alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CHARLESTON.

#### Bailey Lumber Company *v.*C. O. Dunn

(No. 6801)

Submitted November 12, 1930.

Decided November 25, 1930.

*726
      *Arthur F. Kingdon,*for plaintiff in error.

*Willimns (& Riffe,*for defendant in error.

Lite, Judge:

This is an action against ad attorney for money collected by him belonging to his client.

On September 13, 1926, defendant, C. 0. Dunn, as attorney for plaintiff, Bailey Lumber Company, received of E. H. Crouch Lumber Company the sum of $1047.75 in settlement of a judgment in favor of the plaintiff against M. P. Vipper-man based upon a claim which the plaintiff had theretofore entrusted to the defendant for collection. The defendant refusing, without legal excuse, to remit to the plaintiff any part of said sum, this action was instituted November 23, 1929, for the recovery of the full amount thereof with damages in accordance with section 11, chapter 119, Code 1923, as follows: “If any attorney receive money for his client as such attorney and fail to pay the same on demand, or within six months after receipt thereof, without good and sufficient reason for such failure, it may be recovered from him by suit or motion; and damages in lieu of interest not exceeding fifteen per cent-um per annum until paid, may be awarded against him, and he shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and be fined not less than twenty nor more than five hundred dollars. ’ ’ The court, sitting in lieu of a jury, found that the defendant was entitled to a fee of $368.85 for collecting the claim, and rendered judgment against him in favor.of the plaintiff for the remainder of the principal demand, with interest thereon at 6% from September 13, 1926.

The plaintiff complains of the action of the trial court in allowing the defendant a collection fee as a credit against its demand and in limiting the rate of interest on the remainder to 6%.

The defendant, by his conduct, has disentitled himself to compensation for services rendered in effecting the collection. *727“ Where an attorney collects money for his client, and in bad faith or without legal reason retains the same and refuses to pay it over, whereby the client is forced to resort to legal proceedings against him, involving the employment of another attorney, the collecting attorney loses his right to compensation for the collection of the funds.” 6 C. J., page 723. The statute was plainly intended to strengthen the common law rule by subjecting to its penalty an attorney who, without good and sufficient reason, fails to pay money, received for his client, on demand or within six months after its receipt.

Sufficient reason is not stated or perceived, however, for reviewing the discretionary action of the trial court in fixing the minimum as- the penal rate of interest.

The judgment of the circuit court will be reversed and judgment entered here against the defendant in favor of plain-iff for its principal demand, with interest thereon at the rate of 6% per annum from September 13, 1926.

*Reversed and rendered.*
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 240 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 240

   Condemning recent actions taken by the Russian military to down a 
                     United States Air Force drone.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 21, 2023

  Mr. Williams of New York (for himself and Mr. Costa) submitted the 
 following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Condemning recent actions taken by the Russian military to down a 
                     United States Air Force drone.

