alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Rapier Family 

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 4, 2015

No. 04-15-00105-CV

Mava HURD and Leonard Izzo,

Appellants

v.

RAPIER FAMILY FOUNDATION,

Appellee

From the 73rd Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014-CI-14969

Honorable Antonia Arteaga, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Appellants’ third motion for extension of time to file their brief is GRANTED. 

Appellants’ brief is due on July 15, 2015.

_________________________________

Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 4th day of June, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



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 MHI Hospitality Corporation (the Corporation) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2005 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Andrew M. Sims, Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation, 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 result of operations of the Corporation.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |        |  |                                      
|--------------------- |  | ------ |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: August 11, 2005 |  |        |  |                                      
|                      |  |       
|                      |  | By:    |  | /s/ Andrew M. Sims                   
|                      |  | Name:  |  | Andrew M. Sims                       
|                      |  | Title: |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed November 4, 2020.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D20-1483

Lower Tribunal No. 90-28455

________________

Richard Paul Knight,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida,

Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the 

Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, William Altfield, Judge.

Richard Paul Knight, in proper person.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before FERNANDEZ, LOGUE and LOBREE, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Motion Denied ; Order filed October 12 , 2020

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 20

- 00682

- CV

____________ MARIO TORRES AND ANA PATRICIA TORRES, INDIVIDUALLY AND

A/N/F OF N.T., A MINOR , Appellant s

V.

TEXAS CHILDREN ’ S HOSPITAL AND DR. JOHN DOE AND DR. JANE DOE , Appellee s

On Appeal from the 234th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2020

- 61396



### ORDER

A ppellan ts have filed a third emergency motion for relief under Rule 29.3 of the Texas Rules of Appella t e Proc edure

. On the morning of October 9, 2020, this
court issued its opinion and judg ment disposing of this interlocutory appeal and provid ing for this court ’ s order of October 5, 2020, granting emergency relief
, to remain in full force and effect until 5 :00 p. m. o n October 12, 2020

. The samemorning a ppellants filed a second emergency motion
, seeking further relief in this

court

. W e deemed that motion moot in this court in light of our disposition of the
interlocuto ry appeal and stated that a ny fu r ther re lief s hould be pursued in the Supreme Court of Texas. In th eir third emergency motion
, appellants seek a further

exten sion of this court ’ s October 5, 2020 order

. We deny appellant s ’ thir d emergency motion. Th is court ’ s order of October 5, 2020 , granting em ergenc y relief, rem ains in full force and effect until 5:00 p.m. on October 12 , 2020.

PER CURIAM

Panel c onsists of Chief Justi ce Frost and Justices Wise and Bourl iot.
Hon.,Parker Ellze~ CbuntyAttorney - Jim'Wells County Alice, Texas September 10, 1951

OninionNo. V-1274
Re: Authority of the oommissioners' court to finance the construotion of a water works towerwithin the limits of an unincorporated town. Dear Sir:
Your request for an opinion relates to the authority of the Commissioners' Court of Jim Wells County to finance the construction of awater works towerwithin the limits of an unincorporated-~town, for the use of peoplewithin its vicinity. We have been unable to find any statute authorizinga county commissioners' aourt to finance the construction of awater works.tower for the purpose of supplying water to private consumers. Article 2352, V.C.S., refers only towater works for *countypurposes."

The decisions of the Texas courts have repeatedly held that the oommissipners'court is a court of limited jurisdictionand has only such powers as are conferred upon it, eitherby eppress terms or by necessarf implication,by the statutes and.Constitution of this State. Childress County v. State, 127 Tex. 343, 92 S.W. 2d"lOll (1936) Von Rosenberg v. Lovett 173 S.W. 508 (Tex.Civ. App. 1915, error ref.); Roper; Hall, 280 S.W. 289 (Tex.Civ. Abp. 1925);Art. 2351, V.C.S.; 11 Tex. Jur. 632, Counties, Sec. 95.

Therefore,we agreewith you that in the absence of specific statutory power, the Commissioners' Court of Jim Wells Count is not authorized to construct a water works towerwithin an unincorporated tow for the purposes of supplyingwater to its residents. SUMMARY

Since there is no specific statutory authority for such action, theCommissioners1 Court of Jim Wells County has no pqwer to construct a water works towerwithin an un-Hon. Parker Ellzey, page 2 (V-1274)

incorporated town for the purpose of supplyingwater to its residents.

