alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
STATE of North Carolina v. Napier Sandford FULLER

No. 378P18-4

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 21, 2019

Napier Sandford Fuller, for Fuller, Napier Sandford.

Peter A. Regulski, Assistant Attorney General, Blake M. Courlang, District Attorney, Mary Carla Babb, Assistant Attorney General, Matthew W. Sawchak, Solicitor General, James R. Woodall, Jr., District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

*168***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 20th of June 2019 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 21st of June 2019."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 20th of June 2019 by Defendant for Emergency Stay:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 21st of June 2019."
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5175 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the Secretary of 

the Treasury to disclose taxpayer identity information through mass 

communications to notify persons entitled to tax refunds. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 25, 2006 

Mr. DOGGETT (for himself and Mr. SHERMAN) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the 

Secretary of the Treasury to disclose taxpayer identity 

information through mass communications to notify persons entitled to tax refunds. 

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 ‘‘IRS Refund Accessi5 bility Act of 2006’’. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5175 IH 

1 SEC. 2. DISCLOSURE OF TAXPAYER IDENTITY FOR TAX RE2 FUND PURPOSES. 

3 Paragraph (1) of section 6103(m) of the Internal 

4 Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to disclosure of taxpayer 

5 identity information for tax refunds) is amended by insert6 ing ‘‘, and through any other means of mass communica7 tion,’’ after ‘‘media’’. 

Æ 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

      We have issued our report dated October 13, 2004 on the consolidated
      balance sheets of American Health Products Corporation and Subsidiary as
      of June 30, 2004 and 2003, and the related consolidated statements of
      operations, changes in stockholders' equity, and cash flows of American
      Health Products Corporation and Subsidiary for the three years ended June
      30, 2004, included in its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
      June 30, 2004, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. We
      hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of our report in the
      company's previously filed Registration Statement Nos. 333-28002 and
      333-81411.

      /s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP

      Chicago, Illinois
      October 13, 2004
No. 09-9604.

#### Anthony Waldrip, Petitioner v. James E. Hall, Warden.

559 U.S. 1111, 130 S. Ct. 2415,

176 L. Ed. 2d 932,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3776.

May 3, 2010.

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

Same case below, 548 F.3d 729.
Exhibit 31

 

Certification

I, Joseph J. Morand, certify that:

1.            I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 8-K containing distribution or servicing reports filed in respect of periods included in the year covered by this annual report, of Government Trust 1-D;

2.            Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole, 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 as of the last day of the period covered by this annual report;

3.            Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information required to be provided to the trustee by the servicer under the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement, for inclusion in these reports is included in these reports; 

4.            I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer under the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement and based upon my knowledge and the annual compliance review required under that agreement, and except as disclosed in the reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under that agreement; and 

5.            The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the servicer's compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon the report provided by an independent public accountant, after conducting a review in compliance with the Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedure, as set forth in the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement, that is included in these reports. 

Date: January 13, 2006

 

/s/ Joseph J. Morand                                              

Joseph J. Morand

Vice President, JP Morgan Trust Company, NA 

(formerly Bank One Trust Company)
**Exhibit 32.2****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Crum & Forster Holdings Corp., (the“Company”) for the period ended September 30, 2006 (the “Report”) as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Mary Jane Robertson, Executive Vice President, ChiefFinancial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asenacted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 1. This Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and  2. The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.       Dated: November 2, 2006 By:  /s/ *Mary Jane Robertson*             Mary Jane Robertson      Executive Vice President,      Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to theCompany and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission, or its staff, upon request.
FINAL REP 

March 24,2014 

;f~~~T~~VtEt~~~i?7JfG · 

GENERAL TEST;~~~~~~~FH INSTITUTE 

JAPAN OILSTUFFhN:SPECI:ORS~' CORPORATION 

. tfll~l~t~J 

1 
2 
2. Table of Contents 

3 
4 
(Final page: 33) 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33
<PAGE>
 
                                                                   10. (xii) (B)

April 30, 1997


Mr. Louis J. Caporale
10524 N. Woodcrest Drive
Mequon, Wisconsin  53092

Dear Lou:

Reference is made to your Compensation Agreement (the "Agreement") dated as of
April 15, 1997, with Montgomery Ward & Co., Incorporated (the "Company").

