alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case 4:22-cr-00194-O Document 110 Filed 08/31/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 309
Case 4:22-cr-00194-O Document 110 Filed 08/31/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 310
#### BUTE v. RULAND et al.

No. 11317.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Galveston.

Jan. 29, 1942.

B. F. Louis, of Houston, for appellant.

Fulbright, Crooker, Freeman & Bates, of Houston (A. G. McNeese, Jr., and Leon Jaworski, both of Houston, of counsel), for appellees.

MONTEITH, Chief Justice.

This suit in trespass to try title was brought by appellees, H. F. Ruland et al., to recover from appellant, J. H. Bute, the title to and possession of approximately sixty (60) acres of land in the John Dickinson Survey in Galveston County, Texas.

Appellant, by answer and cross-action, asserted title to the land in controversy under the ten year statute of limitations.

One special issue was submitted to the jury, that of adverse possession under the ten year statute of limitations. The jury answered this issue in favor of appellees. Based on this verdict, the court rendered judgment in favor of appellees for the title and possession of the land sued for, denying the ruling sought by appellant.

Appellant has filed no brief in this court. Appellees have filed a brief and have appeared by counsel therein. Upon an examination of appellees’ brief and the judgment of the court, we find that the judgment of the trial court can be affirmed under the showing made by appellees therein and that the record' as presented shows no reversible error. Without further examination of the record, in accordance with Rule No. 416, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed. Letcher v. State, Tex.Civ.App., 134 S.W.2d 341; Guaranty Old Line Life Ins. Co. v. Leonard, Tex. Civ.App., 109 S.W.2d 1091.

Affirmed.
U.S. flag
      An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.
        Here's how you know
      Here's how you know**Official websites use .gov**
            
            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
      **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
            
            A **lock** (
            A locked padlock
            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. Menu

      
        close

            
            
                                              About
          Charter
          Legislation
          Members
          Meetings
          Reports & Resources

                            
                                About
          Contact Us
                  Share
FacebookXLinkedInRedditPinterestEmail Home
 Friday, November 13, 2015 Meeting November 13, 2015
3:00 pm - 4:45 pm

Office of Justice Programs
Third Floor Main Conference Room
810 7th Street NW
Washington, DC 20531

AgendaMeeting SummaryMeeting PowerPoint PresentationMembership Roster

November 13, 2015 Meeting Materials

**Presenters Bios**

Dr. Thomas Simon
	Geroma Void
	Stacie Bladen
	Jose A. Arreola
	Stephon Shallow
	Georgina M. McDowell**Handouts**

Community-Based Violence Prevention
	Defending Childhood 2 pager
	Defending Childhood Michigan
	OJJDP's Youth Violence Prevention Initiatives
	National Forum on Youth Violence Prevention
	AIAN AC**PowerPoint Presentation**

PowerPoint Presentation by Jose A. Arreola for the November 13 meeting
  
Date Published: November 13, 2015
 Top

      Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

        
        
                        Facebook
          
                      X
          
                      YouTube
  

      Secondary Footer link menu
            Accessibility
              Plain Language
              Privacy Policy
              Legal Policies and Disclaimer
              No FEAR Act
              Freedom of Information Act
              USA.gov
              Justice.gov
EXHIBIT
      32.2




**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 on Form 10-K of Ronco Corporation (the
“Company”) for the period from July 1, 2005 to June 30, 2006, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ronald
      C Stone Chief Financial Officer 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 results of operations of the Company.






October
      XX, 2006




/s/ Ronald
      C
      Stone




Ronald
      C
      Stone


Chief
      Financial Officer
#### ZENITH CORPORATION v. COOK OPERATING CO.

No. 5636.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Texarkana.

June 27, 1940.

Richard Nicolds, of Longview, for plaintiff in error.

H. P. Smead and Earl Roberts, both of Longview, for defendant in error.

HALL, Justice.