APPROVED: J. C. Davis, Jr. CountyAffairs Divisiod
Jesse P. Luton, Jr. ReviewingAssistant Yours very truly, PRICE DANIEL Attorney General

Everett Hutchinson Executive Assistant BW:gs:awo

.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

June 26, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice

130726 Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. CHERYL KELLER, Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices

v SC: 130726 COA: 265963 Wayne CC: 05-513167-NH DR. MICHAEL BRACKNEY, and BRACKNEY CHIROPRACTIC, Defendants-Appellants.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, th e application for leave to a ppeal the February 15, 2006 order of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

l0619 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 26, 2006

Clerk
I 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 248 

To require Amtrak to install baby changing tables in bathrooms on passenger 

rail cars. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 9, 2025 

Ms. UNDERWOOD (for herself and Mr. VAN DREW) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To require Amtrak to install baby changing tables in 

bathrooms on passenger rail cars. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Baby Changing on 

5 Board Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. INSTALLATION OF BABY CHANGING TABLES ON AM7 TRAK TRAINS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 243 of title 49, United 

9 States Code, is amended by inserting after section 24313 

10 the following: 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 248 IH

1 ‘‘§ 24314. Baby changing tables 

2 ‘‘(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

3 ‘‘(1) ADA-COMPLIANT RESTROOM.—The term 

4 ‘ADA-compliant restroom’ means a restroom that 

5 complies with the requirements set forth in section 

6 242(a) of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 

7 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12162(a)). 

8 ‘‘(2) BABY CHANGING TABLE.—The term ‘baby 

9 changing table’ means an elevated, freestanding 

10 structure generally designed to support and retain a 

11 child with a body weight of up to 30 pounds in a 

12 horizontal position for the purpose of allowing an in13 dividual to change the child’s diaper, including pull14 out or drop-down changing surfaces. 

15 ‘‘(3) COVERED PASSENGER RAIL TRAIN.—The 

16 term ‘covered passenger rail train’— 

17 ‘‘(A) means a passenger rail train that— 

18 ‘‘(i) is owned and operated by the Na19 tional Railroad Passenger Corporation 

20 (commonly known as ‘Amtrak’); and 

21 ‘‘(ii) was solicited for purchase after 

22 the date of the enactment of the Baby 

23 Changing on Board Act for use by Am24 trak; and 

25 ‘‘(B) does not include any passenger rail 

26 train that Amtrak operates, but does not own. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 248 IH

1 ‘‘(b) BABY CHANGING TABLES.— 

2 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—All covered passenger rail 

3 trains shall have a baby changing table in at least 

4 one restroom in each car, including in an ADA-com5 pliant restroom. 

6 ‘‘(2) SIGNAGE.—Each restroom described in 

7 paragraph (1) shall clearly indicate with signage the 

8 presence of a baby changing table and such baby 

9 changing tables shall be clearly identified with sign10 age.’’. 

11 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The chapter analysis 

12 for chapter 243 of title 49, United States Code, is amend13 ed by inserting after the item relating to section 24313 

14 the following: 

‘‘24314. Baby changing tables.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
# C_2017221EN.01000501.xml

| 10.7.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 221/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.7.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 221/5

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Constanța (Romania) lodged on 29 March 2017 — Întreprinderea Individuală Dobre M. Marius v Ministerul Finanțelor Publice — Agenția Națională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice Galați — Serviciul Soluționare Contestații, Agenția Națională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice Galați — Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice Constanța — Serviciul Inspecție Fiscală Persoane Fizice

(Case C-159/17)

(2017/C 221/06)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Constanța

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Întreprinderea Individuală Dobre M. Marius

Appellant:

Respondents: Ministerul Finanțelor Publice — Agenția Națională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice Galați — Serviciul Soluționare Contestații, Agenția Națională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice Galați — Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice Constanța — Serviciul Inspecție Fiscală Persoane Fizice

Respondents:

Question referred

Question referred

Must Articles 167, 168, 169, 179, 213(1), 214(1)(a) and 273 of Directive 2006/112/EC (1) be interpreted as precluding national legislation which, in circumstances such as those of the main proceedings, requires a taxpayer, whose registration for VAT purposes has been revoked, to pay to the State the VAT collected during the period in which the VAT identification code was revoked, without, however, recognising his right to deduct the VAT relating to purchases made during that period?

1

---

(1)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).

1

---
Exhibit 32.01

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 KMG America Corporation Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the quarter ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned hereby certifies,
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 KMG America Corporation.

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

|                        |  |                                               
|----------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------
|Date:
 November 8, 2007 |  | /s/ Kenneth
 U. Kuk                           
|                        |  |                                               
|                        |  | Kenneth U.
 Kuk                               
|                        |  | Chairman,
 President & Chief Executive Officer
|                        |  | (Principal
 Executive Officer)                

54

---
Earnest HIGHTOWER v. Shelia HIGHTOWER

2160324

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

October 30, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 11 (Friday, January 17, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 6010]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-01059]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES

Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules; Hearing of the Judicial 
Conference

AGENCY: Judicial Conference of the United States.

ACTION: Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules; notice of cancellation of 
open hearing.

