alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Vincent PHILPOT, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 16-65

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed December 26, 2018.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Jonathan Greenberg, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Linda S. Katz, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SUAREZ, LAGOA, and SCALES, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

*32Affirmed. *See**State v. Michel*, 43 Fla. L. Weekly S551, 43 Fla. L. Weekly S298 (Fla. July 12, 2018) (holding "that juvenile offenders' sentences of life with the possibility of parole after 25 years do not violate the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution as delineated by the United States Supreme Court in *Graham v. Florida*, 560 U.S. 48, 130 S.Ct. 2011, 176 L.Ed.2d 825 (2010), *Miller v. Alabama*, 567 U.S. 460, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012), and *Virginia v. LeBlanc*, --- U.S. ----, 137 S.Ct. 1726, 198 L.Ed.2d 186 (2017)").
Memorandum to File 

Subject: Office of Inspector General Report of Investigation 17-03 – Closing Memorandum 

Date: January 12, 2017 

The Farm Credit Administration (FCA) Office of Inspector General (OIG) initiated an investigation on 

October 5, 2016, regarding allegations relating to awards, pay increases, duty station, and time and 

attendance. The OIG completed its investigation on January 12, 2017, issued OIG Report of Investigation 

No. 17-03, and determined the allegations unsubstantiated. By issuance of this Closing Memorandum, 

OIG Investigation No. 17-03 is closed. 

Elizabeth M. Dean
	

Inspector General
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Credit Union Administration

# TIME AND DATE: 

10:00 a.m., Thursday, January 16, 2025.

# PLACE: 

Board Room, 7th Floor, Room 7B, 1775 Duke Street (All visitors must use Diagonal Road Entrance), Alexandria, VA 22314-3428.

# STATUS: 

Open.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

1. NCUA's 2025 Annual Performance Plan.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Melane Conyers-Ausbrooks, Secretary of the Board, Telephone: 703-518-6304.

Melane Conyers-Ausbrooks,

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 2025-00706 Filed 1-10-25; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 7535-01-P
---

Exhibit 13.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL 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 annual report on Form 20-F of Madison Minerals Inc. (the Company) for the year ended October 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I hereby 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 annual 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 the annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. Date: February 18, 2010 Ian BrownIan Brown
Chief Financial Officer


---
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 16 (Monday, January 27, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 8228]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-01784]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENTS: 90 FR 7202, 
January 21, 2025, and 90 FR 7720, January 22, 2025.

PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF THE MEETING: Thursday, January 
23, 2025, at 1 p.m.

CHANGES IN THE MEETING: The Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday, 
January 23, 2025, at 1 p.m., has been changed to Thursday, January 23, 
2025, at 12:30 p.m.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: For further information; please 
contact Vanessa A. Countryman from the Office of the Secretary at (202) 
551-5400.
    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b.

