alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

TIMOTHY STULTZ and CAROLYN STULTZ
, Appellant s ,

v.

BANKUNITED, N.A.
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 19

- 1115

[ May 21, 2020 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; James Nutt , Judge; L.T. Case No. 502018CA007570

.

Taylor M. Claudon and Kendrick Almaguer of The Ticktin Law Group, Deerfield Beach, for appellant s

.

William L. Grimsley and Peter J. Maskow of McGlinchey Stafford, Jacksonville, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed. 1

L EVINE
, C.J., D AMOORGIAN and K UNTZ

, JJ., concur

.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

1 We are mindful of the issuance of Administrative Order SC20

- 23 (the requirement in Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.580(a) for the clerk to issue a writ of possession “forthwith” remains suspended) and Executive Order 20

- 94 (suspending and tolling any s tatute providing for a mortgage foreclosure cause of action under Florida law for 45 days from April 2, 2020). We trust any motions directed to those orders shall be filed in the lower tribunal upon issuance of our

mandate

.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, March 23, 2015.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of

the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, March 23, 2015

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A15I0139. JOSHUA DAVID MELLBERG et al. v. THE IMPACT PARTNERSHIP, LLC

et al. .

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be

hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this

order. The Clerk of State Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record

transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

LC NUMBERS:

14A51191
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 39 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 39

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States waiving 
  the application of the first article of amendment to the political 
speech of corporations and other business organizations with respect to 
   the disbursement of funds in connection with public elections and 
   granting Congress and the States the power to establish limits on 
     contributions and expenditures in elections for public office.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 30, 2019

 Ms. Kaptur (for herself and Ms. Norton) submitted the following joint 
    resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States waiving 
  the application of the first article of amendment to the political 
speech of corporations and other business organizations with respect to 
   the disbursement of funds in connection with public elections and 
   granting Congress and the States the power to establish limits on 
     contributions and expenditures in elections for public office.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled   (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States 
within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

                              ``Article--

    ``Section 1. The first article of amendment does not apply to the 
political speech of any corporation, partnership, business trust, 
association, or other business organization with respect to the making 
of contributions, expenditures, or other disbursements of funds in 
connection with public elections.
    ``Section 2. Congress shall have power to set limits on the amount 
of contributions that may be accepted by, and the amount of 
expenditures that may be made by, in support of, or in opposition to, a 
candidate for nomination for election to, or for election to, Federal 
office.
    ``Section 3. A State shall have power to set limits on the amount 
of contributions that may be accepted by, and the amount of 
expenditures that may be made by, in support of, or in opposition to, a 
candidate for nomination for election to, or for election to, State or 
local office.
    ``Section 4. Congress shall have power to implement and enforce 
this article by appropriate legislation.''.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>
 
                                   EXHIBIT 24.2


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
     of Brown & Sharpe Manufacturing Company on Form S-8 (File Nos. 2-33676, 2-
     56821, 2-60398, 2-77219, 2-77575, 2-83637, 2-97935, 33-17831, 33-23601, 33-
     23603, 33-30927, and 33-54496) of our report dated March 29,1995, on our
     audits of the consolidated financial statements and financial statement
     schedule of Brown & Sharpe Manufacturing Company as of December 31, 1994,
     and for the year then ended, which report is included in this Annual Report
     on Form 10-K.



                                                   COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.

     Boston, Massachusetts
     March 26, 1997
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1123 

To amend title 28, United States Code, to modify the composition of the 

eastern judicial district of Arkansas, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 8, 2019 

Mr. CRAWFORD (for himself, Mr. WESTERMAN, Mr. WOMACK, and Mr. HILL

of Arkansas) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend title 28, United States Code, to modify the composition of the eastern judicial district of Arkansas, and 

for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Divisional Realignment 

5 for the Eastern District of Arkansas Act of 2019’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REALIGNMENT OF THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF AR7 KANSAS. 

8 Section 83(a) of title 28, United States Code, is 

9 amended to read as follows: 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1123 IH

1 ‘‘Eastern District 

2 ‘‘(a) The Eastern District comprises three divisions. 

3 ‘‘(1) The Central Division comprises the coun4 ties of Cleburne, Cleveland, Conway, Dallas, Drew, 

5 Faulkner, Grant, Jefferson, Lincoln, Lonoke, Perry, 

6 Pope, Prairie, Pulaski, Saline, Stone, Van Buren, 

7 White, and Yell. 

8 Court for the Central Division shall be held at Little Rock. 

9 ‘‘(2) The Delta Division comprises the counties 

10 of Arkansas, Chicot, Crittenden, Desha, Lee, Mon11 roe, Phillips, and St. Francis. 

