alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
50235.

50236.

#### TAYLOR v. THE STATE. SEWELL v. THE STATE.

Webb, Judge.

Defendants Taylor and Sewell were jointly indicted and tried for robbery by use of force, and were convicted and sentenced for robbery by intimidation. Criminal Code § 26-1901. A joint motion for new trial was filed on *10October 18, 1974, and a show cause order was signed by the judge and entered on that date setting a hearing on the motion for December 18. However, on November 12, prior to the hearing date, defendants filed their notice of appeal from the judgment of conviction and sentence. It appears that no order has ever been entered disposing of the motion for new trial, and there is no certificate for immediate review. *Held:*

Submitted February 3, 1975

Decided February 14, 1975.

*C. C. Perkins, Don B. Howe, Jr.,*for appellants.

*Eldridge*W. *Fleming, District Attorney, Robert H. Sullivan, Assistant District Attorney,*for appellee.

"The appellant was indicted, tried and convicted for the offense of armed robbery. Thereafter, a motion for new trial was filed but prior to being ruled upon a notice of appeal was filed. Until such motion for new trial is disposed of the appeal is premature. Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed. See *Minter v. State,*229 Ga. 804 (194 SE2d 462), and citations.” *Mills v. State,*233 Ga. 494. Accord, *Home Ins. Co. v. Fort Valley Mills, Inc.,*132 Ga. App. 15 (207 SE2d 590) and cits. (cert. den.).

*Appeal dismissed.*

*Bell, C. J., and Marshall, J., concur.*
From:



### Sent: To: 

### Subject: Patrick Boland <boland@lava
.net> Wednesday, October 30, 2013 8:03 PM EAS(OST) EASservice for Kalaupapa, Molokai, Hawaii 

## Faulk,Scott (OST)

Aloha, I have been traveling between Honolulu and Kalaupapa for more than 40 years. Currently Igo to Kalaupapa about twice a month, where Iam one of the tour drivers for Damien Tours, the only tour in the settlement/National Park
. Istrongly support the service provided by Makani Kai. The entire operation is reliable and professional. The schedule is structured around the needs ofthe residents and visitors
. The prices are reasonable. The pilots and other staff are not only professional, they are family. The previous provider was adisaster, with prices and "service" that made Kalaupapa almost inaccessible. It has been a great relief these past few years to have the solid and quality service provided by Makani Kai. Icertainly recommend that Makani Kai continue asthe EASprovider for Kalaupapa. Thank you, Patrick Boland

1
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed January 30 , 2024

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 23

- 00751

- CV

CHARLES PAUL LEWIS , Appellant

V.

FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION , Appellee

On Appeal from the Co unty Civil C our t at Law No

. 4

Harris Count y, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1208237

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This appeal is from a judgment signed October 2, 2023 . The clerk’s record

was filed November 29, 2023. The court reporter informed this court that there is

no reporter ’ s record. No brief has been filed.

On January 2

, 20 2 4

, we issued a notice stating that unless appellant filed a

brief on or before January 12 , 20 2 4 , the appeal was subject to dismissal without

further notice for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P . 42.3(b).2

Appellant filed no br ief or other response. We dismiss the appeal.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justice s Hassan, Poissant, and Wilson.
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 

# Order

October 9, 2009

138917 & (72) 138919

AUTO-OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant/ Appellee/Cross-Appellant,

v SC: 138917 COA: 277574 Mason CC: 05-000436-CZ FERWERDA ENTERPRISE S, INC., d/b/a HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS LUDINGTON, Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff/ Appellant/Cross-Appellee,

and

DARYL BRONKEMA, Next Friend of JACKSON THOMAS BRONKEMA, CALEB ANDREW BRONKEMA and SAVANNAH JOY BRONKEMA, and DARYL BRONKEMA and MELISSA BRONKEMA, Husband and Wife, Defendants-Appellants/ Cross-Appellees.

