alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3788 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 3900 Darrow Road in Stow, Ohio, as the 

‘‘Corporal Joseph A. Tomci Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 3788 EH

1 SECTION 1. CORPORAL JOSEPH A. TOMCI POST OFFICE 

2 BUILDING. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

4 Postal Service located at 3900 Darrow Road in Stow, 

5 Ohio, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Corporal Jo6 seph A. Tomci Post Office Building’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

9 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

10 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Corporal Joseph A. 

11 Tomci Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives November 6, 

2009. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3788 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postfice Building’’. Ohio, as the ‘‘Corporal Joseph A. Tomci Post Of- al Service located at 3900 Darrow Road in Stow,
D ISMISSED and Opinion Filed De cember 8 , 2017 .

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 17
- 01037
- CR CHARLES EUGENE HUTCH INSON , Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F17
- 54502
- M 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Lang

- Miers , Fillmore , and Stoddart

Opinion by Justice Stoddart Charles Eugene Hutchinson appeals the tria l court’s judgment convicting him of attempted possession of cocaine in an amount less than one gram. The trial court has filed a certification showing appellant (1) entered into a plea bargain and he has no right to appeal; and (2) he waived the right to appeal. Concluding the record supports the trial court’s certification, we dismiss the appeal. Appellant and the State entered into a written agreement in which appellant agreed to plead guilty and waive his right to appeal in exchange for a 365 day sen tence. T o effectuate the plea agreement, the State filed a motion to drop two enhancement paragraphs from the charge and also filed a motion to reduce the offense from a state jail felony to a C lass A misdemeanor.– 2

–

See T EX
. P ENAL C ODE A NN
. § 12.44(b) (Wes t 2011). The trial court granted the State’s motions and assessed the agreed punishment of 365 days in county jail

. When a defendant waives the right to appeal in exchange for valuable consideration from the State, the waiver is enforceable provided it is made voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently.
See Jones v. State , 488 S.W.3d 801, 807

– 08 (Tex. Crim. App. 2016); Ex parte Broadway , 301 S.W.3d 694, 697

– 99 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009). Because the record showed appellant waived his right to appeal in writ ing, the Court requested letter briefs from the parties to address the question of whether the Court has jurisdiction over the appeal. Neither party chose to file a letter brief. We conclude appellant’s waiver of the right to appeal is enforceable

. See Jones , 488 S.W.3d at 807

– 08; Broadway , 301 S.W.3d at 699; Bla n c o v. State , 18 S.W.3d 218 , 2 20 (Tex. Crim. App. 20 0 0). Lacking jurisdiction over the appeal, we are required to dismiss the appeal without further action. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(d); Chavez v. State , 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Do Not Publish T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47 171037F.U05 /Craig Stoddart/ CRAIG STODDART JUSTICE– 3

– 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT
CHARLES EUGENE HUTCHINSON, Appellant No. 05

- 17

- 01037

- CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F17

- 54502

- M. Opinion delivered by Justice Stoddart. Justices Lang

- Miers and Fillmore participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED

. Judgment entered this 8th day of December, 2017.
Exhibit 32

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


         In  connection  with the  Quarterly  Report  of  Forgotten  Investments
Company, Inc., on Form 10- QSB for the period ending June 30, 2001 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned,  Daniel L. Hodges, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting
Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  that to the best of my
knowledge and belief:

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

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


Date: April 19, 2004

/s/ Daniel L. Hodges
Daniel L. Hodges
President
(Principal Executive & Accounting Officer)


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
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.
#### Georgia Manufacturing and Paper Mill Company, plaintiff in error, *vs.*Thomas P. Amis, defendant in error.

Subscription to the stock of an incorporated company does not create a statutory liability. Right of action thereon is barred at the expiration of six years.

Statute of limitations. Before Judge Buchanan. Coweta Superior Court. March Term, 1874.

'For the facts of this case, see the decision.

J. B. S. Davis, for plaintiff in error.

A. H. Cox; Austin & Harris ; P. H. Brewster, for defendant.

Warner, Chief Justice.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff against the defendant on a promissory note, for the sum of $159 10, dated 27th December, 1869, due one day after date. To this action the defendant pleaded as a set-off, a subscription to stock made by the plaintiff to defendant on the 14th day of June, 1866. On the trial of the case, the court charged the jury: “If you believe, from the evidence, that more than six years had elapsed after defendant’s right of action accrued on the subscription, before the same was. pleaded as a set-off to plaintiff’s suit,.and in the absence of proof to the contrary, I charge you that the right of action accrued at the time of the subscription, and that the right of the defendant to plead the subscription of the plaintiff as a set-off to plaintiff’s suit in this case, was barred by the statute of limitations.” This charge of the court, is the error complained of here. It is insisted by the plaintiff in error that this subscription for stock comes within the 2916th section of the Code, which declares, that all suits for the enforcement of rights accruing to individuals under statutes, acts of incorporation, or by operation of law? shall be brought within twenty years after the right of action *229accrues. The liability of the plaintiff on his stock subscription, or the right to enforce the same, did not accrue to the defendant under any statute, act of incorporation, or by-operation of law, but the right accrued to the defendant by virtue of the plaintiff’s individual contract as specified in his stock subscription. It was that individual contract of the plaintiff, which gave to the defendant the right of action against him, and if that right of action was not enforced within six years from the time of the accrual thereof, then it was barred by the statute of limitations. We find no error in the charge of the court- to the jury in view of the facts disclosed by the record.