In order to induce you to accept the offer of employment contained in the
Agreement, General Electric Capital Corporation ("GE Capital"), as a principal
shareholder in the Company, hereby agrees with you that if, for any reason other
than termination of your employment, either voluntarily by you or for "cause" by
the Company, the Company shall fail to pay to you the base salary for the first
three years of such Agreement and the guaranteed bonuses for each of the first
three years of such Agreement and the bonus plan to offset your Kohl's equity
loss payable on May 1, 2000, then GE Capital shall pay such amounts to you as
provided in and subject to the conditions of the Agreement.  This obligation on
the part of GE Capital shall be triggered by your written notice to GE Capital
that the Company has ceased to make such payments as required by such Agreement.

Very truly yours,

General Electric Capital Corporation

By:   /s/ Edward D. Stewart
      ------------------------------------
      Executive Vice President
## NUMBER 13

- 2 1

- 00 4 33

- C V

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

– EDINBURG

WILMER LOJA, M.D., WILMER E. LOJA, M.D., P.A., AND WILMER E. LOJA AND ASSOCIATES, P.A, Appellants,

v.

MALLORY COTTON AND JERAMY BRIDGES, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS NEXT FRIENDS, NATURAL PARENTS, AND AS WRONGFUL DEATH BENEFICIARIES OF BABY BOY BRIDGES, Appellees.

On appeal from the 103 rd District Court of Cameron C ounty, Texas.



## MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Benavides , Longoria, and Tijerina Memorandum Opinion by Justice Benavides2

This cause is before the Court on appellants’ unopposed motion s to lift the

abatement, reinstate the case

, and dismiss the appeal. We grant the motion s , lift the

abatement, reinstate the case, and dismiss the appeal

. “In accordance with a motion of appellant, the court may dismiss the appeal or

affirm the appealed judgment or order unless such disposition would prevent a party from

seeking relief to which it would otherwise be entitled.” T EX

. R. A PP . P. 42.1. Attached to

the appellants’ motion is a dismissal order signed by the trial court on August 3 , 2023,

stating that the parties have agreed to extinguish the controversy between them in toto

. “Appeals of some interlocutory orders become moot because the orders have been

rendered moot by subsequent orders.” Herna ndez v. Ebrom , 289 S.W.3d 316, 319 (Tex.

2009). “A case is moot when a justiciable controversy no longer exists between the parties

or when the parties no longer have a legally cognizable interest in the outcome.” Tex.

Dep’t of Fam. & Protective Servs. v. N.J. , 644 S.W.3d 189, 192 (Tex. 2022). “A case m ay
become moot at any time, including on appeal.” Id. When an appeal becomes moot, we

must dismiss it for want of jurisdiction. Id. (citing Heckman v. Williamson County , 369

S.W.3d 137, 162 (Tex. 2012) ; see also Betancourt v. Cotton , No. 13

- 22

- 00132

- CV, 20 22

WL 1414502, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Corpus Christi

– Edinburg May 5, 2022, no pet.) (mem.

op.).

Upon review of the motion s to lift the abatement, reinstate the appeal, and dismiss,

the Court is of the opinion that the motion s should be granted. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 42.1(a)(1). Therefore, this cause is reinstated, the motion to dismiss is granted, and the

appeal is hereby dismissed. In accordance with the agreement of the par ties, costs will3

be taxed against the party incurring the same. See id. R. 42.1(d). Having dismissed the

appeal at appellants’ request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained.