________________ _______________ __________/

AUTO-OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant/ Appellee/Cross-Appellant,

v SC: 138919 COA: 277574 Mason CC: 05-000436-CZ FERWERDA ENTERPRISE S, INC., d/b/a HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS LUDINGTON, Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff/ Appellee/Cross-Appellee,

and

DARYL BRONKEMA, Individually andI, 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 October 9, 2009

p1006 2

Next Friend of JACKSON THOMAS BRONKEMA, CALEB ANDREW BRONKEMA and SAVANNAH JOY BRONKEMA, and MELISSA BRONKEMA, Defendants-Appellants/ Cross-Appellees.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applications for leave to appeal the April 9, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals and the a pplications for leave to appeal as crossappellant are considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE the judgme nt of the Court of Appeal s and we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration of whether the trial court properly assessed attorney fees and penalty interest against plaintiff Auto-Owners Insurance Company. The circuit court correctly granted summary disposition in favor of the defendants because the subject policy unam biguously provided coverage for the defendants’ claim. Accordingly, we REINSTATE the circuit court’s judgment and we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for further proceed ings not inconsistent with this order.

We do not retain jurisdiction.
III

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 6

Authorizing flags located in the Capitol complex to be flown at half-staff

in memory of R. Scott Bates, Legislative Clerk of the United States Senate.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 6, 1999

Mr. LOTT (for himself and Mr. DASCHLE) submitted the following concurrent

resolution; which was considered and agreed to

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing flags located in the Capitol complex to be flown

at half-staff in memory of R. Scott Bates, Legislative

Clerk of the United States Senate.

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring), That, as a mark of respect to the memory

3 of R. Scott Bates, Legislative Clerk of the United States

4 Senate, all flags of the United States located on Capitol

5 Buildings or on the Capitol grounds shall be flown at half6 staff on the day of his interment.

Æ
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.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Project No. 13080-003-CT]

In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's regulations, 18 CFR Part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47879), the Office of Energy Projects has reviewed the application for exemption from licensing for the Cargill Falls Hydroelectric Project, to be located on the Quinebaug River, in the Town of Putnam in Windham County, Connecticut, and has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA). In the EA, Commission staff analyzes the potential environmental effects of the project and conclude that issuing an exemption for the project, with appropriate environmental measures, would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.

                    A copy of the EA is on file with the Commission and is available for public inspection. The EA may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at                     *http://www.ferc.gov*                     using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at                     *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov*                     or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY, (202) 502-8659.                

                    You may also register online at                     *http://www.ferc.gov/​docs-filing/​esubscription.asp*                     to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.                

For further information, contact Jeff Browning at (202) 502-8677.

Dated: March 19, 2012.

Kimberly D. Bose,

 Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2012-7155 Filed 3-23-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
#### William O. BALL, Sr., as Personal Representative of The Estate of Jason Ball, Deceased, Appellant, v. STRUTHERS EXCAVATING, INC., Appellee.

No. 88-384.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Nov. 16, 1988.

Irene H. Sullivan and Michael K. Houtz of Harris, Barrett, Mann *&*Dew, St. Pe-tersburg, for appellant.

Nelly N. Khouzam of Fowler, White, Gil-len, Boggs, Villareal & Banker, P.A., St. Petersburg, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

A thorough consideration of the record on appeal, the briefs, and the oral argument convinces us that in this negligence action we must reverse the summary final judgment entered in favor of Struthers Excavating, Inc. The record is rife with factual issues foreclosing the propriety of a summary determination that any negligence by Struthers was excused by an independent, intervening cause of the decedent’s death.

Accordingly, we reverse the summary judgment and remand for further proceedings.

CAMPBELL, C.J., and SCHEB and FRANK, JJ., concur.
#### STATE ex rel. Kamurt BRIDGES v. 24TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF JEFFERSON.

No. 87-KH-2308.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 13, 1987.

In re Bridges, Kamurt; applying for supervisory writs; Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court, Div. “K”, No. 81-4432; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 87-KH-0664.

Denied.
50420.

