alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0088

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

LEWIS LEON BRYSON,

Defendant and Appellant. 

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including October 14, 2022, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 2 2022

09/02/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0088
50341.

#### GIBSON v. THE STATE.

Submitted March 10, 1975

Decided April 8, 1975

Rehearing denied April 29, 1975

*James M. Rea,*for appellant.

*Linton K. Crawford, Solicitor,*for appellee.

Pannell, Presiding Judge.

The defendant was indicted, tried and convicted of possessing beer for the purpose of resale without first obtaining a license. He was sentenced to 30 days in jail, 11 months probation thereafter, and a $1,000 fine. His motion for new trial was overruled and he appealed to this court. *Held:*

1. The evidence was amply sufficient to authorize the verdict found.

2. The other enumerations of error are either without merit, not properly raised in the court below, or raised the first time on appeal.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Quillian and Clark, JJ., concur.*
#### NUGENT v. PROEL.

No. 3525.

Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit.

Feb. 8, 1940.

Robert W. Upton, of Concord, N. H. (Emory C. Mower, of Burlington, Vt., and Neil Tolman, of Nashua, N. H., on the brief), for appellant.

Carl C. Jones, of Concord, N. H. (James B. Godfrey and Demond, Sulloway, Piper & Jones, all of Concord, N. H., on the brief), for appellee.

Before MAGRUDER, Circuit Judge, and MAHONEY and PETERS, District Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This is a suit for personal injuries. When the case was here before, we reversed a judgment for the' plaintiff because on the evidence as we viewed it a verdict for the defendant should have been directed. Proel v. Nugent, 1 Cir., 1938, 97 F.2d 353. Upon retrial of the case, the trial judge concluded that the evidence did not to any considerable extent vary from that presented before, and hence directed a verdict for the defendant in accordance with our previous opinion. We agree with this disposition of the case.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed with costs to the appellee.
**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

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

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

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

| 1.     | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                                                                    |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  |
| 2.     | The                information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in                all                material respects, the financial condition and result of operations                of                Bedminster National Corp. |

**BEDMINSTER      NATIONAL CORP.**

| By:    | */s/                Paul Patrizio*                                                                                   |
|-----------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                  | PAUL                PATRIZIO                                                                                         |
|                  | President,                Chief                Executive Officer,  Chief                Financial Officer, |
Opinion issued July 15, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-14-00443-CV

———————————

IN RE CAO LA, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus1

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Cao La, seeks a writ of mandamus compelling the clerk of the trial 

court, Stan Stanart, to accept for filing a Motion for New Trial which was 

transmitted by La’s service provider to the County Clerk of Harris County on April 

25, 2014. 

 

1

The underlying case is Morrell Masonry Supply, Inc. v. Cao La, in the Harris County 

Civil Court at Law No. 1, cause number 997475.
2

We deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. All outstanding motions 

are dismissed as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Higley and Brown.
EXHIBIT 31.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Humberto Bravo, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Placer Del Mar, Ltd.;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
     statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to
     make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
     statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by
     this quarterly report;

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
     information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all
     material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash
     flows of the registrant as of, and for, the period presented in this
     quarterly report;

4.   I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
     procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
     registrant and have:

     a.   designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
          material information relating to the registrant, including its
          consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
          entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly
          report is being prepared;
     b.   evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
          and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
          this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
     c.   presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
          effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
          evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5.   I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrant's
     auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or
     persons performing the equivalent functions):

     a.   all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
          controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
          record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
          identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
          internal controls; and
     b.   any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
          employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
          controls; and

6.   I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were
     significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could
     significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most
     recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to
     significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
14th day of February, 2008.


/s/ Humberto Bravo
---------------------------
Humberto Bravo
Chief Financial Officer
#### STATE ex rel. Abdullah Hakim ELMUMIT a/k/a Thomas Sparks v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 88-KH-1410.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 13, 1988.

In re El-Mumit, Abdullah Hakim a/k/a; Sparks, Thomas; applying for supervisory and/or remedial writ; Parish of Livingston, 21st Judicial District Court, Div. “A”, No. 48509.

