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

-- -- -- --

NO. 14-0526

EOG RESOURCES, INC.

v.

FLEET OIL & GAS, LTD.

§

§

§

§

§

§

Johnson County,

10th District.

February 27, 2015

Petitioner's petition for review, filed herein in the above numbered and styled case,

having been duly considered, is ordered, and hereby is, denied.



I, BLAKE A. HAWTHORNE, Clerk of the Supreme Court of Texas, do hereby certify

that the above and attached is a true and correct copy of the orders of the Supreme Court of

Texas in the case numbered and styled as above, as the same appear of record in the minutes of

said Court under the date shown.

It is further ordered that petitioner, EOG RESOURCES, INC., pay all costs incurred on

this petition.

WITNESS my hand and seal of the Supreme Court of Texas, at the City of Austin, this

the 9th day of April, 2015.

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

By Monica Zamarripa, Deputy Clerk

FILE COPY
Exhibit 32 CERTIFICATION 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 Annual Report of Bullion Monarch Mining, Inc. (the Registrant) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending April 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, R. Don Morris, President and James A. Morris, Secretary of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 Registrant.  Date:9/14/07By:/s/R. Don MorrisR. Don MorrisPresident and DirectorDate:9/14/07By:/s/James A. MorrisJames A. MorrisSecretary and Director
Filed 11/6/15 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2015 ND 259

Paul Rusgrove, Plaintiff and Appellant

v.

Wayne Goter, Defendant and Appellee

No. 20150122

Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable Michael G. Sturdevant, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Paul Rusgrove, self-represented, 2521 Circle Drive, Jamestown, ND 58401, plaintiff and appellant; on brief.

Steven Balaban, 200 N. Mandan St., Bismarck, ND 58501, for defendant and appellee; on brief.

Rusgrove v. Goter

No. 20150122

Per Curiam.

[¶1]Paul Rusgrove appeals from a district court’s summary judgment dismissing his lawsuit against Wayne Goter alleging legal malpractice.  Rusgrove argues the district court erred in dismissing his claim for failure to identify an expert witness alleging the district court should have permitted him to subpoena an unretained government employee to provide expert testimony because he is indigent.  He also argues the district court should have applied a less stringent legal standard to him, because he is an incarcerated self-represented litigant.  We conclude the district court appropriately granted summary judgment dismissing Rusgrove’s lawsuit with prejudice, because he failed to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to his case on which he would bear the burden of proof at trial because he did not timely retain an expert witness.  Rusgrove’s remaining arguments are completely without merit, because he provided no relevant legal authority in support of his positions.  See Riverside Park Condominiums Unit Owners Ass’n v. Lucas, 2005 ND 26, ¶ 34, 691 N.W.2d 862 (indicating an argument is without merit when a party fails to provide supportive reasoning or citations to relevant authorities); Nesvig v. Nesvig, 2006 ND 66, ¶¶ 14-17, 712 N.W.2d 299 (holding a district court did not abuse its discretion because it could not compel an unretained expert to appear and provide expert testimony).  We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6) and (7).

[¶2]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Lisa Fair McEvers

Daniel J. Crothers

Dale V. Sandstrom

Carol Ronning Kapsner
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

DEREK MURCHISON,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 156 EAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 20th day of March, 2024

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

GRANTED

. The issue, rephrased for clarity, is:

Whether the Superior Court applied the correct standard for an

after

- discovered evidence claim based upon post

- conviction DNA testing received pursuant to Section 9543.1 of the PCRA and what value the jurisprudence related to a standard of actual innocence provides to that analysis.

Additionally, the Prothonotary is DIRECTED to serve this order on the

Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General, who is INVITED to participate as amicus.

