alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT
32.1

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

In connection with the quarterly report of Apria
Healthcare Group Inc. (the company or Apria) on Form 10-Q for
the quarter ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the SEC on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Lawrence M. Higby, Chief Executive 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.
|--- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

/s/ LAWRENCE M. HIGBY Lawrence M. Higby
Chief Executive OfficerMay 10, 2007

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

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 62 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 62

  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
   United States Code, of the interim final rule of the Occupational 
Safety and Health Administration relating to ``COVID-19 Vaccination and 
                Testing; Emergency Temporary Standard''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 5, 2021

Mr. Gosar submitted the following joint resolution; which was referred 
                to the Committee on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
   United States Code, of the interim final rule of the Occupational 
Safety and Health Administration relating to ``COVID-19 Vaccination and 
                Testing; Emergency Temporary Standard''.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the 
interim final rule submitted by the Occupational Safety and Health 
Administration relating to ``COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing; 
Emergency Temporary Standard'' (published at 86 Fed. Reg. 61402 
(November 5, 2021)), and such rule shall have no force or effect.
                                 <all>
```
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 Cross Timbers Royalty Trust (the Trust) on Form 10-Q for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, not in its individual capacity but solely as the trustee of the Trust, certifies
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to its knowledge:

(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 the Trust.



|                 |  |  |  |                                                                |  |                    
|---------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -------------------
|                 |  |  |  | Bank of America, N.A., Trustee for Cross Timbers Royalty Trust
|                 |  |  | 
|October 19, 2007 |  |  |  | By                                                             |  | /s/ NANCY G. WILLIS
|                 |  |  |  |                                                                |  | Nancy G. Willis    
|                 |  |  |  |                                                                |  | Vice President
#### McDonald et al. vs. Williams as ad.

The cases of *Hemphill vs. Hamilton, ad.,*6 *Eng.*425, and *Anderson et al vs. Wilson,*13 *Arh.*409, as to the right to sue in the representative or individual capacity, approved.

*Appeal from the Ci/rouit Court of Sebastian County.*

Hon. Felix J. BatsoN,,Circuit Judge.

WalKee and GreeN, for appellants!

PiKE & CuMMiNS, contra.

Mr. Justice Scott

delivered the opinion of the Court.

This was an action of debt, by the appellee in his representative character, on two money bonds, made by the appellants, payable to Alfred Wallace, and by him assigned by a full endorsement to the appellee, as administrator of Benjamin L. Moore, deceased. To the declaration, in due form, ending with the ordinary profert of letters of administration, the defendant below interposed a demurrer; setting up for cause, that the cause of action in question, was in the individual, and not in the representative right of the *37appellee. The court overruled the demurrer, and the appellants saying nothing further, but electing to rest, judgment was rendered against them, for the debt and damages, and they appealed, entering into a recognizance to stay the execution.

The question raised by the demurrer, was settled by the court in the cases of *Hemphill vs. Hamilton adr., &c., 6 Eng. R.*425, and *Anderson et*al., *vs. Wilson,*13 *Ark.*409.