In the court below plaintiff in error was defendant, and defendant in error was plaintiff, and they will be so designated here. Plaintiff instituted this suit against defendant for $863.75 for labor performed by it and by Volunteer Development Company, whose assignment it held, as shown by sworn account attached to its petition. It was alleged that plaintiff and Volunteer Development Company had each fixed a mechanic’s and laborer’s lien on certain of defendant’s oil properties which it sought to foreclose. Defendant answered by general demurrer and plea of accord and satisfaction to the effect that it had transferred and assigned to plaintiff certain oil interests in full satisfaction of the indebtedness" owing by it to plaintiff. Defendant denied certain specific items in plaintiff's sworn account, and by way of cross-action alleged that plaintiff was indebted to it in the sum of $153.90 for which it sought judgment. Trial was to the court without a jury, which resulted in judgment for plaintiff.

Defendant’s only proposition asserts that the judgment of the court below is not sustained by the evidence for the reason that it established accord and satisfaction by clear proof. No findings of fact and conclusions of law were filed by the trial court, and there is no request therefor, so, if the judgment of the court below can be affirmed on any theory, it is our duty to do so. Texas Creosoting Co. v. Hartburg Lhr. Co., Tex.Com.App., 12 S.W.2d 169; Adcock v. Shell, 273 S.W. 900, writ re*549fused; Boyd v. Keystone Driller Co., Tex.Civ.App., 6 S.W.2d 221, writ refused; Johnson v. Campbell, Tex.Civ.App., 107 S. W.2d 1111; Bolyard v. Toronto Pipe Line Co., Tex.Civ.App., 120 S.W.2d 960, writ dismissed.

We have carefully examined the testimony in the record and conclude that it amply supports the judgment of the trial court.

The judgment is therefore in all things affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

I, David  Lieberman,  the Principal  Executive  Officer and Principal  Financial
Officer of  Advanced  Plant  Pharmaceuticals,  Inc.  (the  "Company"),  certify,
pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  18 U.S.C.  Section
1350, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1)   the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the fiscal quarter
      ended June 30, 2004 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
      Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
      78m or 78o(d)); and

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


Date: August 20, 2004



/s/ David Lieberman
---------------------------
David Lieberman
Chief Executive Officer
Principal Financial Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2024 ND 13

In the Interest of R.S. 

William Pryatel, M.D., Petitioner and Appellee

v.

R.S., Respondent and Appellant

No. 20230410

Appeal from the District Court of Stutsman County, Southeast Judicial 

District, the Honorable Nicholas D. Thornton, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Leo A. Ryan, Special Assistant Attorney General, Jamestown, ND, for

petitioner and appellee; submitted on brief.

Andrew Marquart, Fargo, ND, for respondent and appellant; submitted on 

brief.

FILED 

IN THE OFFICE OF THE 

CLERK OF SUPREME COURT 

JANUARY 22, 2024 

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
1

Interest of R.S.

No. 20230410

Per Curiam.

[¶1] R.S. appeals from a district court order continuing his treatment at the 

North Dakota State Hospital. R.S. argues the court erred by finding the record 

presented clear and convincing evidence he is mentally ill and a person 

requiring treatment. 

[¶2] In mental health commitment cases we apply the clearly erroneous 

standard of review to factual findings made by the district court. See In re Doe, 

2019 ND 23, ¶ 4, 921 N.W.2d 403. We conclude the district court’s findings are 

supported by clear and convincing evidence and are not clearly erroneous. We 

summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

[¶3] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.

Daniel J. Crothers

Lisa Fair McEvers

Jerod E. Tufte

Douglas A. Bahr
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1998
<CASH>                                          19,211
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,622
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                21,833
<PP&E>                                       2,280,319
<DEPRECIATION>                                 243,302
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,261,666
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,431,489
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        17,349
<OTHER-SE>                                   (205,377)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,261,666
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  269,823
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              57,125
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (326,948)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (326,948)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (326,948)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.05)
        

</TABLE>
Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA- Directorate Identifier: 2014-NM-164-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 out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered 

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

Installation of 

cover

9.0 $ 765.00 $0 $ 765.00 60 $45,900.00

$ 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: $45,900

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $45,900

On-Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Work-hours 

(include access, 

testing, and closeup)

Labor cost 

(@$85/hour)

Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 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 explain 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 have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain 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 requirements for 

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

YES* NO 

*Explanation:
JAMES DEERFIELD COOK II,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-5744

_____________________________/

Opinion filed May 5, 2017.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Leon County.