12 Court for the Delta Division shall be held at Helena. 

13 ‘‘(3) The Northern Division comprises the coun14 ties of Clay, Craighead, Cross, Fulton, Greene, Inde15 pendence, Izard, Jackson, Lawrence, Mississippi, 

16 Poinsett, Randolph, Sharp, and Woodruff. 

17 Court for the Northern Division shall be held at 

18 Jonesboro.’’. 

19 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

20 This Act and the amendment made by this Act shall 

21 take effect on the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 1807

JANICE WOLK GRENADIER , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. JAMES C. CLARK, Judge, in his Personal and Professional Capacity , Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria

. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. ( 1:17

- cv
- 00280

- CMH

- JFA )

Submitted : January 30, 2018 Decided: February 1, 2018

Before MOTZ and KEENAN , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Janice Wolk Grenadier, Appellant Pro Se. Margeaux Showell Serrano, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia , for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Janice Wolk Grenadier appeals the district court’s order s dismissing her suit against a state judge and denying various motions. We have reviewed the record an d find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
Grenadier v. Clark , No. 1:17

- cv
- 00280

- CMH

- JFA (E.D. Va. Apr. 21, 2017; May 23, 2017; June 2 & 23, 2017) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts an d legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-1252

CARL BENIT COOPER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

PINKERTON SECURITY, et al; ANDREW JOHN SAVAGE,

III, Esquire; EDUARDO KELVIN CURRY, Esquire;

MICHAEL S. SEEKINGS,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Florence. Cameron McGowan Currie, District

Judge. (4:06-cv-01448-CMC)

Submitted: September 17, 2007 Decided: October 9, 2007

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Carl Benit Cooper, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Holmes Hood, HOOD LAW

FIRM, Charleston, South Carolina; John A. Massalon, WILLS &

MASSALON, Charleston, South Carolina; Joseph Rutledge Young, III,

DUFFY & YOUNG, LLC, Charleston, South Carolina; Eduardo Kelvin

Curry, CURRY, CURRY & COUNTS, Charleston, South Carolina; Timothy

William Bouch, LEATH, BOUCH & CRAWFORD, LLP, Charleston, South

Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Carl Benit Cooper appeals a district court order and

judgment adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation

and dismissing his claim of a conspiracy among several parties

ultimately resulting in his criminal convictions. We have reviewed

the record and the district court’s order and affirm for the

reasons cited by the district court. See Cooper v. Pinkerton, No.

4:06-cv-01448-CMC (D.S.C. Feb. 27, 2007). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process. 

AFFIRMED
CERTIFICATIONS OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Douglas Lake Minerals Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending November 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), Laurence Stephenson, President (Principal Executive Officer) of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to his 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 result of operations of the Company.



|Date:  January 16, 2006 | /s/
Laurence Stephenson
Laurence Stephenson
President (Principal Executive Officer)
|----------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Douglas Lake Minerals Inc. and will be retained by Douglas Lake Minerals Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, April 02, 2015.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of

the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, April 02, 2015

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A15D0299. JOHN L. WATTS v. THE STATE.

Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

2007CR253
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report
of Kentucky First Federal Bancorp (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period
ending September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, R. Clay Hulette, the Treasurer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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

|/s/R. Clay Hulette                               | 
|------------------------------------------------ | 
|R. Clay Hulette                                 
|Vice President and Chief Financial
      Officer
|November 14, 2007                               

---
STYLE

v

RE: Case No. 14-1079

COA #: 12-14-00320-CV

ELLIOTT WILLIAMS

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE

FILED IN COURT OF APPEALS )

12thCourtof AppealsDistru*

ILE COPY

DATE: 4/9/2015

TC#: 369-14-5236

A petition for review was filed today in the above-styled

case. Respondent may file either a response, or a waiver of

response. If you file a waiver, the Court will not grant the

petition without first requesting a response. (Tex. R. App: P.

53.3) There is no fee for a response or a waiver.

MS. CATHY S. LUSK

CLERK, TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

1517 WEST FRONT, SUITE 354

TYLER, TX 75702
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 20-0508V

UNPUBLISHED

JERRY TAYLOR,

 Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES,

 Respondent.

Chief Special Master Corcoran 

Filed: September 7, 2021

Special Processing Unit (SPU); 

Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

Table Injury; Hepatitis B (Hep B) 

Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to 

Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)

Bridget Candace McCullough, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner.

Jennifer Leigh Reynaud, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

On April 27, 2020, Jerry Taylor filed a petition for compensation under the National 

Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.2(the “Vaccine 

Act”). Petitioner alleges that he suffered left shoulder injuries related to vaccine 

administration as a result of a Hepatitis B vaccine received on October 23, 2018. Petition 

at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special 

Masters.