The judgment must be affirmed, and five per cent, damages will be awarded on the amount of debts, and damages adjudged in the court below.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

MELISSA MCFADDEN,

Case No. 2:18-cv-544

Plaintiff,

Chief Judge Edmund A. Sargus, Jr.

v.

Magistrate Judge Jolson

CITY OF COLUMBUS, 

NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF 

Defendant. LOU REITER

Please take notice that, pursuant to Rule 30 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 

Defendant will, by and through counsel, take the deposition of Lou Reiter on Monday, 

November 30, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. The deposition will be conducted remotely via video 

conferencing initiated by the court reporter. The testimony will be recorded by 

stenographic means. The deposition will continue from day to day until complete. The 

transcript and will be used for any purpose allowed by the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure, the Federal Rules of Evidence, and/or any orders of the Court.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Westley M. Phillips

Susan E. Williams (0073375)

Westley M. Phillips (0077728)

Assistant City Attorneys

CITY OF COLUMBUS, DEPARTMENT OF LAW

ZACH KLEIN, CITY ATTORNEY

77 North Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215

(614) 645-7385 / (614) 645-6949 (fax)

sewilliams@columbus.gov

wmphillips@columbus.gov

Attorneys for Defendant

Case: 2:18-cv-00544-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 27 Filed: 10/20/20 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 100
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that, on October 20, 2020, I electronically filed the foregoing with the 

Clerk of this Court by using this Court’s CM/ECF System. Copies will be served upon counsel 

of record by, and may be obtained through, the Court’s CM/ECF System. 

/s/ Westley M. Phillips

Westley M. Phillips (0077728)

Case: 2:18-cv-00544-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 27 Filed: 10/20/20 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 101
Case: 3:18-mj-00576-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/17/18 Page: 1 of 13 PAGEID #: 1
Case: 3:18-mj-00576-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/17/18 Page: 2 of 13 PAGEID #: 2
Case: 3:18-mj-00576-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/17/18 Page: 3 of 13 PAGEID #: 3
Case: 3:18-mj-00576-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/17/18 Page: 4 of 13 PAGEID #: 4
Case: 3:18-mj-00576-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/17/18 Page: 5 of 13 PAGEID #: 5
Case: 3:18-mj-00576-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/17/18 Page: 6 of 13 PAGEID #: 6
Case: 3:18-mj-00576-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/17/18 Page: 7 of 13 PAGEID #: 7
Case: 3:18-mj-00576-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/17/18 Page: 8 of 13 PAGEID #: 8
Case: 3:18-mj-00576-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/17/18 Page: 9 of 13 PAGEID #: 9
Case: 3:18-mj-00576-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/17/18 Page: 10 of 13 PAGEID #: 10
Case: 3:18-mj-00576-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/17/18 Page: 11 of 13 PAGEID #: 11
Case: 3:18-mj-00576-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/17/18 Page: 12 of 13 PAGEID #: 12
Case: 3:18-mj-00576-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/17/18 Page: 13 of 13 PAGEID #: 13
IA 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 81 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United 

States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Health and 

Human Services relating to ‘‘Vaccine and Mask Requirements To Mitigate the Spread of COVID–19 in Head Start Programs’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 21, 2022 

Mr. JOYCE of Ohio (for himself, Mrs. MILLER-MEEKS, Mrs. SPARTZ, and Mr. 

MAST) submitted the following joint resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Education and Labor 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of 

title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by 

the Department of Health and Human Services relating 

to ‘‘Vaccine and Mask Requirements To Mitigate the 