Let the judgment of the court below be affirmed.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 January 31, 2014

t0127

Order 

Clerk

January 31, 2014

147966

ADELIA MARSHALL,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 147966

COA: 314290

MCAC: 12-000071

GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION,

SELF-INSURED,

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 25, 2013 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
MINNESOTA ARMY NATIONAL GUARD (MNARNG) DRINKING 

WATER PFAS SNAPSHOT 

The Army National Guard is committed to ensuring quality drinking water is provided to its 

Soldiers, and civilians. Proactive sampling is performed by the Army National Guard on its 

drinking water systems, as well as, coordination with other purveyors to ensure perfluorooctane 

sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) remains below the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) lifetime health advisory (HA) level of 70 parts per trillion (ppt). The 

EPA HA is not an enforceable or a regulatory standard, and represents a concentration in 

drinking water that is not expected to produce adverse health effects if the water is consumed 

over a lifetime. 

Drinking Water Status: Finished drinking water, which is the treated water people drink at, 

does not contain PFOS/PFOA above the EPA HA. Additionally, Army National Guard-provided 

drinking water complies with the standards of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), a federal 

law designed to protect the quality of drinking water supplied to the American public. The Army 

National Guard will continue to monitor on-base drinking water to ensure the EPA HA or a 

properly promulgated state drinking water standard is not exceeded. 

Test Date: September 2023 

PFOA + PFOS Results: Non-Detect 

Future Testing Event: May 2024 

Type of Drinking Water System: Army National Guard-owned 

For Questions Contact: National Guard State Public Affairs Office 

Office Phone Number: (651) 282-4410 

Office E-mail Address: ng.mn.mnarng.list.pao-web@mail.mil 

Water quality report: https://minnesotanationalguard.ng.mil/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/2022-

Camp-Ripley-Consumer-Confidence-Report.pdf
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                    MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                            1,372,840
<SECURITIES>                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                    23,409,573
<ALLOWANCES>                     (1,289,758)
<INVENTORY>                      13,954,700
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                 39,488,140
<PP&E>                            2,332,551
<DEPRECIATION>                    1,514,152
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                   63,269,132
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>            26,410,595
<BONDS>                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0
<PREFERRED>                               0
<COMMON>                             40,127
<OTHER-SE>                                0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>     63,269,132
<SALES>                          90,512,495
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                 90,512,495
<CGS>                            54,343,838
<TOTAL-COSTS>                    54,343,838
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                4,114,715
<INCOME-PRETAX>                   1,967,845
<INCOME-TAX>                        776,142
<INCOME-CONTINUING>               1,191,703
<DISCONTINUED>                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                  (1,015,550)
<CHANGES>                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                        176,153
<EPS-BASIC>                            0.05
<EPS-DILUTED>                          0.05


</TABLE>
WBC_Exhibit 10.1_3.31.2013




Exhibit 10.1
Description of Agreement with Kevin Tarrant Relating to Equity Awards


In connection with the February 1, 2013 retirement of Mr. Kevin Tarrant, former Chief Human Resources Officer, the Compensation, Nominating and Governance Committee (the “Committee”) of the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of the Company resolved, at a meeting held on February 4, 2013 that the equity incentive awards received by Mr. Tarrant under the Omnibus Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) prior to his retirement may continue to vest according to their original vesting schedule and any vested stock options held by Mr. Tarrant can be exercised up to 36 months after his retirement date. Absent such action, under the terms of the Plan, Mr. Tarrant’s unvested equity incentive awards would have been cancelled or forfeited, and he would have been required to exercise his vested stock options within twelve months of his retirement date.
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350



(ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)



In connection with the periodic report of Dynegy Holdings Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Nick J. Caruso, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for the purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



|(1) |  | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods
indicated.
|--- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





|                   |  |  |  |     |  |                       |  |                                                     
|------------------ |  |  |  | --- |  | --------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|Date: May 11, 2004 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/    NICK J. CARUSO
|                   |  |  |  |     |  |                       |  | Nick J. Caruso                                      
|                   |  |  |  |     |  |                       |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer



A signed original of
this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Dynegy Holdings Inc. and will be retained by Dynegy Holdings Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
THOMAS W. ITIN
                                   "EAU VIVE"
                             4831 OLD ORCHARD TRAIL
                       ORCHARD LAKE, MICHIGAN 48324-3050

July 15, 1998



Mr. Gerard A. Herlihy
Chief Financial Officer
WILLIAMS CONTROLS, INC.
14100 S.W. 72nd Avenue
Portland, OR  97224

Re:  Investment in Ajay Sports, Inc.

