alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
James Cornell HOWARD v. WAYNE COUNTY CLERK OF COURT

No. 362P17-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 9, 2019

Amy Kunstling Irene, Special Deputy Attorney General, Matthew Delbridge, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

James Cornell Howard, for Howard, James C.

*104***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 13th of March 2019 in this matter for a writ of mandamus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Wayne County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th of May 2019."

Davis, J. recused
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4969 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to eliminate the discriminatory treatment of the District of Columbia under the provisions of law commonly 

referred to as the ‘‘Hatch Act’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 15, 2006 

Ms. NORTON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Government Reform 

A BILL 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to eliminate the discriminatory treatment of the District of Columbia under 

the provisions of law commonly referred to as the ‘‘Hatch 

Act’’. 

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 ‘‘District of Columbia 

5 Hatch Act Reform Act of 2006’’. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
2 

•HR 4969 IH 

1 SEC. 2. EMPLOYEES OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TO BE 

2 SUBJECT TO THE SAME RESTRICTIONS ON 

3 POLITICAL ACTIVITY AS APPLY TO STATE 

4 AND LOCAL EMPLOYEES. 

5 (a) APPLICABILITY OF PROVISIONS RELATING TO

6 STATE AND LOCAL EMPLOYEES.—Section 1501(1) of title 

7 5, United States Code, is amended by striking ‘‘a State 

8 or territory’’ and inserting ‘‘a State, the District of Co9 lumbia, or a territory’’. 

10 (b) PROVISIONS RELATING TO FEDERAL EMPLOYEES

11 MADE INAPPLICABLE.—Section 7322(1) of such title is 

12 amended— 

13 (1) by inserting ‘‘or’’ at the end of subpara14 graph (A); 

15 (2) by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end of subparagraph 

16 (B); 

17 (3) by striking subparagraph (C); and 

18 (4) by striking ‘‘services;’’ and inserting ‘‘serv19 ices or an individual employed or holding office in 

20 the government of the District of Columbia;’’. 

21 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

22 The amendments made by this Act shall take effect 

23 on the effective date of a law enacted by the District of 

24 Columbia after the date of the enactment of this Act which 

25 places restrictions on political activities of employees of 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
3 

•HR 4969 IH 

1 the District of Columbia government, and shall apply with 

2 respect to actions occurring on or after that date. 

Æ 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
EXHIBIT 99.1

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



In  connection  with  the  Quarterly Report of Generations Bancshares, Inc. (the
"Company"), on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2002 as filed with
the  Securities  and  Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned,  John  D. Carini, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and David
K. George, President 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 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.

This 12th day of November, 2002.


                                      /s/  John  D.  Carini
                                      ---------------------------------
                                      John  D.  Carini
                                      Chief  Executive  Officer



                                      /s/  David  K.  George
                                      ---------------------------------
                                      David  K.  George
                                      President and Principal Accounting Officer


<PAGE>
Order entered September 13, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-00594-CR

JOSE ANGEL JASSO JR., Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 203rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F09-72432-P

ORDER

The Court REINSTATES the appeal.

On August 26, 2013, we ordered the trial court to make findings regarding why the 

reporter’s record had not been filed. On September 11, 2013, we received the reporter’s record. 

Therefore, in the interest of expediting the appeal, we VACATE the August 26, 2013 order 

requiring findings.

Appellant’s brief is due within thirty days of the date of this order.

/s/ DAVID EVANS 

JUSTICE
EXHIBIT
      32








CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
      connection with the quarterly filing of Artfest International, Inc., a Delaware
      corporation


(the
      "Company"), on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 30, 2005 as filed with
      the
      Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), the undersigned,


Larry
      D.
      Ditto, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant
      to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.ss.1350),
      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.








Dated:
      January 15, 2007





/s/
      Larry
      D. Ditto


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


Chairman
      and Chief Executive Officer
---

Exhibit 32.2

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

The undersigned, Hamish Malkin, of Argentex Mining Corporation,
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB/A of Argentex Mining
Corporation for the interim period ended October 31, 2006 (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
Argentex Mining Corporation

Dated: April 8, 2008

|/s/
      Hamish Malkin          | 
|-------------------------------- | 
|Hamish Malkin                    | 
|Chief Financial Officer          | 
|(Principal Financial Officer and | 
|Principal 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 required by Section 906, has been provided to Argentex Mining
Corporation and will be retained by Argentex Mining Corporation and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
1 In The 

### Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________ N O . 09
- 21
- 00152
- CV

__________________
IN THE INTEREST OF D.R.D. AND D.A.D.

__________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 317th District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. C
- 226 , 441
- B

__________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Donald Darde n, a ppellant, filed a notice of appeal with the trial court on May 27, 2021. On July 9, 2021, we warned appellant that the appeal would be dismissed without further notice unless he paid the filing fee for the appeal. Despite written notice fro m this Court and an opportunity to cure, to date, appellant has neither
assert ed that he is unable to afford payment of costs for the appeal nor paid the filing fee for the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 20.1. In addition, no clerk’s record has been filed, and the clerk responsible for preparing the record in this appeal informed the Court that a ppellant failed to arrange to pay for the record. See Tex. R. App. P.2 37.3(b). On July 27, 2021, we notified the parties that it appeared appellant had not establis hed indigent status for the appeal and warned that the appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution unless by August 26, 2021, appellant established that he had arranged to pay the fees he is required to pay or that he needed additional time to do so. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b). The Court received no response to the notice. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c). W e dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b), 42.3 , 43.2(f).
APPEAL DISMISSED.
PER CURIAM

Sub mitted on September 22, 2021 Opinion Delivered September 23, 2021 Before Golemon, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ.
In the MATTER OF: M.C.

No. COA19-3

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: July 16, 2019

REVERSED. REMANDED.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

DONNA JOHNSTONE, 

 Petitioner 

 v. 

ROBERT JOHNSTONE, 

 Respondent 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 132 MAL 2016 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 24th day of August, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Amy E. Miles, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Regal Entertainment Group;

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report; and

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this 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 report.

 

 
| Date:  January 3, 2011 | By:    | /s/ Amy E. Miles              |
|-----------------------------|--------|-------------------------------|
|                        |   | Amy E. Miles                  |
|                        |   | Chief Executive Officer       |
|                        |   | (Principal Executive Officer) |

 

----
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

MARK ANDREW RIVERS, JR.,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 386 WAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 21st day of April, 2020, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
SAVINO v. The CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG HOSPITAL AUTHORITY, et al.

18PA19-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 6, 2019

Robert R. Marcus, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, For The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hospital Authority d/b/a Carolinas Healthcare System and CMC-Northeast

Kimberly Sullivan, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, For The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hospital Authority d/b/a Carolinas Healthcare System and CMC-Northeast

R. Kent Brown, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, For Savino, Anthony Lawrence (The Estate of)

Jon Ryan Moore, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, For Savino, Anthony Lawrence (The Estate of)

Paige L. Pahlke, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, For Savino, Anthony Lawrence (The Estate of)

Robert E. Zaytoun, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, For Savino, Anthony Lawrence (The Estate of)

Matthew D. Ballew, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, For Savino, Anthony Lawrence (The Estate of)

John R. Taylor, Attorney at Law, Raleigh

Matthew W. Krueger-Andes, Attorney at Law, Charlotte

Matthew Nis Leerberg, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, For The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hospital Authority d/b/a Carolinas Healthcare System and CMC-Northeast

Burton Craige, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, For N.C. Advocates for Justice

Trisha S. Pande, For N.C. Advocates for Justice

Brian M. Rowlson, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, For The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hospital Authority d/b/a Carolinas Healthcare System and CMC-Northeast

Jonathan E. Schulz, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, For The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hospital Authority d/b/a Carolinas Healthcare System and CMC-Northeast

Narendra K. Ghosh, Attorney at Law, Chapel Hill, For N.C. Advocates for Justice *911The following order has been entered on the Joint Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 5th of August 2019 to File Appellee Brief:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th of August 2019."

Appellee shall have up to and including the 13th day of September 2019 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.

Davis, J. recused
<PAGE>

                                   EXHIBIT 32

      CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL
                    FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Report (as defined under the preceding Certification
Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), I, Peter Lamoureux,
President of Everest Asset Management, Inc. , the general partner of the Everest
Fund, L.P. (the "Fund"), 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 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 Fund.