Spread of COVID–19 in Head Start Programs’’. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the De4 partment of Health and Human Services relating to ‘‘Vac5 cine and Mask Requirements To Mitigate the Spread of 

6 COVID–19 in Head Start Programs’’ (86 Fed. Reg. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HJ 81 IH 

1 68052 (November 30, 2021)), and such rule shall have 

2 no force or effect. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION

NAOMI STURGILL,

Plaintiff,

vs.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL 

SECURITY,

Defendant.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Case No. 1:18-cv-607

Judge Timothy S. Black

Magistrate Judge Stephanie Bowman

DECISION AND ENTRY

ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 17) 

AND TERMINATING THIS CASE IN THIS COURT

This case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference to United 

States Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the 

Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings filed with this Court and, on August 15, 2019, 

submitted a Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 17). No objections were filed. 

As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Court has 

reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo all 

of the filings in this case. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the Court finds that the 

Report and Recommendation should be and is hereby adopted in its entirety. 

Accordingly: 

1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 17) is ADOPTED; 

2. The Commissioner’s decision is REVERSED and REMANDED for an 

immediate award of benefits; and

3. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly, whereupon this case is 

TERMINATED on the docket of this Court. 
2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: 9/26/2019 s/ Timothy S. Black

Timothy S. Black

United States District Judge
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 124 Received in Senate (RDS)]

<DOC>
117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 124

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           December 15, 2022

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
     Directing the Clerk of the House of Representatives to make a 
               correction in the enrollment of H.R. 2617.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That, in the enrollment of the bill H.R. 2617, the Clerk of the House 
of Representatives shall make the following corrections:
            (1) Strike all after the enacting clause through page 3, 
        line 19 (the first sections 1 and 2).
            (2) Strike ``Division C'' and all that follows through the 
        end.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 14, 2022.

            Attest:

                                             CHERYL L. JOHNSON,

                                                                 Clerk.

                               By Kevin F. McCumber,

                                                          Deputy Clerk.
```
Case: 3:18-cv-00168-TMR-SLO Doc #: 6 Filed: 05/25/18 Page: 1 of 15 PAGEID #: 60
Case: 3:18-cv-00168-TMR-SLO Doc #: 6 Filed: 05/25/18 Page: 2 of 15 PAGEID #: 61
Case: 3:18-cv-00168-TMR-SLO Doc #: 6 Filed: 05/25/18 Page: 3 of 15 PAGEID #: 62
Case: 3:18-cv-00168-TMR-SLO Doc #: 6 Filed: 05/25/18 Page: 4 of 15 PAGEID #: 63
Case: 3:18-cv-00168-TMR-SLO Doc #: 6 Filed: 05/25/18 Page: 5 of 15 PAGEID #: 64
Case: 3:18-cv-00168-TMR-SLO Doc #: 6 Filed: 05/25/18 Page: 6 of 15 PAGEID #: 65
Case: 3:18-cv-00168-TMR-SLO Doc #: 6 Filed: 05/25/18 Page: 7 of 15 PAGEID #: 66
Case: 3:18-cv-00168-TMR-SLO Doc #: 6 Filed: 05/25/18 Page: 8 of 15 PAGEID #: 67
Case: 3:18-cv-00168-TMR-SLO Doc #: 6 Filed: 05/25/18 Page: 9 of 15 PAGEID #: 68
Case: 3:18-cv-00168-TMR-SLO Doc #: 6 Filed: 05/25/18 Page: 10 of 15 PAGEID #: 69
Case: 3:18-cv-00168-TMR-SLO Doc #: 6 Filed: 05/25/18 Page: 11 of 15 PAGEID #: 70
Case: 3:18-cv-00168-TMR-SLO Doc #: 6 Filed: 05/25/18 Page: 12 of 15 PAGEID #: 71
Case: 3:18-cv-00168-TMR-SLO Doc #: 6 Filed: 05/25/18 Page: 13 of 15 PAGEID #: 72
Case: 3:18-cv-00168-TMR-SLO Doc #: 6 Filed: 05/25/18 Page: 14 of 15 PAGEID #: 73
Case: 3:18-cv-00168-TMR-SLO Doc #: 6 Filed: 05/25/18 Page: 15 of 15 PAGEID #: 74
DESCRIPTION PART NUMBER QTY PRICE TOTAL AMOUNT DATE OF PUR

