alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 19-2451

___________________________

National Green Gas, L.L.C., a Minnesota limited liability company

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Estrategy, Inc., a corporation; Brian L. Sexton, individual

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellants

Jamila Aldasheva, individual; Contracting Officer Department of Veterans Affairs

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City

 ____________

 Submitted: October 7, 2020

Filed: October 9, 2020

[Unpublished]

____________

Before COLLOTON, BENTON, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.
Brian Sexton and eStrategy, Inc. appeal following the district court’s1

 adverse

judgment in a diversity action brought by National Green Gas, L.L.C. (NGG). 

Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we find

no basis for reversal. See Moore v. Martin, 854 F.3d 1021, 1025 (8th Cir. 2017)

(denial of motion for summary judgment is reviewed de novo); United States v.

STABL, Inc., 800 F.3d 476, 487 (8th Cir. 2015) (denial of continuance is reviewed

de novo); Am. Bank of St. Paul v. TD Bank, N.A., 713 F.3d 455, 467 (8th Cir. 2013)

(evidentiary rulings are reviewed for abuse of discretion); Knutson v. Ag Processing,

Inc., 394 F.3d 1047, 1050 (8th Cir. 2005) (appellate court upholds jury verdict unless

it concludes that reasonable jury could not have found for that party); Mathenia v.

Delo, 99 F.3d 1476, 1480 (8th Cir. 1996) (denial of Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion is

reviewed for abuse of discretion). We grant NGG’s motion to seal a portion of the

appellate record, and eStrategy’s motion to take judicial notice of the district court’s

ruling on Sexton’s post-trial motion; and we deny NGG’s motion to strike Sexton’s

March 30 letter. 

The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 

______________________________

1The Honorable Brian C. Wimes, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri.

-2-
EXHIBIT 99
----------




                       SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION
                       -------------------------



     The following statement is provided by the undersigned to accompany
the foregoing Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed pursuant to any provision
of the Exchange Act of 1934 or any other securities law:

     Each of the undersigned certifies that the foregoing Report on
Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m) and that the information
contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of JMB/245 PARK AVENUE
ASSOCIATES, LTD.



By: JMB PARK AVENUE, INC.         By: JMB PARK AVENUE, INC.
    Corporate General Partner         Corporate General Partner



    By: /s/  Patrick J. Meara         By: /s/  Gailen J. Hull
        ----------------------            ----------------------------
        Patrick J. Meara                  Gailen J. Hull
        Principal Executive Officer       Chief Financial Officer and
                                          Principal Accounting Officer
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 32.2




In connection with the Quarterly Report of Daleco Resources Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on May 17, 2004 and as amended May 28, 2004
(the "Report"), I, Dov Amir, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (3)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
                  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


                                                   /s/ Dov Amir
                                          ----------------------------------
                                          Dov Amir
                                          Chief Executive Officer
                                          November 22, 2004
**
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

I, Terrence W. Olson, certify that: 

1. I havereviewed this Amendment to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019 of First Eagle Alternative Capital BDC, Inc. (the “Registrant”); 

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

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

Date: December 1, 2020 

 
By: 
/s/ TERRENCE W. OLSON
 Terrence W. Olson Chief Financial Officer**
# C_2005216EN.01S00301.xml

| 3.9.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 216/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.9.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 216/s3

---

NOTICE TO READERS — COM DOCUMENTS

NOTICE TO READERS — COM DOCUMENTS

Henceforth and from OJ C 211 of 30 August 2005, when titles of preparatory acts adopted by the Commission and COM Document other than preparatory acts are to be published in the Official Journal, the on-line version of the Official Journal accessible on EUR-Lex will contain the text in full.

Lex

A click on the document number (left-hand column ‘Documents’) will open the page of EUR-Lex containing the archive information you require concerning the COM Document you want.

Lex

---
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A17A1915. THOMAS ROY HOLBIRD, JR. et al. v. JERRY HAMEL et al.

Jerry Hamel, Hugh Burch and Floyd Brown (collectively, “Hamel”) obtained

a judgment against Thomas R. Holbird, Jr. individually and as executor of the estate

of Thomas R. Holbird, Sr. (“Holbird”), which required Holbird to execute a quitclaim

deed pertaining to property located in the Bahamas.