Whereas United States European Command released footage confirming that 2 
        Russian Su-27 fighter jets acted unprofessionally and in a reckless 
        manner;
Whereas a United States Air Force drone was acting safely and responsibly in 
        international airspace and in accordance with international law; and
Whereas the 2 fighter jets released fuel and bumped into the drone, resulting in 
        the drone crash-landing in the Black Sea: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) condemns the reckless actions of the Russian military; 
        and
            (2) recognizes that Russian attempts to recover the drone 
        are a threat to the national security of the United States.
                                 <all>
```
December 2, 2011 

MEMORANDUM 

From: William H. Maxwell 

EPA/SPPD/ESG (D243-01) 

To: Docket Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234 

Subject: Meeting with National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA) 

Attendees: 

Kirk Johnson, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association 

Ted Cromwell, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association 

John Novak, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association 

Ellen Kurlansky, EPA/OAR/OAA/OPAR 

Joe Goffman, EPA/OAR/OAA/OPMO 

Joel Beauvais, EPA/OGC/IO 

Kellie Ortega, EPA/OECA/OCE/AED 

Eric Schaeffer, Environmental Integrity Project 

Leah Kelly, Environmental Integrity Project 

Stephen Brick, consultant to Environmental Integrity Project 

Discussion: 

A general discussion was held of the comments submitted by National Rural Electric 

Cooperative Association on the proposed Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), 

specifically about the MATS time compliance time frame.
Exhibit 13.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 19 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 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63
of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Petrobras Argentina S.A. (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:

The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2013 (the Form 20-F) of the Company fully
complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.



|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                        
|-------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Date: April 25, 2014 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Luis Miguel Sas    
|                     |  |  |  |  |  | Luis Miguel Sas        
|                     |  |  |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the
Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDG MENT

No. 04

- 19

- 00412

- CV

Cornelius Roy PRINCE , III, d/b/a Texas Concepts,

Appellant

v.

Dixie BATTOE

, Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 3, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019CV00375

Honorable J

. Frank Davis, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE MARTINEZ

, JUSTICE ALVAREZ , AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the appellant’s motion to dismiss is

GRANTED, and this appeal is DISMISSED. Costs of the appeal are taxed against the party who

incurred them.

SIGNED October 23, 2019.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez , Justice
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Richard A. SENA, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-1229

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 13, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
UNITED STAT ES COURT OF AP P EALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS

N O . 03-1443 C EC I L G AT ES , A PP EL L ANT ,

V . R. J A M ES N I C HOL S ON , S EC RE T A RY O F V ET ER A N S A FF A I RS , A PPEL L EE .
Be fore KASOL D, MOORMAN, a nd SCHOEL EN, Judges

. O R D E R On J uly 25, 2003, Cecil Gate s appea led through co u n s el a July 14, 2003, decision of the Boa rd of Ve tera

ns' Appea ls (Boa

rd) that de termined that there was no clea r and unmistakable er

ror (CUE) in a N ovember

19, 2002, Boa

rd dec ision. I n an unopposed motion to dismiss, t he Secr etar y notes that on J anuar

y 7, 2003, Mr. Gate s filed a motion for reconsider ation as to the Nove mber 2002 Boa rd dec ision, which the Boa rd Chairman ha s y et to act upon, a nd on J anuary

23, 2003, filed a second motion for rec onsideration as to the same B oard de cision, which the B oard Chair man denied on April 2, 2003. The Sec reta ry argues that the November 2002 Boa rd decision was not final when the J uly 2003 Boa

rd re ndere d its decision and that the J uly 2003 Boa rd decision should be vac ated. The Court agree s. A CUE claim cannot lie as to a Boa rd dec ision that is s till open to direct revie w. See M ay v. Nicholson , 19 Vet.App. 310, 320 ( 2005). Moreove r, to the extent that Mr. Gates a rgues that a January 1 0 , 2003, letter to the Court constituted a Notice of Appe al (NO A) of the November 2002 Boa

rd dec ision, the Court notes that it does not have jurisdiction over that decision bec ause of th e o utsta nding motion for r econside ration. Se e Lin v ille v . W

est , 1 6 5 F. 3 d

1 3 8 2 , 1 3 8 6 (F ed

. C i r. 1 9 9 9 ) ( ad o p t i n g Rosler v. De rwinski , 1 Vet.App. 241 (1991)) . Inasmuch a s the outstanding moti on for r econside ration wa s filed within 120 day s of the Novembe r 2002 B oard de cision, in t h e ev en t that the Boa rd Chairman de nies the outstanding mot ion fo r re c on sid e ratio n, Mr . G ate s w ill have 12 0 d ay s a ft e r t hat B oa rd Cha ir ma n' s d e c isi on

to f ile an NOA

. Se e Lin v ille , su pra ; se e als o Lo sh v . B ro wn , 6 Vet.App. 87, 90 ( 1993). Up on c on sid e ratio n o f t

he fo re g oin git i s ORDERED that the Jul y

14, 2003, Boa

rd decision denying the CUE claim is VACATED. I t is further ORDERED that the Secr etar y ' s motion t o dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is gra nted and the appea l of the Nove mber 19, 2002, B oard de cision is DI SMI SSED. DA TE D: De c e mbe r 2 , 2 00 5 PER CU RIAM

.
| 1.     | Such Annual      Report on Form 10-K for the year ended Decmber 31, 2009, 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 such Annual Report on Form 10-K for      the year ended December 31, 2009, fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations      of Indestructible I, Inc. |

|                        |   |                                                                                                                                                    |   |
|-----------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Date:      February 2, 2010 | By:    | /s/      Patrick Day                                                                                                                                    |   |
|                        |   | Patrick      Day                                                                                                                                        |   |
|                        |   | Chairman      of the Board of Directors,Principal      Executive Officer,Principal      Financial Officer, Controller,Principal      Accounting Officer |   |
Scott G. PRATT, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. ED 106128