Justice McCaffery did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5


       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         3,384,439
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  3,460,307
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    3,705,849
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               11,213,467
<PP&E>                                         28,478,700
<DEPRECIATION>                                 15,869,275
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 24,395,592
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          3,383,434
<BONDS>                                        4,562,500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       1,809,171
<OTHER-SE>                                     12,419,651
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   24,395,592
<SALES>                                        42,169,106
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               42,169,106
<CGS>                                          37,825,038
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  37,825,038
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             463,099
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                1,172,369
<INCOME-TAX>                                   383,125
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            789,244
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   789,244
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .29
        



</TABLE>
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-15-00102-CV

Andrew H. Jackson

v.

John W. Jackson, Victoria Jackson Bannister, and Melin da L. Jackson

as Executrix of the Estate of Monroe Scott Jackson, II, Linda M. Welty, O.B. Jackson Jr., Gaines Bradford Jackson, Susan D. Hensley, and Marjorye M. Heldt §

§

§

§ From the 96th District Court

of Tarrant County (096-271894-14)

September 22, 2016

Opinion by Justice Gardner



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

there was no error in the tria l court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of

the trial court is affirmed.

It is further ordered that Appellant An drew H. Jackson shall pay all of the

costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By __/s/ Anne Gard ner_________________ Justice Anne Gardner
EXHIBIT 10.10



PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   Ministry of Energy Mines and Petroleum Resources


RECORD OF 2 POST CLAIM - MINERAL TENURE ACT

(Section 27)



	
____________________________________
	
391991______________________________

	
Mining Division
	
Tenure No.

	
____________________________________
	
____________________________________

	
Gold Commissioner
	
Date of Record




_____________________________________________________________________________________



APPLICATION TO RECORD A 2 POST CLAIM



I, Stephen Kenwood, Name of Locator, 2073 149th Street, Surrey, British Columbia, V4A 8C4, (604) 535-8146, Client No. 134185, Agent for Paul Reynolds, 4035 W. 31st Avenue, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6S 1Y7, Client No. 122617, hereby apply for record of a 2 Post Claim for the location as outlined on the attached copy of mineral titles reference map No. 082L2E, in the Vernon Mining Division.



ACCESS



Describe how you gained access to the location, include reference to roads, trails, topographic features, permanent landmarks and a description of the legal post location.


Access to location gained by traveling east of Vernon on Highway 6 15 km. past Cherryville to Monashee Creek.  The Initial Post is approximately 2.1 km. further south along Highway 6 from Monashee Creek and about 30 metres east of Highway 6.



TAG INFORMATION



I have affixed the portion of the metal identification tag embossed "INITIAL POST" (No. 1) to the initial post and impressed this information on the tag:



TAG NUMBER 706072 M  INITIAL POST (No. 1)



	
CLAIM NAME
	
WYATT 8

	
LOCATOR
	
Stephen Kenwood

	
AGENT FOR
	
Paul Reynolds

	
DATE COMMENCED
	
February 8, 2002

	
TIME COMMENCED
	
12:15

	
DIR. TO F.P.
	
015

	
METRES TO RIGHT
	
0

	
METRES TO LEFT
	
500






"Direction" means a bearing measured between 0 degrees and 360 degrees, where 0 degrees is the bearing of true north.    time is p.m.



I have securely affixed the portion of the metal identification tag embossed "FINAL POST (No. 2)" to the final post (or the witness post) and impressed this information on the tag:

	
CLAIM NAME
	
WYATT 8

	
LOCATOR
	
Stephen Kenwood

	
AGENT FOR
	
Paul Reynolds

	
DIST. FROM I.P.
	
500 metres

	
DATE COMPLETED
	
February 8, 2002

	
TIME COMPLETED
	
1:30






If a witness post was placed for final post:  Bearing and distance from witness post to the true position of the final corner post, exactly as written on the witness post:  _________ degrees, _________ metres.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT



I have complied with all of the terms and conditions of the Mineral Tenure Act and Regulations pertaining to the location of the 2 post claims and have attached a plan of the location on which the positions of the initial and final post (and witness post, if applicable) are indicated.  The tag information supplied above is the identical information that I impressed upon the respective tags affixed to the applicable post when I located this claim, and the information is true and correct.


