alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D21-3280

_____________________________

CHARLES URIAH WELLS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Washington County.

Timothy Register, Judge.

September 6, 2022

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

RAY, WINOKUR, and JAY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Charles Uriah Wells, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Michael Schaub, Assistant 

Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
**Exhibit 31.1**

**OFFICERCERTIFICATION**

I, Timothy J. Dodd, certifythat:

1. I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of Dakota Growers Pasta Company, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.

Date: June 14, 2006
|                                       |
|---------------------------------------|
| /s/ Timothy J. Dodd                   |
| Timothy J. Dodd                       |
| President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

 

----
#### St. John’s Episcopal Church, Also Known as All Angels Church, Appellant, v John C. Cochrane, as Treasurer of Suffolk County, et al., Respondents, and Alexandros Demetriades, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent. County of Suffolk, Third-Party Defendant-Respondent.

[718 NYS2d 877]

In an action, *inter alia,*to set aside a tax deed, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), entered November 23, 1999, as denied its motion for summary judgment, granted the separate cross motions of the defendant John C. Cochrane, Treasurer of Suffolk County, and the defendant third-party plaintiff, Alexandros Demetriades, which were for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them, and, upon searching the record, granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant Town of Southampton dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs payable to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The plaintiff claims to have owned certain real property lo*516cated in the Town of Southampton. The County of Suffolk acquired the property by tax deed filed August 8, 1995, and subsequently sold the property to the defendant third-party plaintiff Alexandros Demetriades. In this action, the plaintiff seeks to set aside the tax deed and the deed transferring the property to Demetriades, claiming, *inter alia,*that it was deprived of due process of law as it was not properly notified of the real property tax assessment, the tax lien, and the sale which resulted in the transfer of the property. The Supreme Court granted summary judgment to the defendants, dismissing the complaint as time-barred. We affirm, but for a different reason.

The plaintiff failed to establish that it was the owner of the property. When the taxes were assessed, the record titleholder of the property was The Church of All Angels (hereinafter All Angels), and notices were provided to All Angels. The plaintiff contends that it acquired title to the property when it merged with All Angels in 1929 and that it should have received the various notices. However, the plaintiff failed to submit proof sufficient to demonstrate that a merger was effectuated in compliance with Religious Corporations Law § 13. Since the plaintiff did not establish an ownership interest in the property, its due process rights were not violated *{see, Matter of McCann v Scaduto,*71 NY2d 164, 172).

In light of our determination, it is unnecessary to address the plaintiff’s remaining contentions. Santucci, J. P., Altman, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.
IN RE: Derek A. QUINATA, Relator.

No. 08-17-00164-CV

Court of Appeals of Texas, El Paso.

October 6, 2017

RESPONDENTS: The Honorable Angie Barill, Judge, The Honorable Stephen B. Ables, Presiding Judge, 346th District Court, 500 E. San Antonio, El Paso, TX 79901.

ATTORNEY FOR PARTY IN INTEREST: Hon. Jaime E. Esparza, District Attorney, El Paso County Courthouse, 500 E. San Antonio, Suite 201, El Paso, TX 79901.

ATTORNEY FOR RELATOR: Hon. James D. Lucas, 2316 Montana Ave., El Paso, TX 79903.

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Derek A. Quinata, a Texas attorney, filed a habeas corpus petition challenging a contempt order issued by the Honorable Angie Juarez Barill, Judge of the 346th District Court of El Paso County, Texas. Relator also filed a motion seeking a stay of a *de novo* contempt hearing scheduled by Judge Barill before the Honorable Stephen B. Ables. Finding that the contempt order was entered in a criminal case, we dismiss this original proceeding for lack of jurisdiction.

A court of appeals' original habeas corpus jurisdiction is limited to civil matters. Under Section 22.221(d) of the Government Code, a court of appeals may issue the writ of habeas corpus when a person is restrained in his liberty by virtue of an order, process, or commitment issued by a court or judge in the court of appeals' district because of the violation of an order, judgment, or decree previously made, rendered, or entered by the court or judge **in a civil case** . TEX.GOV'T CODE ANN . § 22.221(d) (West 2004). Original habeas corpus jurisdiction in criminal cases is granted to the Court of Criminal Appeals, the district courts, and county courts. *See* TEX.CODE CRIM.PROC.ANN . art. 11.05 (West 2015).

The habeas corpus petition does not reflect that Relator was held in contempt for the violation of an order entered by a court or judge in a civil case. To the contrary, the petition reflects that Relator was representing a defendant in a criminal case pending in Judge Barill's court (cause number 20160D01693), and Judge Barill held him in contempt because he failed to appear for two scheduled hearings in these *121cases. Consequently, we dismiss this original habeas corpus proceeding for lack of jurisdiction. The motion requesting emergency relief is denied as moot.
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.                  

