alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Jeffrey Schwam, Appellant, v Robin Schwam, Respondent.

[718 NYS2d 883]

In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by a judgment entered June 3, 1998, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Schaffer, R.), entered December 22, 1999, which, *inter alia,*denied that branch of his motion which was for downward modification of his maintenance obligation, granted that branch of his motion which was for downward modification of his child support obligation only to the extent of reducing that obligation to $22,261.66 per year, and granted the defendant’s application for an award of an attorney’s fee.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly found that the plaintiff failed to make out a prima facie case of entitlement to modification of the maintenance provisions of the parties’ stipulation of settlement, which was incorporated but not merged into their judgment of divorce. The plaintiff failed to establish that continued *517enforcement of the maintenance obligation would result in extreme hardship *(see,*Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [9] [b]; *Pozza v Pozza,*260 AD2d 360; *Sheridan v Sheridan,*225 AD2d 604).

The court providently exercised its discretion in granting the defendant’s application for an award of an attorney’s fee *(see,*Domestic Relations Law § 237; *DeCabrera v Cabrera-Rosete,*70 NY2d 879).

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are without merit. O’Brien, J. P., Santucci, Florio and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit
      32**





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**


**OF
      THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





The
      undersigned, Wilson Cheng, the Chief Executive Officer, Chairman of the Board
      of
      Directors and Treasurer of BESTWAY COACH EXPRESS INC. (the "Company"), DOES
      HEREBY CERTIFY that:





1.
      The
      Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended May 31, 2006
      (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





2.
      Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.





IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed this statement
      this **** 24th
      day
      of July, 2006.





___**/s/
                Wilson Cheng**___________
              Wilson
                Cheng
              CEO,
                Chairman of the Board of Directors and
                Treasurer








A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      BESTWAY COACH EXPRESS INC. and will be retained by BESTWAY COACH EXPRESS INC.
      and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request.
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Antonio GOLSTON, Appellant.

WD 80355

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

ORDER FILED: September 4, 2018 Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied October 23, 2018 Application for Transfer Denied December 18, 2018

Marsha Stiles, Springfield, MO, Counsel for Appellant.

Shaun Mackelprang, Jefferson City, MO, Counsel for Respondent.

Before Division One: Thomas H. Newton, P.J., Cynthia L. Martin, and Gary D. Witt, JJ.

**ORDER**

Per Curiam:

*323Mr. Antonio Golston appeals his conviction by a Jackson County jury of voluntary manslaughter, first-degree robbery, and two counts of armed criminal action (ACA). The trial court sentenced him to fifteen years in the Department of Corrections for voluntary manslaughter, twenty-five years for robbery, and ten years on each of the ACA convictions, to be served concurrently, with credit for time served but with no probation.

For reasons stated in the memorandum provided to the parties, we affirm. Rule 30.25(b).
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

*I, John F. Coger, certify that:*

 

*6.**              Ihave reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Community ValleyBancorp (the “registrant”);*

 

*7.**              Basedon my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterlyreport;*

 

*8.**              Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant asof, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;*

 

*9.**              Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:*

 

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

 

*b)**                 Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and*

 

*d)**                   Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting ;and*

 

*10.**       The registrant’s other certifying officer and Ihave disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofregistrant’s board of directors:*

 

*a)**                Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and*

 

*c)**             Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.*

 

 
| *Date:* | *November 10, 2005*                           |   | *By /s/ John F. Coger* |   |
|---------|----------------------------------------------------|--------|------------------------|--------|
|    | Executive Vice President, Chief Financial  Officer |
|    | and Chief Operating Officer                        |

 

----
PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS [LOGO]



            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
            --------------------------------------------------------


We  hereby  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in  the  Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (No. 33-24340) of FMS Financial  Corporation of our report
dated March 17, 2005 relating to the financial statements,  which appears in the
Annual Report to  Shareholders,  which is  incorporated in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K. We also consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated
March 17, 2005 relating to the financial statement  schedules,  which appears in
this Form 10-K.