GINA M. BENAVIDES Justice

Delivered and filed on the 17th day of August , 202 3

.
STATE v. Anthony Ray SOLOMON

178P19-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 11, 2019

Hal Askins, Special Deputy Attorney General, Glenn Gerding, Appellate Defender, Susan I. Doyle, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina

Anthony Ray Solomon, for Solomon, Anthony Ray.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 10th of May 2019 by Defendant for Petition for Discretionary Review:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th of June 2019."
Exhibit 23.2



                       ENGINEER'S CONSENT


We  consent  to  incorporation by reference in  the  Registration
Statements  (No. 33-32378 and No. 33-67924) on Form S-8  and  the
Registration  Statement (No. 333-00815)  on  Form  S-3  of  Devon
Energy  Corporation  the reference to our  appraisal  report  for
Devon  Energy Corporation as of December 31, 1997, which  appears
in  the  December 31, 1997 annual report on Form  10-K  of  Devon
Energy Corporation.





                                                ALLEN ASTON
                                                AMH GROUP, LTD.


March 10, 1998
```

                                                                    EXHIBIT 12.2

            CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF 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 Annual Report of Healthcare Technologies Ltd. on Form
20-F for the period ending December 31, 2006 (the "Report"), I, Eran Rotem,
Chief Financial Officer of Healthcare Technologies Ltd. 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 and 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 Healthcare
Technologies Ltd.

                                                    HEALTHCARE TECHNOLOGIES LTD.

                                                    By: /s/ Eran Rotem
                                                    ------------------
                                                    Eran Rotem
                                                    Chief Financial Officer

Date:  June 28, 2007
```
Exhibit 99.1
------------

CERTIFICATION  OF  CHIEF  EXECUTIVE  OFFICER  AND  CHIEF  FINANCIAL  OFFICER
PURSUANT  TO18  U.S.C.  SECTION  1350,  AS  ADOPTED  PURSUANT  TO

SECTION  906  OF  THE  SARBANES-OXLEY  ACT  OF  2002

I,  William  W.R. Elder, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report  of  Genus, Inc. on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange  Act  of  1934  and that information contained in such Annual Report on
Form  10-K  fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results  of  operations  of  Genus,  Inc.


                                     By:    /s/ William W.R. Elder
                                        --------------------------
                                     Name:  William W.R. Elder
                                     Title: Chief Executive Officer

I,  Shum  Mukherjee,  certify,  pursuant  to  18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report  of  Genus, Inc. on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange  Act  of  1934  and that information contained in such Annual Report on
Form  10-K  fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results  of  operations  of  Genus,  Inc.

                                     By:    /s/ Shum Mukherjee
                                        ----------------------
                                     Name:  Shum Mukherjee
                                     Title: Chief Financial Officer


<PAGE>
##### 



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
  1)
    
    such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months
ended March 31, 2006, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2)
    
    the information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the
Company for the three months ended March 31, 2006, fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Plumas Bancorp.
 Date:
    
    May 9, 2006
    
    /s/ Andrew RybackAndrew J. Ryback, Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 32.1****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Crum & Forster Holdings Corp. (the“Company”) for the period ended March 31, 2007 (the “Report”) as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Nikolas Antonopoulos, President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as enacted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 1. This Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and  2. The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.        Dated:  May 3, 2007 By:  /s/  *Nikolas Antonopoulos*    Nikolas Antonopoulos    President and Chief Executive Officer   A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to theCompany and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission, or its staff, upon request.
EXHIBIT 23-5



[Letterhead S.A. Holditch & Associates, Inc.]
ONE SHELL SQUARE, SUITE 4320
701 POYDRAS STREET
NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA 70139-4301

February 29, 1996

MCN Corporation
500 Griswold
Detroit, Michigan 48226

Re: MCN Corporation
1995 Annual Report on Form 10-K

Ladies and Gentlemen:

The firm of S.A. Holditch & Associates, Inc., consents to
the use of its name and the information contained in its
report dated December 28, 1995, regarding MCN Corporation
oil and gas reserve information as of December 31, 1995, in
its 1995 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

In addition, S.A. Holditch & Associates, Inc. consents to
the incorporation by reference of said material in
Registration Statement Nos. 33-43075,   33-52825 and 33-
52827 on Form S-8, 33-55665 and 33-57115 on Form S-3 and
Post Effective Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement No.
33-21930-99 on Form S-8 of MCN Corporation.