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.

Filed: November 13, 2018

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: Christian Lehmberg, Woodrail Centre, 1000 W. Nifong, Bldg. 7, Suite 100, Columbia, MO 65203.

ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT: Joshua D. Hawley, Attorney General, Karen L. Kramer, Asst. Attorney General, P. O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0899.

Before Philip M. Hess, P.J. and Robert G. Dowd, Jr. and Mary K. Hoff, JJ.

**ORDER**

PER CURIAM.

Scott Pratt appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. We find no clear error in the motion court's denial of his motion and affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. 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).
Order entered February 24, 2020

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-20-00112-CV

CITY OF FORT WORTH, Appellant

V.

JOEL F. FITZGERALD, SR., PH.D., Appellee

On Appeal from the 191st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-19-08184

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s February 18, 2020 unopposed motion for an extension of 

time to file its brief on the merits. We GRANT the motion and extend the time to March 16, 

2020.

/s/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.

Exhibits 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 Annual Report on Form 20-F of Dove Energy Inc., a company organized under the laws of under the laws of Ontario, Canada (the “**Company**”), for the period ending December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the        “**Annual Report**”), each of the undersigned officers 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, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

| 1. |   | the Annual Reportfully complies, in all material respects, with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|----|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. |   | the information contained in the Annual Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in the Annual Report. |
|----|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|                           |
|--------------------------------|
| By:                            |   | /S/    Victor DeLaet |   |   |   |   |   |   |
|                           |   | Victor DeLaet

Interim Chief Executive Officer |   |   |   |   |   |   |
|                           |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Date:  June 29, 2009 |   |   |   |   |
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 Annual Report of Adventure Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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 result of operations of the Company.





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





This certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.





May 19, 2010
By:
/s/ Wayne AndersonPresident and Acting Chief Financial Officer(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
**EXHIBIT: 8**

Invitel Holdings A/S Subsidiaries 

Austria 

Invitel International AG

AT-Invitel GmbH 

Bulgaria 

Invitel International Bulgaria EOOD 

Czech Republic 

Invitel Internationals.r.o. 

Hungary 

InvitelHungary Holdings Kft. 

Invitel International Hungary Kft. 

Invitel Távközlési Zrt. 

Invitel Technocom Kft. 

Italy

Invitel International Italia S.R.L. 

The Netherlands 

HTCC Holdco I B.V.

HTCC Holdco II B.V. 

InvitelInternational Holdings B.V. 

Magyar Telecom B.V. 

The Netherlands Antilles 

Matel HoldingsN.V. 

Romania 

EurowebRomania S.A. 

Serbia 

InvitelTelecom d.o.o. Beograd 

Slovakia 

Invitel International SK, s.r.o. 

Slovenia 

Invitel Telekommunikacije d.o.o. 

Turkey

MTCTR Memorex Telekomunikasyon Sanayyi ve Ticaret Limited Sirketi 

Ukraine 

Memorex Telex Communications UALtd.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX

Christy Windel Anderson Public Library 3200 W Center Street Anderson, California 96007 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105

November 7, 2013

Subject: Requestto retain public documents atthe Anderson Public Library for public inspection DearMs. Windel: The purpose ofthis letter is to request that the Anderson Public retain the enclosed documents at the library for at least sixty (60) days for public inspection. These documents are the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's preliminary decision for the proposed Clean Air Act Prevention ofSignificant Deteriorationpermit for the expansion ofthe SierraPacific Industries facility located in Anderson, California. These documents are currently available for public comment. Please contact me at (415) 947-4156 orkelly.shaheerah@epa.gov ifyou have any questions.

Enclosures 

# 7/i&

Shaheerah Kelly, Environmental Engineer AirDivision, Permits Office
SCWC-15-0000325

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAII

JIJUN YIN, Petitioner/Plaintiff-Appellant,

vs.

P.I. AGUIAR, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF 

VIRGINIO C. AGUIAR, JR., DECEASED, KEVIN AGUIAR and AGEE, INC., 

Respondents/Defendants-Appellees.

 

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(CAAP-15-0000325; CIV. NO. 11-1-0331)

ORDER ACCEPTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)

Petitioner/Plaintiff-Appellant Jijun Yin’s Application 

for a Writ of Certiorari, filed on May 29, 2019, is hereby 

accepted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no oral argument will be 

held 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, July 10, 2019.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Richard W. Pollack

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-15-0000325

10-JUL-2019

02:30 PM
EXHIBIT 32.2

Certification by Chief Financial Officer of Quarterly Report

I, Steven Spooner, Chief
Financial Officer of Mitel Networks Corporation (Mitel), 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Mitel, for the fiscal quarter ended January 31, 2011 filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Mitel.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: March 2, 2011



/s/ Steve SpoonerName:

Steve SpoonerTitle:

Chief Financial Officer
---

Exhibit 32

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



CERTIFICATIONS

The undersigned, Mark Sampson, President and Chief Executive Officer of Nexaira Wireless, Inc. (the Company), and Ralph Proceviat, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:

1. The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended August 31, 2009 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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended August 31,  2009 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and the results of operations of the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the undersigned have set their hands hereto as of the 18thth day of November, 2009.



/s/    MARK SAMPSONMark SampsonPresident and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)/S/    RALPH PROCEVIATRalph ProceviatChief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)






---
Reese P. BERT, Doc #Y55096, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-5137

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed August 18, 2017.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.