

 
Notice of Intent to Request Extension From the Office of 
Management and Budget of a Currently Approved Information Collection 
Activity, Request for Comments; Certification Procedures for Products 
and Parts

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA invites public comments about our intention to request 
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to approve a current 
information collection. CFR part 21 prescribes certification standards 
for aircraft, aircraft engines, propellors, products, and parts. The 
information collected is used to determine compliance and applicant 
eligibility.

DATES: Please submit comments by August 24, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carla Scott on (202) 267-9895, or by 
e-mail at: Carla.Scott@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

    Title: Certification Procedures for Products and Parts.
    Type of Request: Extension without change of an approved 
collection.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0018.
    Form(s): 8110-12, 8130-1, 8130-3, 8130-6, 8130-9, 8130-12.
    Affected Public: A total of 13,339 respondents.
    Frequency: The information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: Approximately 17 minutes per 
response.
    Estimated Annual Burden Hours: An estimated 30,487 hours annually.
    Abstract: CFR part 21 prescribes certification standards for 
aircraft, aircraft engines, propellors, products, and parts. The 
information collected is used to determine compliance and applicant 
eligibility. The respondents are aircraft parts designers, 
manufacturers, and aircraft owners.

Addresses: Send comments to the FAA at the following address: Ms. Carla 
Scott, Room 712, Federal Aviation Administration, IT Enterprises 
Business Services Division, AES-200, 800 Independence Ave., SW., 
Washington, DC 20591.
    Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of 
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of 
the Department, including whether the information will have practical 
utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimates of the burden of 
the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, 
utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to 
minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, 
including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of 
information technology.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 21, 2010.
Carla Scott,
FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises Business 
Services Division, AES-200.
[FR Doc. 2010-15424 Filed 6-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
| **Exhibit 24.4**      |
|-----------------------|
|                  |
| **POWER OF ATTORNEY** |

 

KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS, that I, the undersigned, do hereby appoint Lionel Reilly or Neal Soderquist, or either of them, attorney for me and in my name and on my behalf  (i) to sign the Annual Report on Form 10-K of PROFESSIONAL VETERINARY PRODUCTS, LTD. for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2007, and any such amendment thereto, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, (ii) to file the Annual Report on Form 10-K, any amendment thereto, and all exhibits and documents required in connection therewith the SEC, and (iii) generally to do and perform all things necessary to be done in the premises as fully and effectually in all respects as I could do if personally present. 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 25th day of October, 2007.

 

| /s/ G.W. Buckaloo, Jr. |
|------------------------|
| G.W. Buckaloo, Jr.     |

 

| STATE OF MISSOURI | ) |   |
|-------------------|---|--------|
|              | ) | ss.    |
| COUNTY OF JACKSON | ) |   |

 

On this 25th day of October, 2007, before me, a Notary public qualified for said County, personally came G. W. Buckaloo, Jr., known to me to be the identical person who signed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged the execution thereof to be his voluntary act and deed.

 

| /s/ Alby White         |
|------------------------|
| Notary Public          |
| My commission expires: |

 

| June 27, 2010 |
|---------------|