alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Jules Williams v. Marvlyn Jennifer Williams

Appellate case number: 01

- 16

- 00970

- CV

Trial court case number: 2015

- 35489

Trial court: 246th District Court of Harris County

On July 18, 2017, appellee filed a “Motion to Dismiss Appeal, Alternatively, Motion to

Strike Appellant’s Brief Alternatively, Motion for an Amended Brief.” On July 2 4 , 2017, appellant

filed a response entitled as a “Motion to Oppose Request by Appellee for Appellant Brief to Be

Stricken or Appeal Dismissed.” Because appellant’s “motion” is a response opposing the relief

sought by appellee , we dismiss it as a motion and consider it as an objection to appellee’s motion

. Appellee’s motion to di smiss the appeal and for alternative relief is DENIED

.

On July 24, 2017, appellant also filed a “Motion to Request a Default Judgment for Failure

to File Reply Brief Within Specified Timeframe.” The motion requests that we not consider

appellant’s brief an d impose sanctions for its being filed 4 days after the filing deadline.

Appellant’s motion is DENIED

.

It is so ORDERED. All other pending motions filed as of this date are dismissed as moot.

Judge’s signature: /s/ J a ne Bland

Acting individually

Date: July 27, 2017
EXHIBIT
23.1





CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM




The Board
of Directors of


New
Motion, Inc.:




We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-145933 on Form S-8 of New Motion, Inc. and subsidiaries of our report dated
March 26, 2009, with respect to the consolidated balance sheet of New Motion,
Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2008, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders’ equity, comprehensive loss, and cash
flows for the year then ended, which report appears in the December 31, 2008
Annual Report on Form 10-K of New Motion, Inc. and subsidiaries.




/s/ KPMG
LLP




New York,
New York




March 26,
2009
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 65 (Monday, April 6, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18441-18442]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07894]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[USITC SE-15-012]


Government in The Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: United States International Trade 
Commission.

TIME AND DATE: April 10, 2015 at 10:30 a.m.

PLACE: Room 101, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, Telephone: 
(202) 205-2000.

STATUS: Open to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:
    1. Agendas for future meetings: none.

[[Page 18442]]

    2. Minutes.
    3. Ratification List.
    4. Vote in Inv. No. 701-TA-530 (Preliminary) (Supercalendered Paper 
from Canada). The Commission is currently scheduled to complete and 
file its determination on April 13, 2015; views of the Commission are 
currently scheduled to be completed and filed on April 20, 2015.
    5. Outstanding action jackets: none.
    In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, 
not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the 
agenda of the following meeting.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: April 1, 2015.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2015-07894 Filed 4-2-15; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
Opinion filed December 8, 2016

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals 

____________

No. 11-16-00242-CV

____________

FRANKLIN P. SHACKELFORD, Appellant

V.

STEPHENS COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT AND 

STEPHENS COUNTY, TEXAS, Appellees 

On Appeal from the 90th District Court

Stephens County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CV-31184

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant, Franklin P. Shackelford, has filed in this court an unopposed 

motion to dismiss this appeal. In the motion, Appellant states that the parties have 

reached an agreement that includes the dismissal of this appeal. Appellant also states 

that the motion is unopposed and that each party has agreed to bear its own costs.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1. 

The motion is granted, and the appeal is dismissed.

December 8, 2016 PER CURIAM

Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

Willson, J., and Bailey, J.
Exhibit 32

Certification of the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer

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 on Form 10-Q of NYMEX Holdings, Inc. (the Company) for the period ending March 31, 2007 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), James E. Newsome as Principal Executive Officer of the Company, and Kenneth D. Shifrin, as Principal Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of 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 operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



By:

/s/ James E. NewsomeName:

James E. NewsomeTitle:

President & CEO (Principal Executive Officer)Date: May 11, 2007By:

/s/ Kenneth D. ShifrinName:

Kenneth D. ShifrinTitle:

Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)Date: May 11, 2007
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 7
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM AMERUS 
LIFE HOLDINGS, INC. AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                         2,414,807
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                      64,033
<MORTGAGE>                                     225,743
<REAL-ESTATE>                                    4,561
<TOTAL-INVEST>                               2,901,652
<CASH>                                           1,814
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                               1,329
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         120,481
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,384,229
<POLICY-LOSSES>                              2,053,740
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                  0
<POLICY-OTHER>                                   7,039
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                           55,369
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                188,381
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        19,500
<OTHER-SE>                                     438,010
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,384,229
<PREMIUMS>                                     187,823
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                            229,884
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                              65,983
<OTHER-INCOME>                                   2,711
<BENEFITS>                                     261,869
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                     40,160
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                            59,925
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                118,032
<INCOME-TAX>                                    43,859
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             74,173
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    74,173
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     3.20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0
        

</TABLE>
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 3104 

To amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to allow the District 

of Columbia to receive Federal funding under such Act, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 28, 2021 

Mr. CARPER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to 

allow the District of Columbia to receive Federal funding 

under such Act, 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 ‘‘Flood Prevention Act 

5 of 2021’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3104 IS

1 SEC. 2. ELIGIBILITY OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FOR FED2 ERAL FUNDING UNDER THE COASTAL ZONE 

3 MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1972. 

4 Section 304(4) of the Coastal Zone Management Act 

5 of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1453(4)) is amended by inserting ‘‘the 

6 District of Columbia,’’ after ‘‘the term also includes’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
Court of Appeals of

the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A17E0018. HOWARD ANDERSON LEE v. RONNIE K. BATCHELOR et al.