On September 3, 2021, Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes

that Petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 

1. Specifically, Respondent agrees that “petitioner has no history of pain, inflammation, 

or dysfunction in his left shoulder; his pain and reduced range of motion were limited to 

1 Because this unpublished Ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required 

to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E-Government Act 

of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government 

Services). This means the Ruling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance 

with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, 

the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that 

the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access. 

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for ease 

of citation, all section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. 

§ 300aa (2012).
2

the shoulder in which the vaccine was administered; and no other condition or abnormality 

was identified to explain his symptoms.” Id. at 4. Respondent further agrees that the 

statutory six month sequela requirement has been satisfied and that Petitioner has 

satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Act. Id.

In view of Respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that 

Petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master
The State of TexasAppellee

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

Thursday, April 9, 2015

No. 04-14-00709-CR

Francisco Javier GONZALEZ,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 399th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2011CR9697

Honorable Ray Olivarri, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Appellant’s brief was due to be filed in this appeal on April 6, 2015. On April 2, 2015, 

appellant filed a motion for extension of time to file the brief because the trial court recently 

entered findings of fact and conclusions of law. On April 7, 2015, a deputy clerk of this court 

contacted the trial court clerk regarding the findings of fact and conclusions of law, and the trial 

court clerk filed a supplemental clerk’s record containing the findings of fact and conclusions of 

law which were signed on March 31, 2015. It is therefore ORDERED that the deadline for the 

filing of the appellant’s brief shall be reset and shall run from the date the supplemental clerk’s 

record was filed. Appellant’s motion is GRANTED. The appellant’s brief must be filed no later 

than April 27, 2015.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 9th day of April, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 114 

To adjust the boundary of the Fort Frederica National Monument in the 

State of Georgia, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2019 

Mr. CARTER of Georgia introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To adjust the boundary of the Fort Frederica National 

Monument in the State of Georgia, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. FORT FREDERICA NATIONAL MONUMENT, 

4 GEORGIA, BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT. 

5 (a) MAXIMUM ACREAGE.—The first section of the 

6 Act of May 26, 1936 (16 U.S.C. 433g), is amended by 

7 striking ‘‘two hundred and fifty acres’’ and inserting ‘‘305 

8 acres’’. 

9 (b) BOUNDARY EXPANSION.— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 114 IH

1 (1) IN GENERAL.—The boundary of the Fort 

2 Frederica National Monument in the State of Geor3 gia is modified to include the land generally depicted 

4 as ‘‘Proposed Acquisition Areas’’ on the map enti5 tled ‘‘Fort Frederica National Monument Proposed 

6 Boundary Expansion’’, numbered 369/132,469, and 

7 dated April 2016. 

8 (2) AVAILABILITY OF MAP.—The map described 

9 in paragraph (1) shall be on file and available for 

10 public inspection in the appropriate offices of the 

11 National Park Service. 

12 (3) ACQUISITION OF LAND.—The Secretary of 

13 the Interior may acquire the land and interests in 

14 land described in paragraph (1) by donation or pur15 chase with donated or appropriated funds from will16 ing sellers only. 

17 (4) NO USE OF CONDEMNATION OR EMINENT

18 DOMAIN.—The Secretary may not acquire by con19 demnation or eminent domain any land or interests 

20 in land under this section or for the purposes of this 

21 section. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

**COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,**

**Respondent**

**v.**

**KHALIL J. MADISON,**

**Petitioner :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 74 EAL 2016** 

**Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 15th day of June, 2016, the Petition for Allow ance of Appeal is** 

DENIED

**.**
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.                  

###### National Science Foundation

      ( print page 23766)    
In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Public Law 92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the following meeting:

*Name:*                         Advisory Committee for Education and Human Resources (#1119).                    

*Date/Time:*

May 9, 2012; 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.

May 10, 2012; 8:30 a.m. to 1 p.m.

*Place:*                         NSF Headquarters, Room 375, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.                    

*Type of Meeting:*                         Open.                    

*Contact Person:*                         YeVonda McIlwaine, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230 (703) 292-8600,                         *ymcilwai@nsf.gov.*

*Purpose of Meeting:*                         To provide advice with respect to the Foundation's science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education and human resources programming.                    

## Agenda

### May 9, 2012

Morning Refreshments/Introductions, 2013 Budget and Planning, EHR's R&D Core Launch, E2 Joint Committee with MPS, Moving Forward—New Direction, Committee Business with Director and Deputy Director, Reception

### May 10, 2012

STEM Education: A Matter of Priority, Program Review, Discussion with Director.

Dated: April 17, 2012.

Susanne Bolton,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 2012-9535 Filed 4-19-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P