Denied.
#### PLANTERS TRUST & SAVINGS BANK v. L & W FARMS, INC., et al.

No. 86-C-2399.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 9, 1987.

In re L & W Farms, Inc.; Willoughby, Glenn 0.; Willoughby, Stephen; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 85-1197; Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court, Div. “F”, No. 82-4635.

Prior report: La.App., 496 So.2d 1268.

Denied.
Open Literature Review Screen Chemical Name: Atrazine CAS No: 1912-24-9 Citation: Guasch, H., I. Munoz, et al. (1997). "Changes in atrazinetoxicitythroughout succession ofstream periphyton communities." Journal ofApplied Phycology 9(2): 137- 146. (ECOTOX #020359). 

### (VVlKIP 

### i..fb'l, f:. ill

## $""") Date ofScreen: 08/24/09 Rationale for Not Conducting a Full Open Literature Review Summary: The study reported ranges for the a.i. concentrations employed in the study; therefore, the a.i. exposure concentrations were not defined. Primary Reviewer: LisaMuto, StaffScientist, Cambridge Environmental Inc. Secondary Reviewer: Teri Myers, Senior Scientist, Cambridge Environmental Inc.



# III1IIIIII 2087830
#### Margaretta C. CLARK, Executrix of the Last Will and Testament and Codicil Thereto of J. William Clark, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 7197.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Dec. 7, 1939.

Lindabury, Depue & Faulks, of Newark, N. J. (Ferdinand Tannenbaum, of New York City, and James E. T. Tams, of Newark, N. J., of counsel), for plaintiff-appellant.

Samuel O. Clark, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., and Sewall Key, Norman D. Keller, and Lester L. Gibson, Sp. Assts. to Atty. Gen.,' John J. Quinn, U. S. Atty., and Thorn Lord, Asst. U. S. Atty.,' both of Trenton, N. J., and Howard D. Pack, Sp. Asst, to Atty. Gen., for the United States.

Before BIGGS, MARIS, and BIDDLE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the district court is affirmed upon the opinion of Judge Forman, D.C., 30 F.Supp. 599.
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 17, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 2290]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-695]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12857-002; Project No. 14073-000]


FFP Project 18, LLC, Northland Power Mississippi River LLC; 
Notice Announcing Preliminary Permit Drawing

    The Commission has received two preliminary permit applications 
deemed filed on February 1, 2011, at 8:30 a.m.,\1\ for proposed 
projects to be located on the Mississippi River, in St. James Parish, 
Louisiana. The applications were filed by FFP Project 18, LLC for 
Project No. 12857-002, and Northland Power Mississippi River LLC for 
Project No. 14073-000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Under the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, any 
document received after regular business hours is considered filed 
at 8:30 a.m. on the next regular business day. 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(2) 
(2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 17, 2012, at 9 a.m. (eastern time), the Secretary of the 
Commission, or her designee, will conduct a random drawing to determine 
the filing priority of the applicants identified in this notice. The 
Commission will select among competing permit applications as provided 
in section 4.37 of its regulations.\2\ The priority established by this 
drawing will be used to determine which applicant, among those with 
identical filing times, will be considered to have the first-filed 
application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 18 CFR 4.37 (2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The drawing is open to the public and will be held in room 2C, the 
Commission Meeting Room, located at 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 
20426. A subsequent notice will be issued by the Secretary announcing 
the results of the drawing.

    Dated: January 10, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-695 Filed 1-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
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

      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and in connection with the annual report on Form
10-KSB of Simtrol, Inc. (the "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2004, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof
(the "Report"), the undersigned hereby certify 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.

      This Certification is signed on March 28, 2005.


                                    /s/ Richard W. Egan
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    Richard W. Egan
                                    President and Chief Executive Officer


                                    /s/ Stephen N. Samp
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    Stephen N. Samp
                                    Chief Financial Officer
S. 234 

One Hundred Eleventh Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the sixth day of January, two thousand and nine 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 2105 East 

Cook Street in Springfield, Illinois, as the ‘‘Colonel John H. Wilson, Jr. Post 

Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. COLONEL JOHN H. WILSON, JR. POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 2105 East Cook Street in Springfield, Illinois, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Colonel John H. Wilson, 

Jr. Post Office Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Colonel John H. Wilson, Jr. Post Office Building’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
#### DYNA SPAN CORPORATION, a foreign corporation, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE and Bill Gunter, as Insurance Commissioner of the State of Florida, Respondents.