#### COMMERCIAL CREDIT PLAN, INC. v. MILLS.

Submitted March 4, 1975

Decided April 29, 1975

Rehearing denied May 29, 1975.

*Smith & Portman, Ronald C. Crawford,*for appellant.

*Lewis & Javetz, Emanuel Lewis,*for appellee.

Bell, Chief Judge.

The automobile finance company has not pierced the defendant’s answer that there was a substitution by judicial decree of his divorced wife as the sole debtor and release of defendant from the obligation and that the company acquiesced in accepting the former wife as the sole obligee. See *Loftis Plumbing Co. v. American Surety Co.,*74 Ga. App. 590 (40 SE2d 667). We affirm the denial of the motion for summary judgment.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Webb and Marshall, JJ., concur.*
Order entered February 18 , 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 13 - 00261 - CR No. 05 - 13 - 00262 - CR No. 05 - 13 - 00263 - CR No. 05 - 13 - 002 6 4 - CR MARQUIS OBRIAN WHITE , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from th e 291st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . F12 - 56960 - U , F13 - 57100 - U, F12 - 71366 - U, F13 - 71367 - U 

### O RDER The Court REINSTATES the appeals. On January 7, 2014, we ordered J. Daniel Oliphant removed as appellant’s counsel and

or dered the trial court to appoint new counsel to represent appellant in the appeals. We have received the trial court’s order appointing Katherine Drew of the Dallas County Public Defender’s Office as new counsel. We DIRECT the Clerk to add Katherine Drew as appellant’s appointed attorney of record.We ORDER appellant to file his brief within FORTY - FIVE DAYS of the date of this

order. We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order, by electronic transmission, to Ms. Drew and to the Dallas County District Attorney’s Office.

/s/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE
----

----

**EXHIBIT        32.1**

**CERTIFICATION        PURSUANT TO**

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

| (1) | The                  Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                  of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                  and |
|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (2) | The                  information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of                  the                  Company. |
|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| April                  30, 2006 | /s/                  Paul                  Roszel                                            |
|---------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                            | Paul                  Roszel                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        |
|                            | President,                  Chief Executive Officer                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |

----
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 141 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. CON. RES. 141

 To authorize the printing of copies of the publication entitled ``The 
             United States Capitol'' as a Senate document.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

            October 3 (legislative day, September 22), 2000

Mr. McConnell submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
                        considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 To authorize the printing of copies of the publication entitled ``The 
             United States Capitol'' as a Senate document.

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That (a) a revised edition of the publication entitled ``The United 
States Capitol'' (referred to as ``the pamphlet'') shall be reprinted 
as a Senate document.
    (b) There shall be printed a total of 2,850,000 copies of the 
pamphlet in English and seven other languages at a cost not to exceed 
$165,900 for distribution as follows:
            (1)(A) 206,000 copies of the pamphlet in the English 
        language for the use of the Senate with 2,000 copies 
        distributed to each Member;
            (B) 886,000 copies of the pamphlet in the English language 
        for the use of the House of Representatives with 2,000 copies 
        distributed to each Member; and
            (C) 1,758,000 copies of the pamphlet for distribution to 
        the Capitol Guide Service in the following languages:
                    (i) 908,000 copies in English;
                    (ii) 100,000 copies in each of the following seven 
                languages: Spanish, German, French, Russian, Japanese, 
                Italian, and Korean; and
                    (iii) 150,000 copies in Chinese.
            (2) If the total printing and production costs of copies in 
        paragraph (1) exceed $165,900, such number of copies of the 
        pamphlet as does not exceed total printing and production costs 
        of $165,900, shall be printed with distribution to be allocated 
        in the same proportion as in paragraph (1) as it relates to 
        numbers of copies in the English language.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                      Exhibit 21


                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT


                             State or Other
                             Jurisdiction of
Name of                      Incorporation               Percent
Subsidiary                   or Organization             Owned
---------------------------  --------------------------  -----
<S>                          <C>                         <C>

CBR Finance (B.V.I.) Ltd.    British Virgin Islands               100

Zhaoqing Blue Ribbon High    Sino-foreign joint venture            60 (1)
  Worth Brewery, Ltd.