1 When Holbird failed to do so, 

Hamel filed a petition for contempt and attorney fees.

2 The trial court appointed a

special master to addressthe form of quitclaim deed necessary in the Bahamas. Upon

obtaining the specialmaster’sreport, the trial court entered an order requiring Holbird

to execute a quitclaim deed in the form identified. Holbird seeks to appeal thisruling.

It appears, however, that the case is not yet final.

As a general rule, a right of direct appeal lies from a final judgment; that is,

where the case is no longer pending below. See OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (1). Here, the trial

court’s order did not resolve Hamel’s contempt petition. Under these circumstances,

it appears the action remains pending in the superior court.

3 Because the order was

1 Holbird appealed, and the judgment was affirmed in an unpublished opinion

issued under Court of AppealsRule 36. See Case Number A12A2074, decided March

11, 2013.

2 Brown apparently passed away. Thus, the contempt action was brought by

Hamel and Burch. 

3 The trial court also did not rule on Hamel’s request for attorney fees. Based

upon the language Hamel employed in his complaint, it appears as though he was

seeking assessed attorney fees under OCGA § 9-15-14. If attorney fees are sought

July 11, 2017
not final, Holbird was required to comply with the interlocutory appeal procedures

of OCGA § 5-6-34 (b) in order to obtain appellate review. This appeal is therefore

DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

under OCGA § 9-15-14, a trial court’s reservation of the attorney fee issue does not

render the order non-final. See Hill v. Buttram, 255 Ga. App. 123, 124 (564 SE2d

531) (2002) (reservation of OCGA § 9-15-14 attorney fee issue does not extend time

for filing notice of appeal).

07/11/2017
----

| Date:  | August                9, 2007 |   |                                                    |
|--------|-------------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                          | By:    | /s/                David L. Johnson                     |
|   |                          |   | David                L. Johnson                         |
|   |                          |   | Chairman                of the Board,                   |
|   |                          |   | President                and Chief Executive Officer of |
|   |                          |   | Maxus                Realty Trust, Inc.                 |
----

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 28 June 2005

in Case T-301/03 Canali Ireland Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (1)

(Community trade mark - Figurative mark CANAL JEAN CO. NEW YORK - Opposition by the proprietor of the national word mark CANALI - Likelihood of confusion)

(2005/C 217/81)

Language of the case: English

In Case T-301/03: Canali Ireland Ltd, established in Dublin (Ireland), represented by C. Gielen and O. Schmutzer, lawyers, against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Agents: A. Apostolidis and S. Laitinen), the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the Court of First Instance, being Canal Jean Co. Inc., established in New York (United States), represented by M. Cover, Solicitor — action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 June 2003 (Case R 103/2002-2) relating to Opposition Proceedings No 78859 between Canali SpA and Canal Jean Co. Inc. — the Court of First Instance (First Chamber), composed of J. D. Cooke, President, I. Labucka and V. Trstenjak, Judges; B. Pastor, Assistant Registrar, gave a judgment on 28 June 2005, in which it:

----

(1)OJ C 275 of 15.11.2003

----
Jacqueline DENNIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1378

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed September 6, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit 31.1

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, A. Leon Blaser, hereby certify that:

(1) I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended June 30, 2007 (the “report”) of Environmental Energy Services, Inc.;

(2) Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

(3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

(4) The small business issuer's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) [omitted]

(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

(5) The small business issuer's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.
From: Szabo, Aaron To: Fisher, Brian ; Risley, David Cc: Stenhouse, Jeb Subject: Summary of Interagency Comments under EO12866 and 13563: Technical Support Document for the Interstate Transport Rule for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS (RIN 2060-AS05) Date: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 2:18:15 PM Attachments: Summary of Interagency Comments Under EO12866_13563 EPA CSAPR Update NPR....docx
Attached please find the summary of interagency comments under EO 12866 and 13563 on the technical support document (TSD) entitled, Preparation of Emissions Inventories for the Version 6.2 2011 Emissions Modeling Platform for the draft proposed rule entitled, Interstate Transport Rule for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS

. Thank you and please let me know if you have any comments or questions.