Charles W. Dodson, Judge.

James Deerfield Cook II, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of appellant’s response to the Court’s order of 

December 22, 2016, the Court has determined that appellant failed to invoke the 

Court’s jurisdiction in a timely manner. Fla. R. App. P. 9.110(b). Accordingly, the 

appeal is dismissed.

KELSEY, WINOKUR, and WINSOR, JJ., CONCUR.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<NAME> Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts, Inc.
<CIK>  0000943320
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         164,544
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   70,269
<ALLOWANCES>                                    13,663
<INVENTORY>                                     12,145
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               248,437
<PP&E>                                       2,320,244
<DEPRECIATION>                                 482,318
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,296,223
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          260,195
<BONDS>                                      1,736,887
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           242
<OTHER-SE>                                     139,829
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,296,223
<SALES>                                      1,045,140
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,161,925
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  646,234<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               269,246<F2>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 4,519
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             165,885
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (21,843)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (21,843)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  9,453
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (12,390)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.56)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.56)
<FN>
<F1>Includes gaming, lodging, food & beverage and other.
<F2>Includes general & administrative, depreciation & amortization, and Trump
World's Fair closing costs.
</FN>


</TABLE>
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Annual Report of Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership (MCV) on
Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, James M. Kevra, President and Chief Executive
Officer of MCV, 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, as amended; and  (2)
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of MCV. /s/ James M. Kevra
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY 

The Honorable John A. Boehner 

Speaker 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Mr. Speaker: 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

May 20, 2013 

I am writing to notify you, as required under 5 U.S.C. § 8348(1)(2), of my determination that, by 

reason of the statutory debt limit, I will be unable to fully invest the portion of the Civil Service 

Retirement and Disability Fund (CSRDF) not immediately required to pay beneficiaries and that 

a "debt issuance suspension period" will begin on Monday, May 20,2013, and last until 

August 2,2013, the last day that Congress is expected to be in session before Labor Day. With 

these determinations, the Treasury Department will suspend additional investments of amounts 

credited to, and redeem a portion of the investments held by, the CSRDF, as authorized by law. 

In addition, because the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 provides that 

investments in the Postal Service Retiree Health Benefits Fund (pSRHBF) shall be made in the 

same manner as investments for the CSRDF, the Treasury Department will suspend additional 

investments of amounts credited to the PSRHBF. 

My predecessors have declared "debt issuance suspension periods" during previous debt limit 

impasses. By law, the CSRDF and PSRHBF will be made whole once the debt limit is 

increased. Federal retirees and employees will be unaffected by these actions. 

I respectfully urge Congress to protect America's good credit and avoid the potentially 

catastrophic consequences of failing to act by increasing the debt limit in a timely fashion. 

Sincerely, 

Jacob J. Lew 

Identical letter sent to: 

The Honorable Nancy Pelosi, House Democratic Leader 

The Honorable Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader 

The Honorable Mitch McConnell, Senate Republican Leader 

cc: The Honorable Dave Camp, Chairman, House Committee on Ways and Means 

The Honorable Sander M. Levin, Ranking Member, House Committee on Ways and Means 

The Honorable Max Baucus, Chairman, Senate Committee on Finance 

The Honorable Orrin Hatch, Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Finance 

All other Members of the 113 th Congress
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

ALFONSO PERCY PEW,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 342 EAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 16th day of January, 2019

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

and Motion Requesting Allowance of Appeal be Held in a Stay are DENIED

.
EXHIBIT
32.2



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 Quarterly Report of World Health Energy Holdings, Inc., (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended
June 30, 2015 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 results of operation of the
Company.



|Date: August 14, 2015 | By: | /s/ Jason Lurie        
|--------------------- | --- | -----------------------
|                      |     | Jason Lurie            
|                      |     | Chief Financial Officer



A signed original
of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.