/s/  "Stephen Kenwood"

Signature of Locator



SEAL



RECEIVED

SUB-RECORDER

VANCOUVER, BC

FEB. 28, 2002

Recording Stamp
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Vernon L. Peak, Appellant.

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant’s contention that the court erred in failing to submit counts charging intentional and reckless conduct in the alternative is unpreserved and we decline to reach the issue in the interest of justice *(see, People v Carey,*151 AD2d 989, *lv denied*74 NY2d 806; *People v Dukett,*147 AD2d 938, *lv denied*73 NY2d 976). Defendant raised that issue in a posttrial motion but failed to object before the jury was discharged, when any defect could have been remedied by resubmission to the jury *(see, People v Satloff,*56 NY2d 745).

We have examined defendant’s remaining arguments on appeal and find none that requires reversal. (Appeal from Judgment of Oneida County Court, Parker, J.—Attempted Murder, 2nd Degree.) Present—Doerr, J. P., Green, Pine, Balio and Lawton, JJ.
**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

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

The undersigned, Mark Lana, the President, Chief Executive Officer and a Director of HS3 Technologies, Inc., hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)           the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of HS3 Technologies, Inc. for the three months ended September 30, 2006 (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 HS3 Technologies, Inc.

Dated  November 16, 2006.

/s/ Mark Lana                                    

Mark Lana 

President, Chief Executive Officer and Director

(Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial

Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
**Exhibit 32.1**

** **

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

I, William L. Bridgford, Chairman of the Board ofBridgford Foods Corporation (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

 

(1)                  the AnnualReport on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended November 2,2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d));and

 

(2)                  the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Dated: January 31, 2008 |                                 |
|------------------------------|--------------------------------------|
|                         |                                 |
|                         | /s/  WILLIAM  L. BRIDGFORD |
|                         | **William  L. Bridgford,**           |
|                         | **Chairman  of the Board**           |
|                         | **(Principal  Executive Officer)**   |
|                              |                                      |  |

 

----
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: 2013-NM-234-AD

Executive Order 12866:

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

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

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

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of 

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
Exhibit 23.3

CONSENT OF RYDER SCOTT COMPANY

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS

As independent petroleum engineers, we hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of our report included in this Form 10-K, into Tom
Brown, Inc.'s previously filed Registration Statements on Form S-8 Nos. 33-42991, 33-60191, 33-60842, 333-13157,
333-30069, 333-42011, 333-56577, 333-69353, 333-89031, 333-89033, 333-31426, 333-57814,
333-74268 and 333-106596, and No. 333-104896 on Form S-3.

| |  | /s/ RYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P.
| |  | -----------------------------

March 11,
2004

---

QuickLinks
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

v.

FREDERICK JOHN DAVIS

PETITION OF: ROBERT ALLEN

SAURMAN :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 22 MM 2018

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 6th day of April

, 2018, in consideration of the Motion to Withdraw

and the Motion to Deny Attorney Withdrawal, this matter is REMANDED to the Court of

Common Pleas of Monroe County for that court to determine whether counsel should be

granted leave to withdraw. See Pa.R.C rim.P. 120(B) (providing that an attorney may not

unilaterally withdraw his or her appearance in a criminal matter; rather, a court must

determine whether leave to withdraw is warranted).

If the attorney is permitted to withdraw, the court is DIRECTED to determine

whether Frederick Davis is to be appointed new counsel or is to proceed pro se . The

Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County is DIRECTED to enter its order regarding this

remand wi thin 45 days and to promptly notify this Court of its determination.
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 State

          - [Public Notice 7853]

      ( print page 24555)    
Pursuant to section 7041(a)(1)(C) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2012 (Div. I, Pub. L. 112-74) (“the Act”), I hereby determine that it is in the national security interest of the United States to waive the requirements of section 7041(a)(1)(B) of the Act with respect to the provision of Foreign Military Financing for Egypt, and I hereby waive this restriction.