Howard Anderson Lee has filed in this Court a Petition For a Writ of

Mandamus, seeking the issuance of an order to compel certain actions of multiple

Gwinnett County court officials.

We lack jurisdiction of this case. Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that

falls within our Supreme Court’s general appellate jurisdiction. See Stendahl v. Cobb

County, 284 Ga. 525, n.1(668 SE2d 723) (2008); Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI,

Par. III (5). It is for the Supreme Court to determine whether Lee has properly

complied with any requisite procedure to invoke its jurisdiction. See Howard v.

Fuller, S08O0357(decided, November 30, 2007)(reiterating procedure to be followed

before seeking to invoke Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction to issue a writ of

mandamus against a trial judge). Accordingly, this appeal is hereby TRANSFERRED

to the Supreme Court for disposition.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

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.

11/22/2016

November 22, 2016
STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

CHAD MCCLENDON AND TASHA

MCCLENDON

VERSUS

DEREK EDENS, GOVERNMENT

EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY, 

U - HAUL COMPANY OF LOUISIANA, 

REP - WEST INSURANCE COMPANY, 

AREC 30, LLC AND ABC

INSURANCE COMPANY

In Re: U - Haul Co. of Louisiana, applying

writs, 19th Judicial District Court, 

Baton Rouge, No. 694848. 

NO. 2021 CW 0894

MARCH 17, 2022

BEFORE: GUIDRY, HOLDRIDGE, AND CHUTZ, JJ. 

for supervisory

Parish of East

WRIT GRANTED. On de novo review, we conclude that no

genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether Derek Edens

was in the course and scope of his employment with defendant, U - 

Haul Company of Louisiana, at the time of the accident. The

mere fact that an employee is " on call" does not automatically

give rise to liability on the part of the employer. See Johnson

v. C' s Transportation Servs., LLC, 2020- 0338 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 

8/ 4/ 21), 2021 WL 3418693 (unpublished) . There was no evidence

that Derek Edens was on duty, responding to a call, or

performing any work- related activity at the time of this

accident. Accordingly, we grant the writ application, reverse

the trial court' s June 16, 2021 judgment, and render judgment

herein in favor of U - Haus Company of Louisiana granting its

motion for summary judgment and dismissing plaintiffs' claims

against it. 

JMG

GH

WRC

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

EPUTY CLE K F CO RT

FOR THE COURT
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                                  SUBSIDIARIES


Name                                                   Jurisdiction of Formation
----                                                   -------------------------

NCO Financial Systems, Inc.                                    Pennsylvania
NCO Funding, Inc.                                              Delaware
NCO Financial Services, Inc.                                   Canada
FCA Funding, Inc.                                              Delaware
NCO Portfolio Management, Inc. *                               Delaware
NCOP Capital Resource, LLC                                     Nevada
Compass International Services Corporation                     Delaware
NCO Europe, Ltd.                                               United Kingdom
NCO Financial Systems of Puerto Rico, Inc.                     Puerto Rico
JDR Holdings, Inc.                                             Delaware
NCO Holdings, Inc.                                             Delaware
NCO Group International, Inc.                                  Delaware
NCO Financial Services (Barbados) SRL                          Barbados
NCO Customer Management, Inc.                                  Pennsylvania
RMH Teleservices Asia Pacific, Inc.                            Delaware
NCO Customer Management, Ltd.                                  Canada
NCOCRM Funding, Inc.                                           Delaware
Risk Management Alternatives International Corp. Canada        Canada
Horsham Aviation LLC                                           Delaware


     *Owns 100 percent of 26 subsidiaries and 50 percent of 11 subsidiaries
     operating in the United States engaged in the ownership of delinquent
     receivables.

Note: This table does not include any subsidiary that is not required to be
listed pursuant to Item 601 (b) of Regulation S-K.
UNITED STATES


SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Washington, D.C. 20549





FORM 8-K





CURRENT REPORT


PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE  SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934





Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported) August 10, 2015











DENNY’S CORPORATION


(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)





Delaware0-1805113-3487402(State or other jurisdiction ofCommission File No.(I.R.S. EmployerIncorporation or organizationIdentification No.)





