alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### STATE of Oklahoma, Appellant, v. Larry RINGGOLD, Appellee.

No. O-80-478.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

Oct. 15, 1981.

Jan Eric Cartwright, Atty. Gen., William S. Flanagan, Asst. Atty. Gen., Oklahoma City, for appellant.

Jim Jones, Sallisaw, for appellee.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BUSSEY, Judge:

The State of Oklahoma appeals from an order entered in Sequoyah County District Court, Case No. C-79-279, by the Honorable Fred D. Green which sustained the motion of Larry Ringgold, the appellee, to quash the grand jury indictment for violations of Laws 1974, ch. 60, § 1, now 22 O.S.Supp.1980, § 340.

Judge Green found that during the grand jury session investigating the appellee, Larry Ringgold, the district attorney’s office was under investigation as well, and during the session no partial report was issued by the grand jury concluding its investigation, or clearing the office of the district attorney. He therefore sustained the appellee’s *627motion to quash and dismiss the indictment because of the intermittent presence in the grand jury room of one or two assistant district attorneys to assist and advise, together with one or two assistant attorneys general, in direct contravention of Laws 1974, ch. 60, § 1, now 22 O.S.Supp.1980, § 340.

The State admits a violation of the exact language of the statute occurred, but argues that there was substantial compliance with the statute, and further, that the actions of the assistant attorneys general and the assistant district attorneys were not prejudicial to the outcome of the grand jury proceedings, and the defendant’s rights were in no way infringed. Contrary to what the State would have us find, a showing of prejudice to the defendant is not necessary in order to quash an indictment for a violation of 22 O.S.Supp.1980, § 340. Once a violation of the statute is found, prejudice must be presumed. *Hammers v. State,*337 P.2d 1097 (Okl.Cr.1959); *Highers v. State,*337 P.2d 1112 (Okl.Cr.1959).

In *Hartgraves v. State,*5 Okl.Cr. 266, 114 P. 343 (1911), it was stated:

> “There must not only be no improper influence or suggestion in the grand jury room, but, as suggested in *Lewis v. Commissioners,*74 N.C. 194, there must be no opportunity therefor. If the presence of an unauthorized person in the grand jury room may be excused, who will set bounds to the abuse to follow such a breach of the safeguards which surround the grand jury?”

The ruling of the district court which dismissed the indictment filed against Larry Ringgold on December 13, 1979, is AFFIRMED.

BRETT, P. J., and CORNISH, J., concur.
### 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 April 28, 2009

l0420 

# Order

April 28, 2009

137715

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 137715 COA: 276591 Wayne CC: 06-011565-01 ROD HOLMES, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal th e October 14, 2008 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JU LY 31, 2013

NO. 03

- 13

- 00484

- CR

Jason William Ausburn, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 426TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, RO SE AND GOODWIN

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE ROSE

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the record of the court below, and the same being

considered, it is the opinion of this Court that the appeal should be dismissed for want of

jurisd iction

. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the appeal be dismissed in accordance with

the opinion of this Court; that the appellant pay all costs relating to this appeal; and that this

decision be certified below for observance.
Exhibit 32.1
 Certification of Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  (i)
    
    the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended March
31, 2011 (the Report) 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(ii)
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  By:
    /s/ Kimberly K. SchaeferKimberly K. SchaeferChief Executive Officer and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
#### Miriam G. LAWHORN v. ESTATE OF Barbara MORRIS, Deceased, and Alton Wayne Morris, A Minor.

No. 57200.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Sept. 16, 1987.

Percy W. Watson, Sam H. Buchanan, Jr., Watson & Buchanan, Hattiesburg, for appellant.

Eugene L. Fair, Hattiesburg, for appel-lees.

Appeal from Chancery Court, Forrest County; William Robert Taylor, Jr., Chancellor.

Before DAN M. LEE, ROBERTSON and GRIFFIN, JJ.

AFFIRMED.