/s/PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
March 24, 2005
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 94 (Thursday, May 15, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 27973]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11212]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8735]

In the Matter of the Designation of Al-Nusrah Front Also Known as 
Jabhat al-Nusrah Also Known as Jabhet al-Nusra Also Known as The 
Victory Front Also Known as Al Nusrah Front for the People of the 
Levant Also Known as Al-Nusrah Front in Lebanon Also Known as Support 
Front for the People of the Levant Also Known as Jabaht al-Nusra li-Ahl 
al-Sham min Mujahedi al-Sham fi Sahat al-Jihad as a Specially 
Designated Global Terrorist Pursuant to Section 1(b) of Executive Order 
13224, as Amended

    Acting under the authority of and in accordance with section 1(b) 
of Executive Order 13224 of September 23, 2001, as amended by Executive 
Order 13268 of July 2, 2002, and Executive Order 13284 of January 23, 
2003, I hereby determine that the entity known as Al-Nusrah Front, also 
known as Jabhat al-Nusrah, also known as Jabhet al-Nusra, also known as 
The Victory Front, also known as Al Nusrah Front for the People of the 
Levant, also known as Al-Nusrah Front in Lebanon, also known as Support 
Front for the People of the Levant, also known as Jabaht al-Nusra li-
Ahl al-Sham min Mujahedi al-Sham fi Sahat al-Jihad, committed, or poses 
a significant risk of committing, acts of terrorism that threaten the 
security of U.S. nationals or the national security, foreign policy, or 
economy of the United States.
    Consistent with the determination in section 10 of Executive Order 
13224 that ``prior notice to persons determined to be subject to the 
Order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States 
would render ineffectual the blocking and other measures authorized in 
the Order because of the ability to transfer funds instantaneously,'' I 
determine that no prior notice needs to be provided to any person 
subject to this determination who might have a constitutional presence 
in the United States, because to do so would render ineffectual the 
measures authorized in the Order.
    This notice shall be published in the Federal Register.

