alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### MIZELL & WALKER v. DENNIS SIMMONS and W. J. HARDISON.

*Petition to Rehear*— Affirmance *of Judgment.*

The decision in *Mizellv.*Simmons, as reported in 79 N. C., 182, is affirmed, and must stand as the judgment of this court.

*(Watson*v. Dodd, 72 N. C., 240, cited and approved.)

Petition by defendants to Rehear heard at January Term, 1880, of The Supreme Court.

*Messrs. P. B. Winston, Sr.,*and *Mullen & Moore*for plaintiffs-;

*Messrs. Gilliam & Gatling*and *Reade, Bushee & Bushee*for. defendants.

Ashe, J.

This is a petition to rehear and reverse the judgment rendered in this court in the case of *Mizell v. Simmons,*at its June term, 1878, and reported in 79 N. C., 182.

*2In the case of *Watson*v. Dodd, 72 N. C., 240, which, like this, was a petition to rehear, Chief Justice PeaesoN in delivering the opinion of the court said : “ The weightiest considerations make it the duty of the court to adhere to their decisions. No case ought to be reversed upon petition to rehear unless it was decided hastily and some material point ivas overlooked, or some direct authority was not called to the attention of the court.” And to the same effect are the cases of *Haywood*v. *Daves,*81 N. C., 8; *Devereux*v. *Devereux, Ibid.,*12.

This case seems to have been considered in 1878, when -before this court, with very great care, deliberation and labor, from the numerous authorities cited and the able and well considered opinions delivered. But i.t does not appear that any material point was then overlooked or that any important authority was then omitted which is now brought to the attention .of .the court. So far from that being the case, the same authorities then cited are now relied upon, and we are unable to discover any error in the decision then made. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the decision made in this case at the June term, 1878, shall stand as the judgment of this court.

No .error. ‘ Affirmed.
**Exhibit32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C.  §1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Movie Gallery, Inc. (the “Company”) onForm l0-Q for the period ended July 6, 2003, as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, J. T. Malugen, Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

 

##### **(1)**                                  The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| /s/  J. T. Malugen |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| J. T. Malugen           |
| Chief Executive Officer |
| August 20, 2003         |

 

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

 

1

----
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois  60604

May 29, 2008

Before

Hon. MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge

Hon. TERENCE T. EVANS, Circuit Judge

Hon. ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge

No. 06‐3807

JAMES CIOMBER, Appeal from the United States District

Plaintiff‐Appellant, Court for the Northern District of

Illinois, Western Division.

v.

No. 04 C 50129

COOPERATIVE PLUS, INC.,

Defendant‐Appellee. Philip G. Reinhard,

Judge.

O R D E R

The slip opinion issued in the above‐entitled cause on May 28, 2008, is amended

as follows:

Page 4, second paragraph, first sentence, third line, delete “for.”
P. 1 

# OAR Box 

# 1865 Prepped by Charmelle Mathews



## Document

Number: 

# 25)IV-E-1 3 Docket Number: 

# A-83-2 7

Printed 12/3/20089:15:27

AM Sheet 25of 105P. 2 

# A-83-2 7

IV-E-1 3 CONTAC T REPOR T Dat e 

# TA* I 

# y?P 7 Originato r_ CONTACT BY : TELEPHON E ^ MEETIN G D Othe r NAME,TITL E 4ORGANIZATIO N £ b £^, 5 ,^,0/2 . ftoc^S 6^,^ Z TY2 o C (T 1 'u/ W ADDRES S & TELEPHON E NUMBE R 

## P-0. &QX 

## 3"7 f ?QCP-^-13-3^3 /

fcxecie*, T x7900 7 PURPOS E O R SUBJEC

T (Giv e project numbe ri f appropriate ) SUMMAR Y 

## /3 V C/4ev/eo/0 ( 

## A^ D T/rVf5 rHt e/N°A c

## T

Y jt. T&ZAT

SO ; 

## dd o bfoi O rATMOS

PtfefLiC-

/£c3«7KlJ/^ . rHiLuPS C W /W & S6c J gt rA CJ . 3 2 

## •bocPo/ L tft * ^(,/rr ) P^jc rF£o/w/ | a V a 

## ^<_< ^

Fen. trite

*jN, r 

## . / S D€^£i > r o T^tA T p ^ ^,r * 0 

## P ^

J i Y 7 

## ; Q 

## y 0Cfu 

## - ^ J TTf/ j £<rPi/0£Y ^

S<* 5 WOT

- /Vl/HZKt T TTt t ^'ZoDJcr . /Z*T>fet f 77 | £y - /-<--£- £ rTf f 0ALUML< T

## r^o-fcjcrs . Mf c"^// i s w/u o /tfce-fc/=* £ /VCL^ I 

## 7 0 Af/f<2/c

^ THz Lo^-^cr-vZ

£eS"/ou^- M ffir,)*.(_€• h f\5 ft i! /K^tfArt yujt' 2 'A / A Pfi-or\r/rALt

MAAJ/JC(1. '
C D 

## 8 ACTIO N Distribution :
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 20

- 573

_____________________________
L EVERT S TEWART , Appellant,

v.