WALKER, C.J., ROY NOBLE LEE and HAWKINS, P.JJ., and PRATHER, SULLIVAN and ANDERSON, JJ., concur.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPI RES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

TROYTS AUTO SERVICE and TROYTS ) BOGAR VALERO, ) ) Appellants, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D14-2201 ) GENNARE VITELLI, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed September 11, 2015. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; William P. Levens, Judge. Roland A. Hermida, Tampa, for Appellants. No appearance for Appellee.

BLACK, Judge. Troyts Auto Service and Troyts Bogar Valero challenge the final judgment of the trial court ordering them to pay conversion damages to G ennare Vitelli. The appellants argue that the trial court erred in finding liabilit y for conversion because the matter was not pleaded or tried by consent. We agree and rever se. In the complaint, Mr. Vitelli alleged one count of civil theft and two counts- 2 - of fraudulent misrepresentation in the inducement. 1 Following a nonjury trial, the trial court entered a final judgment finding that Mr. Vitelli failed to establish that the appellants committed civil theft or fraudulently induced Mr. Vi telli. 2 However, the trial court did find the appellants liable for conversion. This was error. "A trial court may not decree relief that has been neither pleaded nor tried by consen t." Lodge Constr., Inc. v. Far E. GC Exponent, Inc., 800 So. 2d 325, 325 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001 ) (citing Conidaris v. Cresswood Servs., Inc., 779 So. 2d 518, 519 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)) . The complaint does not include a claim for conversion, it was not amended nor was a request to amend filed, and the record does not demonstrate that the issue was t ried by the consent of the parties. 3 Accordingly, we reverse the portion of the final judgment findi ng the appellants liable for conversion as well as the damages awarded pursuant thereto and remand for entry of an amended final judgment. Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded.

NORTHCUTT and SALARI O, JJ., Concur.

1 Mr. Vitelli did not participate in this appeal.

2 Though the complaint contained two claims for fraud, the trial court's order did not address the latter claim.

3 In the initial brief the appellants explained that Mr. Vitelli concluded his written closing argument by requesting that the court consider finding the appellants liable for conversion should the court determine that he failed to establish the requisite intent for civil theft.
----

|   | 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      as of the dates and for the periods covered by the  report. |

|   | /s/      Robert J. Halloran, Jr.                      |   |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Robert      J. Halloran, Jr.                          |   |
|   | President,      Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |   |
Motion Granted and Order filed December 18, 2018 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-18-00896-CV

____________

CITY OF HOUSTON ET AL., Appellants

V.

HOUSTON MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEE PENSION SYSTEM, Appellee

On Appeal from the 333rd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2015-35252

ORDER

This appeal is related to a previous appeal in this court, City of Houston v. 

Houston Municipal Employee Pension Sys., No. 14-15-00865-CV. The parties have 

filed a joint motion to transfer the record in the previous appeal to the current appeal. 

A court of appeals has the power to take judicial notice of its own files in the same 

or related proceedings. Turner v. State, 733 S.W.2d 218, 223 (Tex. Crim. App. 

1987). Accordingly, we GRANT the parties’ joint motion and ORDER the clerk of 

this court to transfer the clerk’s record in 14-15-00865-CV into this case.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Christopher and Jewell
IV 

107TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 476

Expressing support for the goals and ideas of a day of tribute to all firefighters who have died in the line of duty and recognizing the important 

mission of the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation in assisting family members to overcome the loss of their fallen heroes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 19, 2002

Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania (for himself, Mr. HOYER, Mr. SMITH of Michigan, Mr. ANDREWS, Mr. EDWARDS, Mr. BOEHLERT, and Mr. HALL of 

Texas) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred 

to the Committee on Science 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Expressing support for the goals and ideas of a day of 

tribute to all firefighters who have died in the line of 

duty and recognizing the important mission of the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation in assisting family 

members to overcome the loss of their fallen heroes.

