alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
STATE EX REL. Irving MORRIS v. STATE of Louisiana

No. 17-KH-0764

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

September 21, 2018

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE TWENTY-SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF WASHINGTON**

PER CURIAM:

Denied. Relator does not identify an illegal term in his sentences, and therefore, his filing is properly construed as an application for post-conviction relief. *See* *State v. Parker* , 98-0256 (La. 5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694. As such, it is subject to the time limitation set forth in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Relator's application was not timely filed in the district court, and he fails to carry his burden to show that an exception applies. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8 ; *State ex rel. Glover v. State* , 93-2330 (La. 9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.

Relator has now fully litigated his application for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see* 28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Relator's claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, relator has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.
EXHIBIT 32.1

Richard J. DeVries, President and
Chief Executive Officer of Pavilion Bancorp, Inc. and Mark D. Wolfe, Chief Financial
Officer of Pavilion Bancorp, Inc., 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 for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2007
          which this statement accompanies 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 on Form 10-Q for the quarterly
          period ended June 30, 2007 fairly presents, in all material respects, the
          financial condition and results of operations of Pavilion Bancorp, Inc..
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: August 13, 2007

| |  | /s/ Richard J. DeVries
Richard J. DeVriesPresident and Chief Executive Officer
| |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |  | /s/ Mark D. Wolfe
Mark D. WolfeSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
| |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY, Appellant, v. Nikolas Jacob CRUZ, Appellee.

No. 4D18-1421

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[September 27, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Robert CEASAR v. Darryl VANNOY, Warden Louisiana State Penitentiary

NO. 2018-KH-0574

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

September 21, 2018

Denied.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Chesapeake Bay Impact Crater

Filters

              - multimedia_video(1)
              - multimedia_video-149194(1)

## By Location

              - california(1)
              - (-)district of columbia(1)
              - maryland(3)
              - new jersey(1)
              - virginia(15)

## By Year

Presentations and Events        March 22, 2007        PubTalk 3/2007 — Impact!
##### 



Exhibit 11
 Certification Required by Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code
 Company" Report"
 1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 2.
    
    The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the periods
presented in the Report.
  /s/ Phil E. MulacekPhil E. MulacekChief Executive Officer  10
Exhibit
32.1








REGENOCELL
THERAPEUTICS, INC.


CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF THE
SARBANNES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the amended annual
report of RegenoCELL Therapeutics, Inc.  (the “Company”) on Form 10 K
for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the “Report”), I, James F. Mongiardo,
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to Section 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.








/s/      
James F.
Mongiardo


James F.
Mongiardo


Chief
Executive Officer


and


Chief
Financial Officer


August
27, 2009
Jerome WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-1895

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[August 23, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

*Affirmed.*
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

 

I, Carole R. Wright, Chief Financial Officer of UTEK Corporation, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of UTEK Corporation; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact 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 includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

 

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

 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, 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) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand 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 

 

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, 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 financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’sBoard of Directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and 

 

(b) Any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Dated this 8th day of August, 2005.
Paul NEWMAN, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-2799, 2D18-1719

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

August 23, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.

Granted.
Nicholas St. Claire THOMPSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-4063

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed June 22, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Laurence SCHNEIDER, Appellant, v. FIRST AMERICAN BANK, as successor by merger to Bank of Coral Gables, LLC, Unknown Tenant #1, Unknown Tenant #2 and The Oaks at Boca Raton Property Owner's Association, Inc., Appellees.

No. 4D17-2239

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[July 25, 2018]

Ryan D. Gesten of The Law Offices of Ryan D. Gesten, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Henry H. Bolz, III and Sheyla Mesa of Keller & Bolz, LLP, Coral Gables, for Appellee First American Bank.

Taylor, J.

Laurence Schneider appeals a final judgment of foreclosure and a separate amended final judgment awarding damages to First American Bank (the "Bank") for breach of a credit agreement. We reverse to the extent that the judgments improperly allowed the Bank to simultaneously execute on the money judgment and foreclose on appellant's property.1 On all other issues, we affirm.

It is well-settled that "to collect money owed on a note, a mortgagee may pursue its legal and equitable remedies simultaneously, until the debt is satisfied." *Royal Palm Corp. Ctr. Ass'n v. PNC Bank, NA* , 89 So.3d 923, 929 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). "[T]he reason that an action at law on a note may be pursued simultaneously with the equitable remedy of foreclosure is that the two remedies are not inconsistent." *Id.* at 932. Accordingly, a trial court may enter a final judgment of foreclosure that allows for immediate execution of the damages award, so long as the trial court withholds the setting of the foreclosure sale of the property until the plaintiff certifies that its money judgment has not been satisfied. *Id.* at 926, 928, 933.

A trial court may not, however, simultaneously allow a foreclosure plaintiff to execute on the money judgment and foreclose on the subject property. *Id.* at 933 ; *see also**Farah v. Iberia Bank* , 47 So.3d 850, 851 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (striking "for which let execution issue" language from final judgment of foreclosure).

Here, we find that the trial court erred in entering two judgments-a money judgment and a foreclosure judgment-that together allowed the Bank to simultaneously execute on the money judgment and foreclose on appellant's property. To remedy this error, we reverse only the foreclosure judgment. On remand, the trial court shall modify the foreclosure judgment *266so as to withhold the setting of the foreclosure sale of the property until the Bank certifies that its money judgment remains unsatisfied. *See**Royal Palm* , 89 So.3d at 928. This procedure assures that, while the Bank was free to pursue both remedies, it will not obtain a recovery that exceeds the amount of the debt. *Id.* at 933. Moreover, once the Bank "has obtained a foreclosure sale of the property, it cannot collect on the note other than to pursue the appropriate deficiency amount." *Bonita Real Estate Partners, LLC v. SLF IV Lending, L.P.* , 222 So.3d 647, 652 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017).