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

SUMMARY: The following public hearing on proposed amendments to the 
Federal Rules of Evidence has been canceled: Evidence Rules Hearing on 
February 12, 2025.

DATES: February 12, 2025.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: H. Thomas Byron III, Esq., Chief 
Counsel, Rules Committee Staff, Administrative Office of the U.S. 
Courts, Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building, One Columbus 
Circle NE, Suite 7-300, Washington, DC 20544, Phone (202) 502-1820, 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    The announcement for this hearing was previously published in the 
Federal Register on July 31, 2024 at 89 FR 61498.

(Authority: 28 U.S.C. 2073.)

    Dated: January 13, 2025.
Shelly L. Cox,
Management Analyst, Rules Committee Staff.
[FR Doc. 2025-01059 Filed 1-16-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 2210-55-P
```
Thomas P. FLEMING, DOC #C08434, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-1599

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 22, 2019

Affirmed.
STATE of Louisiana v. Ladray BIAS, Jr.

NO. 2019-KO-0416

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 22, 2019

Denied.
<PAGE>


                                                                   Exhibit 24.01

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY


KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS that each person whose signature appears
below constitutes and appoints Constance F. Galley and Ira A. Gerard, and each
of them, his or her true and lawful attorneys-in-fact, with full power of
substitution, for him or her and in his or her name, place and stead in any and
all capacities, to sign any and all amendments (including post-effective
amendments) to this Report, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto and
all documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and agents, and each of them,
full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing
requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to all
intents and purposes as he or she might or could do in person, hereby ratifying
and confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact and agents or any of them, or his
or her substitute or substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue
hereof.

         Pursuant to the requirements of the Exchange Act, this Report has been
signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the
capacities and on the dates indicated.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

 Name                                                                  Title                              Date
 ----                                                 -------------------------------------          --------------
 <S>                                                  <C>                                            <C>
 PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER:

                                                      President and Chief Executive Officer          March __, 1998
--------------------------------------
 Constance F. Galley


 PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER AND
 PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING OFFICER:

--------------------------------------                Vice President, Finance and Administration     March __, 1998
 Ira A. Gerard                                        and Chief Financial Officer


 ADDITIONAL DIRECTORS:

--------------------------------------                Director                                       March __, 1998
 Stewart K.P. Gross

--------------------------------------                Director                                       March __, 1998
 Ernest E. Keet

--------------------------------------                Director                                       March __, 1998
 John J. Pendray

--------------------------------------                Director                                       March __, 1998
 Dennis G. Sisco
</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**





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





I,
      Elena
      Pochapski, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of
      Siberian Energy Group Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the three months ended March
      31,
      2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form
      10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
      results of operations of Siberian Energy Group Inc.





By:/s/ *Elena
      Pochapski*


Elena
      Pochapski


Principal
      Financial Officer


(Principal
      Accounting Officer)





May
      ___,
      2007
Thomas Pike BARKERDING v. Scott WHITTAKER, William Bishop and the Law Firm of Stone Pigman Walther Wittman, LLC, et al.

NO. 2019-C-0166

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 8, 2019

Denied.
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 on Form 10-Q of Pharmasset, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended March 31,
2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Kurt Leutzinger, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
by 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: May 5, 2010



|                                       
|---------------------------------------
|/S/    KURT
LEUTZINGER                 
|Kurt Leutzinger
Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Pharmasset, Inc. and will be retained by
Pharmasset, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
1 The Honorable Donald J. Stohr, United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Missouri. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 00-2763

___________ David N. Hannah, Jr., * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Dora B. Schriro, Director Missouri * Eastern District of Missouri. Department of Corrections; James A. * Gammon, Superintendent Moberly * [UNPUBLISHED] Correctional Center; Teresa Thornburg, * Assistant Superintendent, Moberly * Correctional Center, * * Appellees.

___________ Submitted: December 4, 2000 Filed: December 8, 2000

___________ Before BEAM, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Missouri inmate David Hannah appeals the district court’s 1 28 U.S.C.-2-

§ 1915A(b)(1) dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. Upon de novo review, see Cooper v. Schriro , 189 F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir. 1999) (per curiam), we agree with the district court

that Hannah failed to allege sufficient facts to state a claim, see Wishon v. Gammon , 978 F.2d 446, 450 (8th Cir. 1992) (requirements for equal protection claim); Springdale Educ. Ass’n v. Springdale Sch. Dist. , 133 F.3d 649, 651 (8thCir. 1998) (conclusory allegations insufficient to state claim under § 1983). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
EX PARTE Farron Alexander TAYLOR

1160617 (CR-15-1430)

Supreme Court of Alabama.

July 7, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Cert. denied.
Rashad LEE v. STATE

CR-17-0056

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 28, 2017

Dismissed.
Case 3:04-cv-02010-P Document 27 Filed 06/09/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 93