                               By: /s/ Peter Lamoureux
                                   --------------------------
                               Name: Peter Lamoureux
                               Title: Director, President and
                                      Treasurer
                               March 1, 2005
STATE v. Tariq Elijah EVERETTE

139P19-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 11, 2019

Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy Attorney General, William R. West, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

Tariq Elijah Everette, for Everette, Tariq Elijah.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 18th of April 2019 by Defendant for Petition for Discretionary Review:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th of June 2019."
Opinion filed January 6, 2017

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals 

__________

No. 11-16-00340-CV

__________

IN THE INTEREST OF A.R., C.R., M.R., R.R., AND J.R., 

CHILDREN

On Appeal from the 91st District Court

Eastland County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CV-11-142403

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

Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal in this cause on November 30, 2016. 

Upon docketing the case, we notified Appellant that it did not appear that this court 

had jurisdiction in this matter, and we requested that Appellant respond and show 

grounds to continue this appeal. In response, Appellant filed in this court a petition 

for writ of mandamus (Cause No. 11-16-00354-CV). 

The documents on file in this court reflect that, in February 2016, the trial 

court denied various requests and motions filed by Appellant, including discovery 

requests and a motion for summary judgment; however, the trial court has not acted 
2

on Appellant’s motion to modify the parent-child relationship.1 Because the trial 

court’s denials of Appellant’s various requests for relief are interlocutory matters 

that do not constitute final or appealable orders and because the trial court has not 

ruled on the motion to modify, a final appealable order has not been entered. Unless 

specifically authorized by statute, appeals may be taken only from final judgments. 

Tex. A & M Univ. Sys. v. Koseoglu, 233 S.W.3d 835, 840–41 (Tex. 2007); 

Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191 (Tex. 2001). Accordingly, we dismiss 

this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). 

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. 

PER CURIAM

January 6, 2017

Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

Willson, J., and Bailey, J.

 

1

In response to the petition for writ of mandamus in Cause No. 11-16-00354-CV, the trial court 

acknowledged that it had denied various requests for relief filed by Appellant. The trial court further 

indicated in its response that “none of the other parties whose rights and duties would be affected by 

[Appellant’s] suit for modification and therefore entitled to receive notice by service of citation have been 

duly served.” See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 156.003 (West 2014).
No. 09-8149.

#### Toney Cole, Petitioner v. Illinois.

559 U.S. 976, 130 S. Ct. 1694,

176 L. Ed. 2d 188,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2181.

March 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, denied.

Same case below, 388 Ill. App. 3d 1136, 367 Ill. Dec. 608, 982 N.E.2d 286.
| 1.   | The Quarterly Report of the Issuers on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended February 27, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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 Issuers. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |                      |                                  |   |   |
|--------|---------------------------|---------------------------------------|--------|--------|
|   |                      |                                  |
|   | /s/ KRIS G. RADHAKRISHNAN |                                  |
|   | Name:           | Kris G. Radhakrishnan                 |   |
|   | Title:          | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |   |
|   |                      |  (principal financial officer)   |   |
|   |
DISMISS and Opinion Filed November 7, 2022 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-22-00698-CV IN THE INTEREST OF K.W., A CHILD On Appeal from the 468th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 468-55854-2017 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Burn s, Justice Pedersen, III, and Justice Goldstein Opinion by Chief Justice Burns Appellant appeals from the July 13, 2022 order denying his motion to recuse the presiding judge. The reco rd before this Court does not contain a final judgment. The Court questioned its jurisdiction to review the recusal order and directed appellant to file, by Septembe r 30, a letter brief addressing the Court’s concern. We cautioned appellant that failure to comply may result in dismissal of the appeal without further notice. After granting appellant an extens ion to October 12, appellant has failed to comply. With respect to an order denying a mo tion to recuse, this Court's appellate jurisdiction is limited to review from the final judgment. T EX
. R. C IV
. P. 18a(j)(1)(A) (“An order denying a motion to recuse may be reviewed only for abuse of discretion–2– on appeal from the final judgment.”). Becaus e the trial court has not rendered a final judgment, this Court lacks jurisdiction to review the recusal order. See id. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 42.3(a).

220698F.P05 /Robert D. Burns, III / ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
IN THE INTEREST OF K.W., A CHILD
No. 05-22-00698-CV On Appeal from the 468th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 468-55854- 2017. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Burns. Justices Pedersen, III and Goldstein participating. In accordance with this Court’s op inion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED

.

Judgment entered November 7, 2022
No. 09-771.

#### Acceptance Insurance Companies, Inc., Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 1106, 130 S. Ct. 2402,

176 L. Ed. 2d 922,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3746.

May 3, 2010.

Petition for writ of certio-rari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied.

*923Same case below, 583 F.3d 849.