                    This determination shall be published in the                     **Federal Register**                     and, along with the accompanying Memorandum of Justification, shall be reported to Congress.                

Dated: March 23, 2012. 

Hillary Rodham Clinton,

Secretary of State.

[FR Doc. 2012-9870 Filed 4-23-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-31-P
1The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District

of Nebraska.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 98-2845

___________

Richard M. Hedrick, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Nebraska.

Allen Pfeiffer; Gary A. Janssen; Dunn *

L. Donald, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: February 5, 1999

 Filed: April 5, 1999

___________

Before McMILLIAN, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Richard M. Hedrick appeals from the district court&s

1

 adverse grant of summary

judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit against City of Waverly, Nebraska employees

Allen Pfeiffer and Gary A. Janssen, and City attorney Donald L. Dunn, in their

individual and official capacities. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties&

briefs, we conclude the district court&s judgment was correct, and an extended
-2-

discussion is not warranted. We also deny Hedrick&s motion to assess excess costs

against appellees’ counsel. 

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 11, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-30797

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DONALD RAY DAVIS, also known as Dog Man,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

(02-CR-50062-ALL)

Before, BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Court-appointed appellate counsel for Donald Ray Davis has

moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Davis was advised of

the motion and served with a copy of his counsel’s brief, but has

not filed a response.

Our independent review of counsel’s brief and the record

discloses no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Appointed counsel’s

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from
further responsibilities, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR.

R. 42.2. 

MOTION GRANTED; APPEAL DISMISSED
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________

NO. 09-15-00175-CR

NO. 09-15-00176-CR

NO. 09-15-00177-CR

____________________

ALPHA JAMES BADEAUX, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

_______________________________________________________ ______________

On Appeal from the 359th District Court

Montgomery County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 05-02-01288 CR (Counts 1, 2 and 3)

________________________________________________________ _____________

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

On April 28, 2015, Alpha James Badeaux filed notices of appeal concerning 

his convictions for indecency with a child by contact, aggravated sexual assault on 

a child and burglary of a habitation in trial court case number 05-02-01288 CR. We 

notified the parties that the notices of appeal had not been filed within the time 

required for perfecting appeals. Badeaux filed a motion for an extension of time to 

file his notices of appeal. 
2

The trial court sentenced Badeaux on October 26, 2005. The convictions 

were affirmed on appeal and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals refused 

Badeaux’s petition for discretionary review. See generally Badeaux v. State, No. 

09-05-489-CR, 2007 WL 1052439, at *1 (Tex. App.—Beaumont Apr. 4, 2007, pet. 

ref’d) (mem. op.) (not designated for publication). A federal court subsequently 

denied with prejudice Badeaux’s petition for writ of habeas corpus. See generally 

Badeaux v. Thaler, No. H-09-4127, 2011 WL 863617 (S.D. Tex. Mar. 9, 2011) 

(mem. op.) (not designated for publication). The notices of appeal at issue here 

were filed after Badeaux’s convictions were final and not subject to direct appeal. 

We deny the appellant’s motion for extension of time to file notice of appeal and 

we dismiss the appeals for lack of jurisdiction. 

APPEALS DISMISSED.

 ________________________________

 STEVE McKEITHEN

Chief Justice

Submitted on June 23, 2015

Opinion Delivered June 24, 2015

Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.
Official Listing of Approved Companies for the Instrument and Establishment 

Employee Augmented Grading (IEEAG) Program 

Company Name FSIS Establishment 

Number Approval Date 

Page 1 of 1 

Last Revised February 6, 2014 

Washington Beef, LLC 

Also doing business as AB Foods, LLC 

201 Elmwood Road 

Toppenish, WA 98948 

Phone: (509) 865-2121 

Fax: (509) 865-2827 

Email: alison.nolz@abfoodsusa.com 

Contact: Alison A. Nolz 

235 June 1, 2013