###### National Aeronautics and Space Administration

          - [Notice (09-024)]

# AGENCY:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

# ACTION:

Notice of availability of inventions for licensing.

# SUMMARY:

Patent applications on the inventions listed below assigned to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, have been filed in the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and are available for licensing.

# DATES:

March 11, 2009.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mark W. Homer, Patent Counsel, NASA Management Office—JPL, 4800 Oak Grove Drive, Mail Stop 180-200, Pasadena, CA 91109; telephone (818) 354-7770.

*NASA Case No.:*                         NPO-45730-1: Phased-Array Optical Whispering Gallery Mode Modulator and Method.                    

      ( print page 10623)    
Dated: March 4, 2009.

Richard W. Sherman,

Deputy General Counsel.

[FR Doc. E9-5108 Filed 3-10-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
#### John A. Turner, et al, *Appellants,*v. Earle H. McRae, et al, *Appellees.*

Division B.

Decision Filed May 11, 1928.

*Watson & Saussy,*for Appellants;

*Jackson, Dupree & Gone,*for Appellees.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the order herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said order; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said order of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J. concur.
**EXHIBIT 32****Certification of Periodic Financial Report Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and in connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q ofPinnacle Airlines Corp. for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned Philip H. Trenary, thePresident and Chief Executive Officer, and Peter D. Hunt, the Vice President and Chief FinancialOfficer, hereby certify that this Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theregistrant.     Signature Title Date /s/ Philip H. Trenary  President and Chief Executive Officer  May 9, 2007Philip H. Trenary         /s/ Peter D. Hunt  Vice President and Chief Financial Officer  May 9, 2007Peter D. Hunt    
44
Abatement Order filed August 21, 2014

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 13

- 00931

- CV

____________ ALBERT MORRIS AND TI LDA MORRIS , Appellant s
V.

AMERICAN HOME MORTGA GE SERVICING AND WEL LS FARGO TRUSTEE, Appellee s

On Appeal from the 400th District Court Fort Bend County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 12

- DCV

- 197669



### ABATEMENT ORDER
Notice was filed on August 18, 2014 that appellant Albert Morris is in bankruptcy. Tex. R. App. P. 8.1. According to court records , on July 9, 2012
, Albert Morris , petitioned for voluntary bankruptcy protection in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas under case number 12

- 35217

. A bankruptcy suspends the appeal from the date when the bankruptcy petition isfiled until the appellate court reinstates the appeal in accordance with federal law.

Tex. R. App. P. 8.2. Accordingly, we ORDER the appeal abated.
When a case has been suspended by a bankruptcy filing, a party may move the appellate court to reinstate the appeal if permitted by federal law or the bankruptcy court. Tex. R. App. P. 8.3. If the bankruptcy court has lifted or terminated the stay, a certified copy of the order must be attached to the motion. Id. A party filing a motion to reinstate shall specify what furt her action, if any, is required from this court when the appeal is reinstated. See Tex. R. App. P. 10.1(a).
For administrative purposes only, and without surrendering jurisdiction, the appeal is abated and treated as a closed case until further order of this court.

PER CURIAM
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 44 (Monday, March 9, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 9964]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-4896]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 648

[Docket No. 0809251266-81485-02]
RIN 0648-XN33


Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Summer Flounder 
Fishery; Quota Transfer

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Temporary rule; inseason quota transfer.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS announces that the State of North Carolina is 
transferring a portion of its 2009 commercial summer flounder quota to 
the Commonwealth of Virginia. By this action, NMFS adjusts the quotas 
and announces the revised commercial quota for each state involved.

DATES: Effective March 4, 2009 through December 31, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Emily Bryant, Fishery Management 
Specialist, (978) 281-9244, FAX (978) 281-9135.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulations governing the summer flounder 
fishery are found at 50 CFR part 648. The regulations require annual 
specification of a commercial quota that is apportioned among the 
coastal states from North Carolina through Maine. The process to set 
the annual commercial quota and the percent allocated to each state are 
described in Sec.  648.100.
    The final rule implementing Amendment 5 to the Summer Flounder, 
Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fishery Management Plan, which was published 
on December 17, 1993 (58 FR 65936), provided a mechanism for summer 
flounder quota to be transferred from one state to another. Two or more 
states, under mutual agreement and with the concurrence of the 
Administrator, Northeast Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator), can 
transfer or combine summer flounder commercial quota under Sec.  
648.100(d). The Regional Administrator is required to consider the 
criteria set forth in Sec.  648.100(d)(3) in the evaluation of requests 
for quota transfers or combinations.
    North Carolina has agreed to transfer 23,130 lb (10,492 kg) of its 
2009 commercial quota to Virginia to cover the summer flounder landings 
of three North Carolina vessels granted safe harbor in Virginia due to 
mechanical issues between January 16 and January 28, 2009. The Regional 
Administrator has determined that the criteria set forth in Sec.  
648.100(d)(3) have been met. The revised quotas for calendar year 2009 
are: North Carolina, 2,893,992 lb (1,312,693 kg) and Virginia, 
2,341,054 lb (1,061,884 kg).