Whereas for over 350 years the Nation’s firefighters have 

dedicated their lives to the safety of their fellow Americans; 

Whereas throughout the Nation’s history many firefighters 

have fallen in the line of duty, leaving behind family 

members and friends who have grieved their untimely 

losses; 
2

•HCON 476 IH 

Whereas these individuals served with pride and honor as volunteer and career firefighters; 

Whereas until 1980 there was not a national tribute to honor 

these heroes for their acts of valor or a support system 

to help the families of these heroes rebuild their lives; 

Whereas in 1992 Congress created the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation to lead a nationwide effort to remember the Nation’s fallen firefighters through a variety 

of activities; 

Whereas each year the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation hosts an annual memorial service to honor the memory of all firefighters who die in the line of duty and 

bring support and counseling to their families; 

Whereas in 2002 the memorial service will take place the 

weekend of October 5 and 6; 

Whereas 446 fallen firefighters, including firefighters from 34 

States, will be honored in 2002; and 

Whereas many of their family members are expected to attend the memorial service: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That Congress supports the goals and ideas 

3 of a day of tribute to all firefighters who have died in the 

4 line of duty and recognizes the important mission of the 

5 National Fallen Firefighters Foundation in assisting fam6 ily members to overcome the loss of their fallen heroes.

Æ
#### DEPT. OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, DIVISION OF DRIVER LICENSES, Petitioner, v. Terry Joseph SHENK, Respondent.

No. 86-1847.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

June 4, 1987.

Rehearing Denied July 8, 1987.

Enoch Whitney, Gen. Counsel, and Suzanne G. Printy, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Dept, of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, Tallahassee, for petitioner.

Morton D. Aulls, Tavares, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The Department of Highway Safety appeals from a final order of the circuit court granting appellee’s petition for writ of cer-tiorari pursuant to section 322.31, Florida Statutes (1985). We treat the appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari, Fla.R.App.P. 9.040(c); *City of Deerfield Beach v. Vaillant,*419 So.2d 624 (Fla.1982); *Stansberry v. City of Lake Helen,*425 So.2d 1157 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), and deny the petition.

PETITION DENIED.

UPCHURCH, C.J., ORFINGER and COBB, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 281 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 281

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           December 12, 2001

        Received and referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Honoring the ultimate sacrifice made by Johnny Micheal Spann, the first 
     American killed in combat during the war against terrorism in 
 Afghanistan, and pledging continued support for members of the Armed 
                                Forces.

Whereas as part of the war against terrorism, United States military personnel 
        and agents from the Central Intelligence Agency were involved in combat 
        with Taliban forces during a prison uprising in Mazar-e Sharif, 
        Afghanistan, on Sunday, November 25, 2001;
Whereas Johnny Micheal Spann, age 32, an officer in the Central Intelligence 
        Agency, was inside the prison 

fortress interviewing Taliban prisoners when the uprising began;

Whereas Spann was killed in this rebellion and is the first American known to be 
        killed in combat in Afghanistan during this war;
Whereas Spann is the 79th employee of the Central Intelligence Agency killed in 
        the line of duty;
Whereas the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, George J. Tenet, hailed 
        Spann as an American hero and will soon memorialize him on a wall of 
        honor;
Whereas Spann, a former Captain in the Marine Corps, is survived by his wife, 
        Shannon, and 3 young children; and
Whereas the thoughts and prayers of the Congress and the Nation remain with the 
        families of Spann and all the soldiers fighting to ensure the Nation's 
        freedom and safety: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the Congress--
            (1) honors Johnny Micheal Spann, a paramilitary officer in 
        the Central Intelligence Agency, who was the first American 
        killed in combat during the war against terrorism in 
        Afghanistan, and recognizes him for his bravery and sacrifice;
            (2) extends its deepest sympathies to the family of this 
        brave hero; and
            (3) pledges its continued support for the men and women who 
        risk their lives every day to ensure the safety of all United 
        States citizens.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 11, 2001.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 84 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.Con.Res.84
                                     Agreed to November 18, 2002        

                      One Hundred Seventh Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
          the twenty-third day of January, two thousand and two