S TATE O F F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Marianne L. Aho , Judge

. September 29, 2020

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

. R OBERTS , R OWE , and K ELSEY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Levert Stewart, pro se
, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and David Welch, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
#### Four Keys Leasing and Maintenance Corp., Name Changed to 4 Keys Leasing & Maintenance Co., Petitioner, v Theoclis Simithis et al., Respondents.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

January 15, 1988

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Ralph J. Schwarz, Jr.,*for petitioner.

*89OPINION OF THE COURT

Jawn A. Sandifer, J.

Landlord moves this court for an ex parte order (CPLR 5704 [b]) vacating the latest order to show cause of the Civil Court, New York County, in this proceeding.

The record before us reflects countless specious applications brought on by and on behalf of the tenant to frustrate the judgment of possession rendered on behalf of the landlord on April 9, 1986 and affirmed by this court on March 6, 1987. This campaign of meritless applications has involved last minute applications to stave off scheduled evictions, with those applications often presented to Judges and Justices of Civil and Supreme Courts unfamiliar with the history of this proceeding and with the applications themselves failing to properly recite the history of this proceeding (CPLR 2217 [b]). Indeed a failed application to remove this proceeding to the Federal District Court resulted in the imposition of rule 11 sanctions (Fed Rules Civ Pro) against one of tenant’s attorneys. Other specious applications have been made to this court and the Appellate Division. The petitioner has long since been found to be entitled to recover possession of the premises in question and the eviction should go forward.

Therefore, upon reading and filing the January 13, 1988 affirmation of Ralph J. Schwarz, Jr., with exhibits annexed and upon reviewing the numerous orders of the State and Federal courts in this proceeding, all in support of petitioner’s application pursuant to CPLR 5704 (b), and upon due deliberation having been had thereon,

It is hereby ordered that the ex parte application for a stay, signed by the Honorable Leonard Cohen of the Civil Court, New York County, dated January 11, 1988 and returnable January 20, 1988 be and the same is hereby vacated in its entirety and it is further,

Ordered that no further 72-hour notice is required to be served and it is further,

Ordered that no further ex parte applications are to be entertained by the Civil Court to stay the enforcement of the final judgment herein.

A copy of this order is to be served forthwith upon Justice Israel Rubin, Administrative Judge of the Civil Court, and upon Jack Baer, Chief Clerk of the Civil Court, Justice Xavier Riccobono, Administrative Judge of the Supreme Court, New York County, 60 Centre Street, and Jonathan Lippman, Chief *90Clerk and Executive Officer of the Supreme Court, New York County, 60 Centre Street.

In view of the pattern of meritless and misleading applications made on behalf of the tenant to frustrate clear mandates of the Civil Court, the Supreme Court and the Appellate Term, this court shall forward a copy of this order together with New York County Clerk’s file, index No. 92679, to the Disciplinary Committee of the Appellate Division, First Department, for review.
SECTION 302
CERTIFICATION

I, Martin Tutschek, certify that:

I have reviewed this annual report on
Form 20-F/A of Forum National Investments Ltd.;

Based on my knowledge, this annual
report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to
state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with
respect to the period covered by this annual report;

Based on my knowledge, the financial
statements, and other financial information included in this annual report,
fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods
presented in this annual report;

The company's other certifying officers
and I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the
registrant and we have:

Designed such disclosure controls and
procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is
being prepared;

Designed such internal control over
financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting
to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable supervision, to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting
and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles.

Evaluated the effectiveness of the
company's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,
as of the end of the period covered by this annual report based on such
evaluations; and

Disclosed in this report any change in
the company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during
the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internal control over
financial reporting: and

The company's other certifying officers
and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control
over financial reporting, to the company's auditors and the audit committee of
the company's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
function):

All significant deficiencies and
material weakness in the design or operation of internal control of financial
reporting which are reasonably likely to affect the registrant's ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

Any fraud, whether or not material, that
involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the
registrant's internal controls over financial reporting.

|Date:
  October 26, 2012 | /s/
  Martin Tutschek                                  
|------------------------ | -------------------------------------------------------
|                         | Martin
  Tutschek, Chief Financial Officer and Director

---
#### DOE ON THE DEMISE OF JOHN D. PIGGOTT *ET. AL. v.*CHEERS.

In an action of Ejectment, where the plaintiff declared upon the demisesof several lessors, upon three several counts, a refusal by the Court to strike out two of the counts, at the instance of the defendant, is a matter of discretion, from which an appeal will not lie to this Court,

This was an Action of Ejectment, tried before his Honor, Judge Saunders, at the Spring Term, 1854, of Brunswick Superior Court.