Classification

    This action is taken under 50 CFR part 648 and is exempt from 
review under Executive Order 12866.

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: March 4, 2009.
Emily H. Menashes,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E9-4896 Filed 3-4-09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
No. 09-9551.

#### Jeffrey Michael Charley, Petitioner v. Charles L. Ryan, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections.

560 U.S. 909, 130 S. Ct. 3283,

176 L. Ed. 2d 1192,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 4058.

May 17, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-11-0000666 22-OCT-2013 01:13 PM SCWC-11-0000666 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI ' I

STATE OF HAWAI ' I, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee,

vs. KAOLINO RICHARD BAKER, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant.

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS (CAAP-11-0000666; FC-CR NO. 10-1-0329K) ORDER ACCEPTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ) Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant Kaolino Richard Baker’s application for writ of certiorari filed on September 16, 2013, is hereby accepted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no oral argument will be heard in this case. Any party may, within ten days and pursuant to Rule 34(c) of the Hawai ' i Rules of Appellate Procedure, move for retention of oral argument. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai ' i, October 22, 2013. James S. Tabe for petitioner /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr. /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack Linda L. Walton for respondent
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 Zaldiva, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending December 31, 2006, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Quarterly
Report"), We, Robert B. Lees, President, and John A. Palmer, Jr., Treasurer 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:

     (1) The Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
the Company.


Dated: 2/13/2007                       /s/Robert B. Lees
      ----------                       -----------------
                                       Robert B. Lees
                                       President

Dated: 2/13/2007                       /s/John A. Palmer, Jr.
      ----------                       ----------------------
                                       John A. Palmer, Jr.
                                       Treasurer
                                       Director
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF**

**CHIEF EXECUTIVEOFFICER**

**OF PACIFICENERGY MANAGEMENT LLC**

**PURSUANT TO 18U.S.C. § 1350**

 

                Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 andin connection with the accompanying report on Form 10-Q for the quarterlyperiod ended March 31, 2005 that is being filed concurrently with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), theundersigned officer of Pacific Energy Management LLC, general partner ofPacific Energy GP LP, which is the general partner of Pacific Energy Partners,L.P.  and Subsidiaries (the “Partnership”)hereby certifies 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  Partnership. |

 
|   | /s/ Irvin Toole, Jr. |
|--------|----------------------|
|   | Irvin  Toole, Jr.    |
|   | May  3, 2005         |

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to Pacific Energy Partners, L.P., and will be retained by PacificEnergy Partners, L.P., and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionor its staff upon request.

 

----
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 9 A1 23 2

. MATTHEW C O U R T NEY ELLI N GTON v . V ENDOR RESOURCE MANAGEMENT et a l

.
Th i s cas e b eg an as a d i s p o s s es s o ry p ro ceed i n g i n m ag i s t rat e co urt

. Fo l l o wi n g

an ad v ers e ru l i ng , M at th ew Co u rt n ey El l i n gt o n ap p eal ed t o t h e s u p eri o r co u rt , wh i ch
g ran t ed s u m

m ary ju d g m en t t o Ven d o r Res o u rce M an a g e m e n t

. E l l i n g t o n t h en fi l ed
t h i s d i rect ap peal . W e l ack ju ri sd i ct i o n

. Ap p eal s fro m s u peri o r co u rt d eci s i o n s rev i ewi n g lo wer co u rt d eci s i o n s b y cert io rari o r d e n o v o p ro ceed i n g s m u st b e in i t i at ed b y fi l i ng an ap pl i cat i o n fo r d i s cret i o n ary ap p eal

. OCGA § 5 -6 -3 5 (a) (1 ), (b ); B u l l o ck v. S a n d , 2 6 0 Ga. A p p

. 8 7 4, 8 7 5 (5 81 SE2 d 3 3 3 ) (2 0 0 3 ). “ Co m p l i an ce wi t h t he d i s cret i on ary ap p eal s p ro ced u re i s ju ri s d ict io n al .” S

mo a k v. Dep t

. o

f Hu m a n Res o u r ces , 22 1 G a. Ap p. 2 5 7 , 2 5 7 (4 7 1 SE2 d 6 0) (1 9 9 6 ). El l i n g t o n ’ s fai l u re t o fo ll o w t h e p r o p e r p r o ced u re d ep ri v es u s o f ju ri s d i ct i o n o v er t h i s ap p eal , wh i ch is h ereb y DISM ISSED. Se e Bu l l o ck , 2 6 0 Ga. Ap p . at 8 7 5

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m
t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d th e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. January 31, 2019

01/31/2019