    Dated: May 7, 2014.
John F. Kerry,
Secretary of State.
[FR Doc. 2014-11212 Filed 5-14-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-10-P
```
Quintin D. GREER, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. ED 105544

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.

Filed: May 15, 2018 Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied July 16, 2018

Gwenda R. Robinson, Missouri Public Defender Office, St. Louis, Missouri, for Appellant.

Shaun J. Mackelprang, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, Missouri, for Respondent.

Before Lisa P. Page, P.J., Roy L. Richter, J. and Philip M. Hess, J.

***ORDER***

PER CURIAM

Quintin Greer appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Greer raises three points on appeal. Greer claims trial counsel was ineffective for failing to: (1) call Kesha Caples to testify; (2) honor Greer's request for a bench trial; and (3) call Greer to testify. Finding no clear error, we affirm. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
Exhibit 32.1

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

(As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley

Act of 2002)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of DCT Industrial Trust Inc., a Maryland corporation (the Company), does hereby certify with respect to the Quarterly
Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) that, to his knowledge:



| | (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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                   |  |  |  |                        
|------------------ |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Date: May 11, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/ Philip L. Hawkins  
|                   |  |  |  | Philip L Hawkins       
|                   |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer
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 Amended Annual Report ofCormac Mining Inc.(the "Company") on Form 10-K/A-1 for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I,Brian Roberts, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| |    

Dated this 20thday of July, 2009.

BRIAN ROBERTSBrian RobertsChief Executive Officer and Chief FinancialOfficer












---
Exhibit 32.2

          CERTIFICATION of CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Quarterly  Report of Graphco Holdings Corp. (the
Company) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended  September 30, 2003 filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"),  I, Rodger Wichterman,  Chief
Financial  Officer,  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) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (2) The  information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all
material respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the
dates  presented  and  consolidated  result of operations of the Company for the
period presented.

Dated: November 19, 2003

                                                         /s/ Rodger Wichterman
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         Rodger Wichterman
                                                         Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 23.1








CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





ClearOne Communications, Inc.





We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-148789 and 333-137859 of ClearOne Communications, Inc. on Forms S-8 of our financial statement audit report dated March 30, 2011, appearing in this annual report on Form 10-K of ClearOne Communications, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2010, the six months ended December 31, 2009 and the year ended June 30, 2009.








/s/ Jones Simkins, P.C.


JONES SIMKINS, P.C.


Logan, Utah


March 30, 2011
Darrell BOLDEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. ED 105327

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION THREE.

Filed: March 20, 2018

Kevin B. Gau, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, MO. 63101, for appellant.

Karen L. Kramer, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO. 65102, for respondent.

Before Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., P.J., Robert M. Clayton III, J., Angela T. Quigless, J.

***ORDER***

PER CURIAM.

*716Darrell Bolden ("Movant") appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 post-conviction relief motion following an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, Movant argues the motion court clearly erred in denying his post-conviction relief motion because trial counsel was ineffective for failing to call him to testify at a hearing on his motion to suppress statements. Movant argues he would have testified the confessions were induced by threats and promises. Had the trial court learned of the threats and promises, Movant argues it would have ruled his confessions were involuntary and inadmissible. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, and we find the motion court did not clearly err. An extended opinion would have no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to MO. R. CIV. P. 84.16(b) (2015).
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

ALLISON FAYE HUFFMAN, ) DOC #T97673, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-2471 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed September 27, 2019. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Vivian T. Corvo, Judge. Michael A. Hanson of Hanson Law Office, Tampa, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Elba Caridad Martin, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

CASANUEVA, ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, and SMITH, JJ., Concur.
Exhibit 32.2

      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 NuVim,  Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB  for the  quarterly  period  ended  March  31,  2006 as  filed  with  the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date therein specified (the "Report"),
I, Richard P. Kundrat, Chief Financial Officer 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 to the best of my knowledge:

  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.

Date: May 15, 2006

/s/ Richard P. Kundrat
-----------------------
Richard P. Kundrat
Chief Financial Officer
Donnie Max KEITHLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

WD 81400

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Order filed: September 18, 2018

Donnie Max Keithley, Appellant Pro-se.

Shaun Mackelprang, for Respondent.

Before Division Three: Anthony Rex Gabbert, Presiding Judge, Victor C. Howard, Judge and Alok Ahuja, Judge

***ORDER***

PER CURIAM:

Donnie Keithley appeals the dismissal of his Rule 24.035 motion. He complains on appeal that the trial court plainly erred in applying sentence enhancement factors that elevated his conviction from a misdemeanor to a felony. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
**Exhibit 15.1**

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 

We consent to the incorporation by reference inRegistration Statement Nos. 333-81825 and 333-149634 on Form S-8 and Registration Statement No. 333-168347 on Form F-3 of our reports dated May 21, 2013, relating to the consolidated financial statements of Vodafone Group Plc andsubsidiaries (the “Group”), and the effectiveness of the Group’s internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Vodafone Group Plc for the year ended March 31, 2013. 

/s/ Deloitte LLP 

Deloitte LLP 

London, United Kingdom 

June 7, 2013
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The Honorable James G. Carr, Senior District Judge for the U.S. **

District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, sitting by designation.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SEUM SISAVATH,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA; 

KEN CLARK, Warden,

 Respondents - Appellees.

No. 09-15592

D.C. No. 1:06-cv-01413-VRW

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Vaughn R. Walker, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted December 1, 2011

San Francisco, California

Before: THOMAS and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges, and CARR, Senior District

Judge.** 

Seum Sisavath appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his

petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. We affirm.

FILED

MAR 15 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

Sisavath contends that the state appellate court erred in holding that

statements admitted during his trial in violation of the Confrontation Clause were

harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, under Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18

(1967). We agree with the district court, for the reasons described in greater detail

in that court’s order, that the state court’s decision was not contrary to or an

unreasonable application of clearly established law as determined by the United

States Supreme Court, nor was it based upon an unreasonable determination of the

facts, in view of the other evidence supporting Sisavath’s conviction. Because

Sisavath failed to satisfy the standard set by 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), his petition was

properly denied.

Sisavath moves to expand the certificate of appealability to include two

issues not certified by the district court. We decline to expand the COA to include

these issues because Sisavath has not made a “substantial showing of the denial of

a constitutional right” as to those claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); 9th Cir. R.

22-1(e). Sisavath’s motion, filed on June 7, 2010, is denied.

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 32.2

      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 NuVim, Inc. (the "Company") on  Form
10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date therein specified (the "Report"), I, Richard
P.  Kundrat, Chief  Financial Officer  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 to the best of my knowledge:

 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.

Date: May 15, 2008

/s/ Richard P. Kundrat
Richard P. Kundrat
Chief Financial Officer

                                       36
[Nos. 29504-1-II; 29510-5-II.

Division Two.

May 25, 2004.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Eric Quinn Franklin, *Appellant.*

Appeals from judgments of the Superior Court for Pierce County, Nos. 00-1-00574-3 and 01-1-01166-1, Kitty-Ann van Doorninck, J., entered September 24, 2002. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Houghton, J., concurred in by Morgan, A.C.J., and Seinfeld, J. Pro Tern.