S.A. Holditch & Associates, Inc. has no interest in MCN
Corporation or in any affiliated companies or subsidiaries
and is not to receive such interest as payment for such
reports and has no director, officer, or employee otherwise
connected with MCN Corporation.  We are not employed by MCN
Corporation on a contingent basis.

Very yours truly,

/s/ W. Denton Copeland, P.E.

W. Denton Copeland, P.E.

WDC/dg
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

EASTERN DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Petitioner 

 v. 

RAHMIR VENABLE, 

 Respondent 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 419 EAL 2015 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 2nd day of December, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

is DENIED.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration 

          - [TA-W-65,326] 

Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on February 23, 2009 in response to a worker petition filed on behalf of workers of Horton Mfg. Co. LLC, Tallmadge, Ohio. 

The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 25th day of February 2009. 

Richard Church, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

 [FR Doc. E9-5049 Filed 3-9-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
No. 09-9392.

#### Leandro Roger Hernandez, Petitioner v. David L. Runnels, Warden.

559 U.S. 1110, 130 S. Ct. 2410,

176 L. Ed. 2d 929,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3826.

May 3, 2010.

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

Same case below, 357 Fed. Appx. 745.
### NU M BER S 13- 09- 0041 2-C V 

## COURT OF A PP EA LS T H I R T E E N T H D I S T R I C T O F T E X AS CORPUS CHRI ST I -E DI NBURG

____ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _______ _ UVA LD O C A NT U, JR . A ND R UB EN M . T ORR ES, J R., A pp ellan ts, v . F R OS TN A

T IO N A LB A N K , A p p el le e.

____ ____ ____ ____ __ _ _ _ _ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ___ On ap pe al f rom th e 4 04t h Dist rict C ou rt of C amero n Co un ty , T exas .

____ ____ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ___ 

## ME MOR A N D U M OP I N I ON B ef or e Just i ces Ro dr i guez, G ar za, and V el a M em or andu m O pi ni on P erC ur i am Ap pe l l an ts , U v al do C an tu , J r . an d R ub en To r res , J r ., p er fecte d an a pp ea l from a jud g ment ent ered by the 404th Di str ict Cou rtof Cameron C ounty , Texas, i n c ause number 2007- 07- 3680- G ( Ed C arey D ev elo pment, L.P. , et . al . v . F ro st Nat ion al Bankappel lat e caus e number

13- 09- 00081- CV ). Thi s cau se i s present ly before the C our

t on an2

unoppos ed moti on topar ti all y di smi ssthe appeal fil ed by appel lan ts, U v ald o C antu, Jr . and Rub en M . Tor re s, Jr
. Appel lan ts, U v ald o C antu, Jr . and R uben M . Tor re s, Jr ., re q uestthat thi s C our t di smi ssthei r appeal bec ause they hav e settl ed their

porti on of

the cas e and no lon g er w is h to pursue the a ppeal
. The Co urt, h a ving consi dered th e doc uments on fil e and appel lan ts’ moti on to dis mis s the appeal, is of the opini on that the motion shoul d be g ra nted. SeeT EX . R. A PP . P. 42 .1(a). App ellant s’ mo tion to dism iss is grant ed, and the app eal i s hereb y DISMISSED. In ac cordance w it h the ag re ement of the parti es, co stsare taxed ag ain st the p arty i ncur ri ng same. SeeT EX . R. A PP . P. 4 2.1( d)
. Hav ing di smi ss ed th e appea l at ap pel lan ts’ req uest , no moti on for re hear ing w il l be ent ertai ned, and our mandate w il l is sue forthw it h.

P E RC U R I A M Me moran dum Opi nio n del ivered and filed thi s 6 th da y

of Aug ust , 200 9.
No. 09-604.

#### Vince Vinhtuong Nguyen, Petitioner v. California.

559 U.S. 1067, 130 S. Ct. 2091,

176 L. Ed. 2d 722,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3460.

April 19, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the Supreme Court of California denied.

Same case below, 46 Cal. 4th 1007, 95 Cal. Rptr. 3d 615, 209 P.3d 946.