The case sufficiently appears from the opinion of the Court.

*Strange, W. A.*Wright, and *J. S.*Bryan, for the plaintiffs.

*D. Reid,*for the defendant.

Nash, C. J.

The doctrine of amendments ,and the power of this Court to control the action of an inferior Court in such matters, are fully and elaborately discussed by Judge PearSoN, in the opinion delivered in the case of Phillips® against HigdoN, Bus. 382.

It is there laid down with such perspicuity, that we had hoped it would prove to the profession a sure guide. The Court decide “that our jurisdiction in regard to amendments in the Courts below, is confined to the question of power; with its discretion in the exercise of the power, supposing the Court to have it, we have no concern.” The question presented to us in the present case, is very clearly of the latter character. The declaration contains three counts; the first, is one on the demise of George W. Styron, of the whole tract of land; the second is on the demise of John W. Piggott, of one-third of the same tract, the third is on the demise of George W. Styron, for one-third of the same tract. At Spring Term, 1854, of Brunswick Superior Court, where the cause waspending, a motion was made, on the part of the defendants, to strike out of the declaration the two counts on the demise of George W. Styron, which was refused by the *357Court, and for that refusal, the defendant appealed. Whether he would or would not grant the motion, was clearly within the discretion of the Judge. For reasons satisfactory to himself, he did not choose to exercise the power he certainly possessed. The action was brought by order of the County Court of Brunswick, to try the legal title to the tract of land mentioned in the declaration, and for a partition of which a petition was then pending in said Court; the petitioner, John W. Piggott, claiming to be a tenant in common with the defendant who claimed the whole tract as his. There was, therefore, a manifest propriety in supposing the plaintiff to count as many demises as might be necessary in ascertaining the question directed by the Court to be settled.

But the motion being one addressed to the discretion of the Court, we cannot interfere with its exercise.

Appeal dismissed with costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS FOR THE THREE MONTH PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1999, AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                       1,102,325
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  299,342
<ALLOWANCES>                                    89,801
<INVENTORY>                                    106,522
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,450,725
<PP&E>                                       2,761,424
<DEPRECIATION>                                 436,120
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,977,850
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          883,732
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        17,149
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,076,969
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,977,850
<SALES>                                          1,061
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               121,757
<CGS>                                              845
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,266,342
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,132,054)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,132,054)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,132,054)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.07)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2CERTIFICATIONIn connection with the Amendment No. 1 to the quarterly report of Movie Gallery, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended October 1, 2006, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Thomas D. Johnson, Jr., Interim ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 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 SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.Date: March 13, 2007   /s/ Thomas D. Johnson, Jr. Name: Thomas D. Johnson, Jr.  Its: Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                           5
<MULTIPLIER>                    1,000
       
<S>                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                         9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                 DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                                     5,135
<SECURITIES>                                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                              1,677
<ALLOWANCES>                                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                               63,132
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                          72,873
<PP&E>                                                    41,005
<DEPRECIATION>                                            15,470
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                           104,664
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                     34,770
<BONDS>                                                    2,698
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                          0
<PREFERRED>                                                    0
<COMMON>                                                      61
<OTHER-SE>                                                65,799
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                             104,664
<SALES>                                                  175,665
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         175,665
<CGS>                                                     93,549
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                             93,549
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                         2,422
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                           17,096
<INCOME-TAX>                                               6,370
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                       10,726
<DISCONTINUED>                                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                0
<CHANGES>                                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                              10,726
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                               1.85
<EPS-DILUTED>                                               1.80
        

</TABLE>
##### 



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 Quarterly Report of SouthFirst Bancshares, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) on the date hereof (the
Report), the undersigned, Joe K. McArthur, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, and Janice R. Browning, Controller of the Company, being the principal
financial officer of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to the best of our 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 operations of the
Company.

Date: August 16, 2004
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Joe K. McArthur
Joe K. McArthur
Chief Executive OfficerDate: August 16, 2004
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Janice R. Browning
Janice R. Browning
Controller
(Chief Financial Officer)


This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or
otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the
electronic version 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 SEC or its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-2000
<CASH>                                       4,507,954
<SECURITIES>                                 3,290,678
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,020,078
<ALLOWANCES>                                    76,023
<INVENTORY>                                     24,767
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             9,380,689
<PP&E>                                       1,538,845
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,166,166
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,314,046
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,665,746
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     9,006,013
<OTHER-SE>                                     496,520
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                11,314,046
<SALES>                                      2,664,024
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,664,024
<CGS>                                          605,368
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  726,576
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,913,193
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                131,267
<INCOME-TAX>                                    41,205
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             90,062
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    90,062
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.01


</TABLE>