HP BLACK & WHITE PRINTER P3005dn Q7815A#201 56 $791.00 $44,296.00 30

Posted to National Guard FOIA Reading Room April 19, 2011

FOIA RReleasPage 1 
DESCRIPTION PART NUMBER QTY PRICE (EACH) TOTAL AMOUNT DATE OF PURCH

HP COLOR PRINTER CP3505DN CB443A#201 50 $1,030.00 $51,500.00 30‐A

Posted to National Guard FOIA Reading Room April 19, 2011

FOIA RReleasPage 2
David STOVER, Sr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-5054

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 9, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-20837

Conference Calendar

 

THEODORE WILLIAM PALMER,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

JANIE COCKRELL, DIRECTOR,

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,

INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,

Defendant-Appellee.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-01-CV-2264

--------------------

April 11, 2002

Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Theodore William Palmer, Texas prisoner # 847820, challenges

the district court’s 28 U.S.C. § 1915A dismissal as frivolous or

for failure to state a claim of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights

lawsuit, asserting that he has not been properly compensated for

work performed while in prison. He argues, for the first time on

appeal, that the failure to compensate him violates Texas law.

This court will not review this newly raised argument. See

Shanks v. AlliedSignal, Inc., 169 F.3d 988, 993 n.6 (5th Cir.
No. 01-20837

-2-

1999); Burch v. Coca-Cola Co., 119 F.3d 305, 319 (5th Cir. 1997). 

Inasmuch as Palmer’s argument can be construed as a restatement

of his general claim that he was entitled to compensation, the

claim is frivolous because, as the district court determined,

Palmer has no constitutional right to such compensation. See Ali

v. Johnson, 259 F.3d 317, 318 (5th Cir. 2001).

Palmer’s appeal is without arguable merit, is frivolous, and

is therefore DISMISSED. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20

(5th Cir. 1983); 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. The district court’s

dismissal of Palmer’s complaint counts as a strike for purposes

of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), as does this court’s dismissal of the

instant appeal. See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 387 (5th

Cir. 1996). Palmer is CAUTIONED that if he accumulates a third

strike, he may not proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action

or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any

facility unless he is in imminent danger of serious physical

injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

APPEAL DISMISSED; THREE-STRIKES WARNING ISSUED.
Supreme Court of the United States

Office of the Clerk

Washington, DC 20543-0001

February 4, 2020

Clerk

United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

540 Potter Stewart U.S. Courthouse 

100 East Fifth Street

Cincinnati, OH 45202-3988

Re: William T. Schmitt, et al.

v. Frank LaRose, Ohio Secretary of State

No. 19-974

(Your No. 19-3196)

Dear Clerk:

The petition for a writ of certiorari in the above entitled case was filed on 

February 3, 2020 and placed on the docket February 4, 2020 as No. 19-974. 

Sincerely,

Scott S. Harris, Clerk

by

Michael Duggan

Case Analyst

 

Scott S. Harris

Clerk of the Court

(202) 479-3011

Case: 2:18-cv-00966-EAS-EPD Doc #: 74 Filed: 02/07/20 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 626
Exhibit 10.1


 


CAPMARK
FINANCIAL GROUP INC.


 


SEVERANCE
PAY PLAN


 


AMENDMENT


 


Capmark Financial Group Inc. (the “Company”) adopted the Capmark
Financial Group Inc. Severance Pay Plan. (as amended, the “Plan”).  The Company hereby amends the Plan as
hereinafter set forth.  This Amendment is
effective on its execution date.


 


1. Subsection 5(a)(ii) is amended to
read as follows:


 


“(ii) Exempt Employees


 


(A) Executive Officers: For an
eligible Employee who is an Executive Officer, other than the Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, the benefit is the Employee’s Base Pay Rate, subject to
the limitation of subsection 5(b)(v).


 


(B) Other Exempt Employees:  For an eligible Employee who is an exempt
employee under the Fair Labor Standards Act (other than an Employee described
in subsection 5(a)(ii)(A) above), the benefit is three weeks of pay at the
Weekly Pay Rate for each year of service, with a minimum of six weeks and a
maximum of 40 weeks, subject to the limitation of subsection 5(b)(v).”


 


2. 
Subsection 5(a)(iii) is amended to add a sentence at the end
thereof to read as follows:


 


“This subsection shall not apply to an
eligible Employee whose benefit is determined under subsection 5(a)(ii)(A),
above.”


 


3. Subsection 5(e) is amended to read as
follows:


 


“(e) Payment. Benefit payments
shall be paid in one lump sum. All benefit payments shall be subject to
applicable federal, state and local income tax withholding, payroll taxes and
other applicable deductions.  If a
Participating Company rehires an Employee before expiration of the period
applied to calculate the Employee’s benefit amount, the Employee will be
required to repay to the Participating Company the amount of benefit
attributable to the period of time for which the Employee is reemployed.  An Employee’s benefit shall be paid as soon
as administratively reasonable after satisfaction of all conditions precedent
for 


 


1

















 


receipt of the benefit, but in any event no later than December 31st of the second calendar year following the
calendar year in which the Employee’s separation from service occurs.”