                          Concurrent Resolution

Whereas the National Family Partnership, Governors, Attorneys General, 
  Parent Teacher Associations, and over 100 other organizations 
  throughout the United States annually cosponsor October 23 through 
  October 31 as Red Ribbon Week;
Whereas the objective of Red Ribbon Week is to promote drug-free 
  communities through drug prevention efforts, education, parental 
  involvement, and community-wide support;
Whereas drug abuse is one of the major challenges our Nation faces in 
  securing a safe and healthy future for our children; and
Whereas parents, youth, schools, businesses, law enforcement and 
  religious institutions, service organizations, senior citizens, 
  medical and military personnel, sports teams, and individuals 
  throughout the Nation demonstrate their commitment to drug-free, 
  healthy lifestyles by wearing and displaying red ribbons during this 
  weeklong celebration: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the Congress--
        (1) supports the goals of Red Ribbon Week; and
        (2) encourages all Americans to promote drug-free communities 
    and to participate in drug prevention activities to show support 
    for healthy, productive, drug-free lifestyles.
  Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.

  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
```
**
Exhibit 35.1 

Servicer Compliance Statement of Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation 

**NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE COMPANY LLC**

**OFFICER’S CERTIFICATE**

The undersigned, Kevin J. Cullum, President and Chief Executive Officer of NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE COMPANY LLC, a Delaware limited liabilitycompany (successor by conversion to Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation, the “Company”), does hereby certify, in his capacity as such officer, as follows: 

(1) The undersigned has caused a review of the activities of the Company, in its capacity as Servicer, during the period October 26, 2021through March 31, 2022 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance pursuant to the Amended and Restated Servicing Agreement, dated as of April 1, 2021, as amended and as supplemented by the2021-A Series Servicing Supplement, dated as of October 26, 2021 (as amended and supplemented, the “Agreement”), by and among Nissan-Infiniti LT LLC, as titling company, NILT LLC, and theCompany, as servicer, to be conducted under his supervision; and 

(2) To the best of the undersigned’s knowledge, based upon suchreview, the Company has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period. 

This Officer’s Certificate is being furnished pursuant to Item 1123 of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB forpublicly-issued asset-backed securities. Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Agreement. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand effective as of the 27th day of June, 2022. 

 
/s/ Kevin J. CullumKevin J. CullumPresident and Chief Executive Officer
 
20 

**
### Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA

- 

### 2015

- 4817 Directorate Identifier: 

### 2014

- NM

- 115

- AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then ou t of the changed cell

.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement)

Do not include on

condition costs here Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine,

propeller, appliance)

Work

- hours

(include

access, testing,

and close

- up) Labor

cost

(@$8 5 / h

our) Parts Cost Total Costs

(labor +

parts) Number of

U.S.

Registered

Products Total Cost

for U.S. Fleet



### Inspection 6 $ 510.00 $0 $ 510.00 

### 124 $ 63,240.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00



### The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $ 63,240



### Costs covered under warranty ( if known ) $ 

### 0

On

- Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement) Work

- hours

(include access,

testing, and close

up) Labor cost

(@$85/hour) Parts Cost Cost per Product



### Repair 15.0 $ 1,275.00 

### 10, 000 $ 11,275.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00



### Special considerations for Economic Analysis ( Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to expla in warranty costs) 

### :

### Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES * NO

* Explanation:

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES * NO

* Explanation:

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD hav e a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? E xplain for

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO

Explanation:

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirem ents for

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES * NO



### * Explanation 

### :
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 66 (Thursday, April 5, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 20613]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8224]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XB129


New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of cancellation of a public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) has 
cancelled the public meeting of its Scientific and Statistical 
Committee (SSC) that was scheduled for Monday, April 16, 2012 beginning 
at 8 a.m. in Providence, RI.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, 
New England Fishery Management Council; telephone: (978) 465-0492.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The initial notice was published on March 
30, 2012, (77 FR 19231), and the meeting will be rescheduled at a later 
date and announced in the Federal Register.

    Authority:  16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: April 2, 2012.
William D. Chappell,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-8224 Filed 4-4-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P