203 East Main Street


Spartanburg, South Carolina 29319-0001


(Address of principal executive offices)


(Zip Code)





(864) 597-8000


(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)





Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligations of the registrant under any of the following provisions:





[    ]  Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)





[    ]  Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)





[    ]  Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))





[    ]  Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))














---










Item 7.01 Regulation FD Disclosure





Denny's Corporation (the "Company") management will conduct meetings with members of the investment community during the months of August and September as part of non-deal roadshows. A copy of the investor presentation to be used during the meetings is attached to this Current Report on Form 8-K as Exhibit 99.1 and is also available in the “Investor Relations” section of the Company’s website at www.dennys.com.





The information set forth in this Item 7.01 of this Current Report on Form 8-K, including Exhibits 99.1 hereto, shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section. The information in this Item 7.01 of this Current Report on Form 8-K shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except as expressly set forth by specific reference in such filing.








Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits





(d) Exhibits





Exhibit 99.1 -- Presentation


























---




SIGNATURES





Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.











Denny's CorporationDate: August 10, 2015/s/  Jay C. GilmoreJay C. GilmoreVice President,Chief Accounting Officer andCorporate Controller
Exhibit
32.1


CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO


18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Superclick, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the quarter ending January 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Periodic Report"), I, Sandro
Natale, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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
Periodic 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 Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.





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.





Dated:  Date:
      March 5, 2009
              /s/ Sandro NataleName:  Sandro
      NataleTitle:
      President  & Chief Executive
  Officer
#### Lazevnick v. General Hospital of Monroe County, Inc.

Defendant General Hospital of Monroe County, Inc., a/k/a Pocono Hospital, Inc., filed preliminary objections with accompanying memorandum of law on March 15, 1979. The prehminary objections are a demurrer and a motion to strike. We hold that the demurrer and part (2) of the motion to strike are overruled. Part (1) of the motion to strike is sustained and paragraph 6(d) of the complaint shall be stricken.

We note that in overruling the demurrer it is necessary to discuss a prior decision of this tribunal cited as authority by defendant for his position. In Kovacs v. Eaton, no. M78-0236, (opinion of the administrator, filed September 25, 1978), we held that a claim for breach of an express warranty in a medical malpractice case must be in writing in accord with section 606 of the Health Care Services Malpractice Act of October 15, 1975, P.L. 390, as amended, 40 P.S. §1301.606. That section provides as follows:

> *716“Section 606. Provider not a warrantor or guarantor. —In the absence of a special contract in writing, a health care provider is neither a warrantor nor a guarantor of a *cure.”*(Emphasis supplied.)

Section 606 of the act addresses only warranties or guarantees *of a cure.*As such, it is the only limitation on contract actions authorized by section 102 of the act, 40 P.S. §1301.102. See McKlveen v. Latrobe Area Hospital, et al., 12 D. & C. 3d 712 (1979) (opinion of the administrator filed April 24, 1979). A review of the Kovacs case reveals that plaintiff alleged breach of an express warranty to use *skill and care*in treating plaintiff. Since a claim for breach of such a warranty in an oral contract is not specifically barred by section 606, we now hold that the decision in the Kovacs case on the warranty issue was in error and as such that portion of our opinion therein is expressly overruled.

Inasmuch as the plaintiffs’ complaint in the instant action does not seek recovery for breach of warranties of a cure or result, there is nothing in the act to bar plaintiffs bringing the subject claim. Accordingly, we enter the following

ORDER

And now, April 25, 1979, upon consideration of the preliminary objections and memorandum of law in support thereof filed on March 19, 1979 by defendant General Hospital of Monroe County, Inc., a/k/a Pocono Hospital, Inc., it is hereby ordered and decreed that the preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer and part (2) of the motion to strike are overruled. Part (1) of the motion to strike is sustained, and paragraph 6(d) of the complaint shall be stricken.
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 62 (Wednesday, April 1, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 17512]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07565]


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

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD


Sunshine Act Meetings

April 2015.

TIME AND DATES: All meetings are held at 2:00 p.m.
    Wednesday, April 1;
    Thursday, April 2;
    Tuesday, April 7;
    Wednesday, April 8;
    Thursday, April 9;
    Tuesday, April 14;
    Wednesday, April 15;
    Thursday, April 16;
    Tuesday, April 21;
    Wednesday, April 22;
    Thursday, April 23;
    Tuesday, April 28;
    Wednesday, April 29;
    Thursday, April 30.

PLACE:  Board Agenda Room, No. 11820, 1099 14th St. NW., Washington, DC 
20570.

STATUS:  Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:  Pursuant to Sec.  102.139(a) of the Board's 
Rules and Regulations, the Board or a panel thereof will consider ``the 
issuance of a subpoena, the Board's participation in a civil action or 
proceeding or an arbitration, or the initiation, conduct, or 
disposition . . . of particular representation or unfair labor practice 
proceedings under section 8, 9, or 10 of the [National Labor Relations] 
Act, or any court proceedings collateral or ancillary thereto.'' See 
also 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(10).

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:  Henry Breiteneicher, Associate 
Executive Secretary, (202) 273-2917.

    Dated: March 30, 2015.
 William B. Cowen,
Solicitor.
[FR Doc. 2015-07565 Filed 3-30-15; 4:15 pm]
 BILLING CODE 7545-01-P