Dear Jerry:

Williams Controls, Inc. (the "Company"),  and Ajay Sports, Inc. ("Ajay") entered
into an  agreement  dated June 30, 1998 (the  "Agreement"),  whereby the Company
agreed to invest $2,000,000 into Ajay, assume certain debts of Ajay, and convert
$5,000,000  of loans and  advances to Ajay into Series D  Convertible  Preferred
Stock of Ajay. This agreement was made in consideration of the  restructuring of
the Company's and Ajay's joint and several  credit  facilities  with Wells Fargo
Bank, into separate loan facilities for the Company and Ajay.

I consented to that transaction and this letter shall serve as Amendment No. Two
to my guaranty dated October 2, 1995, as amended January 7, 1998 to the Company,
and  confirms  that the  Company's  loans  and  investments  to Ajay  under  the
Agreement,  including the  additional  $2,000,000  investment  and the preferred
stock  that was  received  in  exchange  for loans  and  advances  to Ajay,  are
Guaranteed Obligations (as defined in Amendment One to Guaranty).

Sincerely,

/s/ Thomas W. Itin
------------------
    Thomas W. Itin

Acknowledged and accepted as of the date first above written.

    WILLIAMS CONTROLS, INC.

By:  /s/ Gerard A. Herlihy
     ---------------------
         Gerard A. Herlihy
Exhibit 32.1



Certification



Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code, the undersigned hereby certifies that:



(1) I have reviewed the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Inland Land Appreciation Fund II, L.P. (the "Report") to which this statement is an Exhibit;



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



(3) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Inland Land Appreciation Fund II, L.P.



|       |                                                                     
|------ | --------------------------------------------------------------------
|By:    | Inland Real Estate Investment Corporation                           
|       | General Partner                                                     
|       |                                                                     
|       |                                                                     
|By:    | /S/ Brenda G. Gujral                                                
|       |                                                                     
|Name:  | Brenda G. Gujral                                                    
|Title: | President of the General Partner and                                
|       | principal executive officer of Inland Land Appreciation Fund II, L.P
|Date:  | July 24, 2006
**EXHIBIT 32.1****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350****(ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)**In connection with the periodic report of Dynegy Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the periodended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), I, Bruce A. Williamson, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer ofthe Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for the purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63,Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, ofthe Securities Exchange 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 at the dates and for the periodsindicated.        Date: May 8, 2008 By:  /s/Bruce A. Williamson    **Bruce A. Williamson**    **Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer**
EXHIBIT 21




                  CONSOLIDATED FREIGHTWAYS CORPORATION
                SIGNIFICANT SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY
                           December 31, 1999

 The significant subsidiaries of the Company were:

                                                         State or
                                             Percent of  Province or
                                             Stock Owned Country of
Significant Subsidiaries                     by Company  Incorporation

Consolidated Freightways
     Corporation of Delaware                    100      Delaware
   Canadian Freightways, Limited                100      Alberta, Canada
   Milne & Craighead, Inc.                      100      Alberta, Canada
   Canadian Freightways Eastern Limited         100      Ontario, Canada
   United Terminals Ltd.                        100      B.C., Canada
   Blackfoot Logistics Ltd.                     100      B.C., Canada
   Transport CFQI, Inc., d.b.a.
     Epic Express and Universal Contract
     Logistics                                  100      Quebec, Canada
   Click Express Inc.                           100      Alberta,Canada
   Interport Sufferance Warehouses              100      Ontario,Canada
   Panorama Mainland Ltd.                       100      Alberta,Canada
   724569 Alberta Ltd. d.b.a. Evergreen
     Logistics                                  100      Alberta,Canada
   Consolidadora De Fletes Mexico S.A. de C.V.   99      Mexico, D.F.
   Transportes CF Dominican Republic             34      Dominican Republic
   Transportes CF Guatemala S.A.                 99.9    Guatemala
   Transportes CF Costa Rica S.A.               100      Costa Rica
Leland James Service Corporation                100      Delaware
Redwood Systems, Inc.                           100      Delaware
   Redwood Systems Logistics de Mexico          100      Mexico - Jalisco
   Redwood Systems Services de Mexico           100      Mexico - Jalisco
Grupo Consolidated Freightways S.A. de C.V.     100      Mexico, D.F.
   CF Alfri-Loder, S. de R.L. de C.V.            50      Mexico - Nuevo Leon
   Transportes CF Alfri-Loder                    49      Mexico - Nuevo Leon
CF MovesU.com Incorporated                      100      Delaware