Aaron L. Szabo Policy Analyst Office of Management and Budget 202-395-3621 Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov
Exhibit 13.1








CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER REQUIRED BY 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





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 Dragon Jade International Limited (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2016 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Lai Yat Man, Chief Executive 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 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.





July 25, 2016/s/ Lai Yat ManName:
Lai Yat ManTitle:
Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 55 (Tuesday, March 24, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 12433]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-6390]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i>11677 and <greek-i>11678]


Oregon Disaster Number OR-00029

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 1.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Oregon 
(FEMA-1824-DR), dated 03/02/2009.
    Incident: Severe winter storm, record and near record snow, 
landslides, and mudslides.
    Incident Period: 12/20/2008 through 12/26/2008.
    Effective Date: 03/13/2009.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 05/01/2009.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 12/02/2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to:
    U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement 
Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster 
declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of 
Oregon, dated 03/02/2009, is hereby amended to include the following 
areas as adversely affected by the disaster.
    Primary Counties: Washington.
    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

Herbert L. Mitchell,
Associate Administrator, for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-6390 Filed 3-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>           5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR NOONEY REALTY TRUST, INC.
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         819,115
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  248,327
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,120,339
<PP&E>                                      20,328,757
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,989,717
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,906,902
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          649,036
<BONDS>                                      4,668,771
<COMMON>                                       866,624
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,551,310
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,906,902
<SALES>                                      2,394,905
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,411,638
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,311,426
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             296,680
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (186,468)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (186,468)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.22)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.22)
        

</TABLE>
STATE of Louisiana v. Curtis CHELEY

17-696 consolidated with 17-538

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

January 4, 2018

Paula C. Marx, Louisiana Appellate Project, P. O. Box 80006, Lafayette, LA 70598-0006, (337) 991-9757, COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT: Curtis Cheley

Hon. Asa Allen Skinner, Thirtieth Judicial District Attorney, Terry W. Lambright, First Assistant District Attorney, P. O. Box 1188, Leesville, LA 71446-1188, (337) 239-2008, COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE: State of Louisiana

Court composed of Marc T. Amy, Shannon J. Gremillion, and Phyllis M. Keaty, Judges.

GREMILLION, Judge.

*585For the reasons expressed in *State v. Cheley* , 17-538 (La.App. 3 Cir. __/__/__), 237 So.3d 58, Defendant's conviction is affirmed, his sentence is vacated, and the matter remanded to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing on whether Defendant's prior guilty plea for possession of cocaine was informed and voluntary, and for resentencing.

**CONVICTION AFFIRMED, SENTENCE VACATED, AND REMANDED.**
Jean C. NOEL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D16-4247

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[February 21, 2018]

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Tatjana Ostapoff, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Melynda L. Melear, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Gross, J.

The Supreme Court held that Jean Claude Noel was "entitled to a resentencing." *Noel v. State* , 191 So.3d 370, 380 (Fla. 2016). On remand to this court, we sent the case to the circuit court for resentencing. *Noel v. State* , 192 So.3d 90, 91 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016).

Back in the circuit court, a public defender was appointed to represent Noel. The newly appointed counsel noticed a status hearing for November 2, 2016, before the circuit court.

At the status hearing, Noel was resentenced by the court. Defense counsel adequately preserved an objection to sentencing at a status conference not noticed as a sentencing hearing.

A defendant has "the right to notice of the sentencing hearing and notice that any new sentence is appealable." *Stang v. State* , 24 So.3d 566, 570 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) ; *see also* *Frison v. State* , 76 So.3d 1103, 1104 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011). "A defendant must receive notice *before* the sentencing hearing, so that defense counsel can prepare any challenges to the evidence the state plans to offer in support." *Brown v. State* , 189 So.3d 837, 840 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015). An essential part of due process is that "any relief granted at a hearing be within the kind of relief sought by the notice given for hearing." *Khan v. Dep't of Revenue* , 901 So.2d 992, 993 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005).

The November 2, 2016 hearing was noticed as a status check, not a sentencing.

We reverse the sentence and remand to the circuit court for *de novo* resentencing at a noticed sentencing hearing. *See* *State v. Fleming* , 61 So.3d 399, 406 (Fla. 2011).

*Reversed and remanded* .

Forst and Kuntz, JJ., concur.