Zhaoqing Brewery             People's Republic of China            60 (1)

Zhaoqing Blue Ribbon         Sino-foreign joint venture            24 (1)
  Brewery Noble, Ltd.

Zhaoqing Blue Ribbon Beer    People's Republic of China            42 (1)
  Marketing Company Limited

Zao Yang Blue Ribbon High    People's Republic of China            33 (1)
  Worth Brewery Ltd.
</TABLE>

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

(1)  Represents the Company's effective interest.



                                       83
<PAGE>
#### John BILLINGSLEY v. STATE of Mississippi (Mississippi Parole Board Committee).

No. 57677.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

July 29, 1987.

John Billingsley, pro se.

Edwin Lloyd Pittman, Atty. Gen., by Henry C. Clay, III, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Sunflower County; Arthur B. Clark, Judge.

*134Before ROY NOBLE LEE, P.J., and DAN M. LEE and SULLIVAN, JJ.

AFFIRMED.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 March 31, 2015

p0323

Order 

Clerk

March 31, 2015

148921(56)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 148921

COA: 311760

Oakland CC: 2012-239764-FH

CHARLES WILLIAM O’NEAL,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s November 7, 

2014 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously.
**EXHIBIT
      23.1**




INDEPENDENT
      REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM’S CONSENT








We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement of
      Simtrol, Inc. and Subsidiaries on Form S-8 File No. 33-44036, Form S-8 File
      No.
      33-44035, Form S-3 File No. 33-55094, Form S-8 File No. 33-56856, Form S-8
      File
      No. 33-72512, Form S-8 File No. 33-72512, Form S-8 File No. 33-81314, Form
      S-8
      File No. 333-18237, Form S-8 File No. 333-18239, Form S-3 File No. 333-44407,
      Form S-3 Amendment No. 1 File No. 333-48635, Form S-8 File No. 333-83035, Form
      S-3 Amendment No. 3 File No. 333-87561, Form S-3 File No. 333-35578, Form SB-2
      Amendment No. 1 File No. 333-128420, and Form SB-2 Amendment No. 1 File No.
      333-120782 of our report, which includes an explanatory paragraph as to the
      company’s ability to continue as a going concern, dated April 16, 2007, with
      respect to our audits of the consolidated financial statements of Simtrol,
      Inc.
      and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2006 and for the years ended December 31,
      2006 and 2005, which report is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB
      of
      Simtrol, Inc. and Subsidiaries for the year ended December 31,
      2006.





/s/
      Marcum & Kliegman LLC





New
      York,
      New York


April
      16,
      2007
III

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. CON. RES. 89

To establish the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies

for the inauguration of the President-elect and Vice President-elect of

the United States on January 20, 2001.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 2, 2000

Mr. MCCONNELL (for himself and Mr. DODD) submitted the following

resolution; which was considered and agreed to

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

To establish the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural

Ceremonies for the inauguration of the President-elect

and Vice President-elect of the United States on January

20, 2001.

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring),

3 SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF JOINT COMMITTEE.

4 There is established a Joint Congressional Committee

5 on Inaugural Ceremonies (in this resolution referred to as

6 the ‘‘joint committee’’) consisting of 3 Senators and 3

7 Representatives, to be appointed by the President of the

8 Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives,
2

•SCON 89 ATS

1 respectively. The joint committee is authorized to make

2 the necessary arrangements for the inauguration of the

3 President-elect and Vice President-elect of the United

4 States on January 20, 2001.

5 SEC. 2. SUPPORT OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE.

6 The joint committee—

7 (1) is authorized to utilize appropriate equip8 ment and the services of appropriate personnel of

9 departments and agencies of the Federal Govern10 ment, under arrangements between the joint com11 mittee and the heads of those departments and

12 agencies, in connection with the inaugural pro13 ceedings and ceremonies; and

14 (2) may accept gifts and donations of goods

15 and services to carry out its responsibilities.

Æ