No. 87-0237.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 25, 1987.

Thomas D. Daiello of Marchbanks & Fea-man, P.A., Boca Raton, for petitioner.

Susan K. Stafford and Lisa S. Santucci of Dept, of Ins., Tallahassee, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

Based upon the present state of the record we deny certiorari without prejudice to petitioner to file a motion to amend its complaint in the circuit court. We recognize that petitioner has filed a non-final appeal from an order transferring venue from the Palm Beach County Circuit Court to the Leon County Circuit Court. Since the Circuit Court in Palm Beach County has refused to consider petitioner’s motion to amend its complaint because of the order transferring venue to Leon County, further proceedings concerning the discovery which is the subject of this petition for certiorari are stayed until petitioner’s motion for leave to amend its complaint has been ruled upon by the appropriate circuit court.

CERTIORARI DENIED.

DELL, WALDEN and STONE, JJ., concur.
#### STATE ex rel. Gregory MITCHELL v. Hon. Patrick G. QUINLAN, Judge.

No. 87-KH-0758.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 23, 1987.

In re Mitchell, Gregory; applying for writ of mandamus; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “B”, No. 285-464.

Granted. The district court is ordered to furnish relator with a copy of his *Boykin*transcript in case No. 285-464 “B”.
## NMR Analysis Summary Instrumentation Used: Experiments Performed: Identification of Functional groups: Structural elucidation:
#### SUN FINANCE COMPANY, INC. v. Willie JACKSON, et al.

No. 88-C-0081.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 5, 1988.

In re Sun Finance Co., Inc.; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. CA86 0988; Parish of Tangipahoa, 21st Judicial District Court, Div. “B”, No. 69606.

Prior report: La.App., 515 So.2d 540.

Granted.

MARCUS, J., recused.
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 KeyOn Communications Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Annette Eggert, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of        the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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 Company. |

|                    |   |   |                          |
|-------------------------|--------|--------|-------------------------------|
| Date: November 14, 2008 |   | By:    | /s/Annette Eggert             |
|                    |   |   |                               |
|                    |   |   | Annette Eggert                |
|                    |   |   | Chief Financial Officer       |
|                    |   |   | (Principal Financial Officer) |

----
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4.

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-60892
DAVID D TURNER, By and Through Natural Mother and Next Friend, Joyce Turner; QUANELLIA TURNER, By and Through Natural Mother and Next Friend, Joyce Turner; IZEAR FARMER, JR, By and Through Natural Mother and Next Friend, Joyce Turner; JOYCE TURNER, Individually; IZEAR FARMER, Individually Plaintiffs - Appellees v. NORTH PANOLA SCHOOL DISTRICT Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi USDC No. 2:06-CV-98
Before REAVLEY, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The plaintiffs sued the North Panola School District because a school bus driver repeatedly and arbitrarily suspended the three minor children from riding the bus only because the children allegedly had a bad odor. The magistrate judge found for two of the minor children, David and Quanellia, in a bench trial United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D November 7, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 07-60892

2 and awarded damages under the Mississippi Tort Claims Act. The school district appeals. We affirm for the reasons assigned in the magistrate judge’s able opinion. The magistrate judge believed the testimony at trial that the bus driver trapped David’s hand in the school bus door while driving off, that Quanellia was sprayed directly with deodorizer, and that the bus driver arbitrarily suspended the children from bus privileges. Because the evidence supports the court’s finding that the bus driver acted preemptively and offensively rather than tocontrol or discipline the children, the court applied the correct negligence standard. See Pigford v. Jackson Pub. Sch. Dist., 910 So. 2d 575, 579 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005). The evidence also supported the finding that the children suffered some damage, and we decline todisturb the court’s award. See Purina Mills, Inc. v. Moak, 575 So. 2d 993, 998 (Miss. 1990); Merritt v. Dueitt, 455 So. 2d 792, 793 (Miss. 1984). The judgment is not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. AFFIRMED.