 


 


EXECUTED this 24th day of March, 2009.


 


 


	
   

  	
  CAPMARK FINANCIAL GROUP INC.

  
	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Linda A. Pickles

  



 


2
Case 1:01-cv-00130-SAS-TSH Document 51-2 Filed 12/05/2003 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

United States of America

v. 2:18-cr-147

Bilal El-Yousseph 

ORDER

There being no objections, the court hereby adopts the Report

and Recommendation of the magistrate judge (Doc. 30) that the

defendant’s guilty pleas be accepted. The court accepts the

defendant’s pleas of guilty to Counts 1 and 2 of the superseding

information, and he is hereby adjudged guilty on those counts. The

court will defer the decision of whether to accept the plea

agreement until the sentencing hearing.

Date: February 7, 2019 s\James L. Graham 

 James L. Graham

 United States District Judge
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

CAUSE NO. DA 21

- 0250

CED WHEATLAND, LLC, CED TETON COUNTY WIND, LLC, and
CED PONDERA WIND, LLC,

Petitioners/Appellants,

v.

MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICE REGULATION,
MONTANA PUBLIC SERVICE
COMMISSION

, NORTHWESTERN ENERGY, and MONTANA
CONSUMER COUNSEL,

Respondent s

/Appellee s.

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME

Appellee Montana Public Service Commission has filed a motion for

extension of time, requesting the first, 30

- day extension for all Appellees to file

answer briefs. Pursuant to authority grante d under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1) , and for

good cause appearing, all Appellees are granted an extension of time until October

1, 2021, to prepare, file, and serve their answer briefs.

Electronically signed by: Bowen Greenwood Clerk of the Supreme Court August 13 2021

08/13/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0250
#### Ford *v.*State.

Opinion delivered October 12, 1901.

Constitutional Law — Contempts.—An act of tlie legislature prescribing tbe punishment for a contempt committed by disobedience of a court’s process is in violation of art. 7, § 26, of tbe constitution, wbicb provides that “tbe general assembly shall have power to ■regulate by law the punishment of contempts not committed in the presence or hearing of the courts, or in disobedience of process.”

Certiorari to Mississippi Chancery Court.

Edwahd D. RobeRtson,v Chancellor.

*Will J.*Driver, for petitioners.

Under our statute the punishment for contempt cannot exceed a fine of $50 and an imprisonment for ten days. Sand. & H. Dig., *551§ 686; S3 Ark. 151; 44 Cal. 475; 44 la. 580; 34 Kan. 314. Certi-orari is the proper remedy when the court has exceeded its ¡jurisdiction. 39 Ark. 173; 53 Ark. 313; 30 Ark. 17; 33 Ark. 107.

*G. W.*Murphy, *Attorney*General, for respondent.

The legislature has no power to impose limitations upon the authority of the courts to punish contempts by disobedience of process. *Of.*art. 7, § 36, Const. Ark.; 16 Ark. 384; *id.*151; 78 Am. St. 157; S. C. Ill Ga. 168.

Wood, J.

Petitioners, Ford and Beatty, were each adjudged guilty of contempt of court by the chancery court of Mississippi county; said contempt consisting in disobedience to a process of injunction issued by said court. One was fined in the sum of $500, and the other in the sum of $100. This proceeding is by certio-rari to quash the judgment, on the ground that the punishment imposed was in excess of the court’s jurisdiction. Art. 7, § 36, of the constitution is as follows: “The general assembly shall have power to regulate by law the punishment of contempts not committed in the presence or hearing of the courts or in disobedience of process.” This constitutional provision is couched in such strong affirmative terms as to clearly evince a purpose to limit the power of the legislature to regulate the punishment of contempts to eases where the contempt is not committed in the presence or hearing of the courts, or in disobedience of process. Therefore the legislature, in attempting to prescribe punishment for a contempt committed by disobedience of the court’s process, passed the bounds set by the fundamental law.

Affirmed.