*Affirmed in part, Reversed in part, and Remanded.*

Warner and Levine, JJ., concur.

1

A foreclosure sale on the property has not yet been held, however, as the trial court granted a stay pending appeal.
STATE EX REL. Eugene JARROW v. STATE of Louisiana

No. 2017-KH-1193

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

October 15, 2018

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ORLEANS**

PER CURIAM:

*687Denied. Relator does not identify an illegal term in his sentence, and therefore, his filing is properly construed as an application for post-conviction relief. *See* *State v. Parker* , 98-0256 (La. 5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694. As such, it is subject to the time limitation set forth in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Relator's application was not timely filed in the district court, and he fails to carry his burden to show that an exception applies. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8 ; *State ex rel. Glover v. State* , 93-2330 (La. 9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189. In addition, relator's sentencing claim is not cognizable on collateral review. *See* La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.3 ; *State ex rel. Melinie v. State* , 93-1380 (La. 1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172 ; *see also* *State v. Cotton* , 09-2397 (La. 10/15/10), 45 So.3d 1030. Finally, the application is also repetitive. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4.

Relator has now fully litigated several applications for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see* 28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a second or successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the Legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Relator's claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, relator has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Atmospheres

Filters

              - science_faqs(4)
              - science_science(189)
              - products_data(130)
              - products_maps(16)
              - products_publications(2007)
              - products_software(7)
              - products_web_tools(8)
              - multimedia_audio(82)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(78)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(4)
              - multimedia_before_after(5)
              - multimedia_image(196)
              - multimedia_image-141769(1)
              - (-)multimedia_image-141770(4)
              - multimedia_image-141771(145)
              - multimedia_image-141772(4)
              - multimedia_image-141774(2)
              - multimedia_image-141775(22)
              - multimedia_image-141776(16)
              - multimedia_image-204460(2)
              - (-)multimedia_slideshow(2)
              - multimedia_video(229)
              - multimedia_video-149194(87)
              - multimedia_video-149195(54)
              - multimedia_video-149196(16)
              - multimedia_video-149197(15)
              - multimedia_video-149198(13)
              - multimedia_video-149225(2)
              - documents_file(10)
              - documents_file-149204(1)
              - documents_file-149213(1)
              - documents_file-149214(4)
              - documents_file-149218(1)
              - documents_file-149220(1)
              - documents_file-149222(1)
              - news_news-149245(2)
              - news_news-149246(2)
              - news_news-149248(5)
              - news_news-149249(2)
              - news_news-149250(7)
              - news_newsletters(2)
              - news_other_news(36)
              - connect_staff_profiles(23)
              - other_basic-37(3)
              - other_basic-42(16)

## By Location

              - colorado(1)
              - florida(1)
              - idaho(1)
              - wyoming(1)

## By Year

Animated GIF        May 1, 2022        Idealized animation of tsunamis in the Kingdom of Tonga looking north-northeast

Animated GIF        May 1, 2022        Idealized animation of tsunamis in the Kingdom of Tonga

slideshow        December 22, 2022        Desert, aquatic, prairie, forest, riparian, tundra, and sagebrush plants

slideshow        September 23, 2021        Rocky Mountain Regional Snowpack Chemistry Photo Gallery

Animated GIF        October 16, 2020        Wave animation

Animated GIF        February 24, 2023        Drainage Density
Exhibit 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 10-KSB of Pacific  InterMedia,
Inc. (the  "Company"),  for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2002, as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Tina M. Bogani,  the Chief  Executive,  Financial and Accounting  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 the Report fairly presents,  in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
     Company.



Date:  November 27, 2002                  /s/ Tina M. Bogani
                                          --------------------------------------
                                          Chief Executive Officer and Chief
                                          Financial and Accounting Officer and
                                          Director
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2020303EN.01002801.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 14.9.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 303/28 |

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9933 – Apollo Capital Management/Chyronhego)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 303/07)

1.

On 4 September 2020, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(1)](#ntr1-C_2020303EN.01002801-E0001).

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Apollo Capital Management L.P. (‘Apollo’, USA), |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Chyronhego (‘Chyronhego’, USA). |

Apollo acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Chyronhego.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of assets and shares.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | for Apollo: private equity investment fund, |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | for Chyronhego: development, production and sale of software, hardware, and services providing graphics creation and management for live television, news, and sports production. |

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(2)](#ntr2-C_2020303EN.01002801-E0002) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.9933 – Apollo Capital Management/Chyronhego

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

| |
| --- |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

---

[(1)](#ntc1-C_2020303EN.01002801-E0001)  [OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2004_024_R_TOC) (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

[(2)](#ntc2-C_2020303EN.01002801-E0002)  [OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOC_2013_366_R_TOC).

---
EXHIBIT 32

                            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 OneCap,  on Form 10-QSB for the
period  ended  December  31,  2003,  as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Vincent W. Hesser, Chief Executive
Officer, and Tammy Hardcastle,  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 the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and result of  operations of the
Company.

                                        /s/ Vincent W. Hesser
                                     _____________________________________
                                     Vincent W. Hesser
                                     Chief Executive Officer
                                     OneCap


                                        /s/ Tammy Hardcastle
                                     ____________________________________
                                     Tammy Hardcastle
                                     Chief Financial Officer



Dated: February 13, 2004
Ronald H. BELL, et al, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. NAPLES ESTATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-3622

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

October 26, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Appeal is dismissed.