    Dated: January 22, 2025.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2025-01784 Filed 1-23-25; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
```
No. 30,069.

#### Amy O. Rafter, *Plaintiff,*v. F. H. Richardson et al., *Defendants.*

(299 Pac. 605.)

Opinion filed June 6, 1931.

*F. G. Drenning,*of Topeka, for the plaintiff.

*Robert Stone, James A. McClure, Robert L. Webb, Beryl R. Johnson, Ralph W. Oman,*all of Topeka, and *W. L. Sayers,*of Hill City, for the defendants.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Burch, J.:

The action is an original action of mandamus in this court to compel the probate judge of Graham county to set aside a temporary order which he made in an action, pending' in the district court of Graham county, restraining sale of real and personal property on execution, and to compel the sheriff of Graham county to execute the writ which the probate judge enjoined him from executing.

Richardson purchased mortgaged land in Nemaha county, and assumed and agreed to pay the mortgage. The mortgage was foreclosed in Nemaha county. Richardson was personally served in Graham county, and a personal judgment was rendered against him in favor of Amy O. Rafter. The. land did not sell at foreclosure sale for enough to satisfy the judgment, and execution was issued against Richardson and sent to the sheriff of Graham county. By virtue of the writ the sheriff seized real and personal property which he advertised for sale. Richardson commenced an action in the district court of Graham county to enjoin execution of the writ on the ground the personal judgment against him was void. In the absence of the district judge the probate judge issued a temporary order restraining execution of the writ, and set the hearing in the district court for February 2, 1931. The sheriff made the following return on the writ of execution:

> *354“December 25, 1930. I was served with a restraining order enjoining any sale under this execution until further orders. I hold my levy intact upon all property levied upon.”

On January 13, 1931, Amy O. Rafter commenced the action in this court. Richardson moved to quash the alternative writ.

There was no excuse for the action in this court. Concede that the petition for injunction in the district court of Graham county did not state a cause of action and the restraining order was wrongfully issued; nevertheless, the petition presented a question for judicial determination, the district court had jurisdiction to decide the question, the probate judge had jurisdiction to issue the restraining order, and the plaintiff here had a perfectly plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law to obtain dissolution of the restraining order. (R. S. 60-1702.) Mandamus issues to compel performance of an act which the law specially enjoins as a legal duty. (R. S. 60-1701.) The probate judge had no power to vacate the restraining order after it had been issued, and rests under no legal duty to do so. The sheriff who was enjoined was obliged to obey the injunction, and mandamus does not lie to compel him to perform an act which he was enjoined from doing. Neither he nor his successor, the present sheriff, is refusing to do any duty enjoined by law.

The motion to quash, is allowed.
# C_2021368EN.01001504.xml

| 13.9.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 368/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.9.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 368/15

---

Order of the President of the Court of 18 June 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Köln — Germany) — CT v Deutsche Lufthansa AG

(Case C-528/20) (1)

(2021/C 368/18)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 28, 25.01.2021.

---
J.L.R. v. C.R.J., Jr.

2160845

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

January 26, 2018

Affirmed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 19-0365

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

MONTE BLAIN GOSSARD,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including December 14, 2020, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

November 4 2020

11/04/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0365
James Keith LARRY v. STATE

CR-16-0579

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

October 13, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Reh. denied.
Case 3:04-cv-02093-P Document 18 Filed 01/31/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 120
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

April 20, 2020

No. 04

- 20

- 00120

- CV

IN RE Brandon HJELLA

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

ORDER

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez , Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa , Justice

Beth Watkins , Justice

On February 24 , 20 20 , relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus complaining of the

trial court’s award of $2,5 00.00 and $36,264.00 in interim attor n e y ’s fees to the real party in

interest ( the “RPI ”). Because the trial court had previously rendered a partial summary judgment

in favor of the RPI an d held in abeyance the issue of c ontingent appellate attor ney ’s fees, t h e RPI

filed a motion asking this court to allow it to request a final ju dgment from the trial court that

included an award of contingent appellate fees.

On April 13, 2020, the trial court signed a final judgment decree ing that the RPI recover

from relat or “judgment for the sum of $39 ,615.27 in

. . . damages and costs, plus accrued

prejudgment interest of $2,197.83, for a tot al of $41,813.10. ” The jud g ment states: “ T h is

Judgment finally disposes of all parties and all claims and is appeal a ble. ” The judg ment does no t

incorporate by reference or otherwise mention an y award of interim attorney ’ s fees.

Because it appears relator may now have obtained the relief he requested in his petition

for writ of mandamus , relator is ORDERED to show cause in writing no later than April 27,

2020 why this original proceeding should not be dismissed as moot. If relator does not timely

respond, this original proceeding will be dismissed as moot.

It is so ORDERED on April 20, 2020

.

PER CURI AM

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2018CI15792 , styled Red McCombs M otors, Ltd. v. Brandon Hjella

, pending in the 150th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texa s, the Honorable Mary Lou Alva rez presiding.ATTESTED T O: _______

______________________ Michael A. Cruz,

Clerk of Court
Oscar Lee RAY, DOC #070511, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-2389

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 1, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
# C_2018083EN.01001301.xml

| 5.3.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 83/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.3.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 83/13

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Østre Landsret (Denmark) lodged on 22 December 2017 — A

(Case C-716/17)

(2018/C 083/20)

Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Referring court

Østre Landsret

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: A

Applicants:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Does Article 45 TFEU, as interpreted following the EU Court of Justice’s judgment of 8 November 2012 in Case C-461/11, (1) preclude a rule on jurisdiction such as the Danish one, the aim of which is to ensure that the court hearing a case involving debt relief has knowledge of and can take account in its assessment of the specific socio-economic situation in which the debtor and his or her family live and must be assumed will continue to live going forward, and that the assessment may be carried out according to previously-determined criteria establishing what can be deemed to be an acceptably modest standard of living under the debt relief arrangement? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does Article 45 TFEU, as interpreted following the EU Court of Justice’s judgment of 8 November 2012 in Case C-461/11, (1) preclude a rule on jurisdiction such as the Danish one, the aim of which is to ensure that the court hearing a case involving debt relief has knowledge of and can take account in its assessment of the specific socio-economic situation in which the debtor and his or her family live and must be assumed will continue to live going forward, and that the assessment may be carried out according to previously-determined criteria establishing what can be deemed to be an acceptably modest standard of living under the debt relief arrangement?

1

that

that

If the answer to question 1 is that the restriction cannot be held to be justified, the EU Court of Justice is asked to answer the following question:

| 2. | Must Article 45 TFEU be interpreted as also having direct effect as between private parties in a situation such as the present one, with the result that private creditors must accept reductions or total loss of amounts owed to them by a debtor who has moved to another country? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Must Article 45 TFEU be interpreted as also having direct effect as between private parties in a situation such as the present one, with the result that private creditors must accept reductions or total loss of amounts owed to them by a debtor who has moved to another country?

---

(1)  Judgment of the Court of Justice of 8 November 2012, ECLI:EU:C:2012:704.

1

---
Exhibit 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Julianna Lu, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of China Health Holding,
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 officer(s) 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 is made known to us
by others, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure
controls 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 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 officer(s) 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
the small business issuer's board 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 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.

August 14, 2006

                                         /s/ Julianna Lu
                                         ---------------
                                         Julianna Lu
                                         Chief Executive Officer
                                         and Chief Financial Officer
exv4w8



 





Exhibit 4.8




CERTIFICATE OF TRUST

Office of the Secretary of the State

30 Trinity Street/P.O. Box 150470/Hartford, CT 06115-0470/Rev. 10/1/97







Space for Office Use Only



FILING #0002542716 PG 01 OF 01VOL B-00560

FILED 03/11/2003 03:00 PM PAGE    01564

SECRETARY OF THE STATE

CONNECTICUT SECRETARY OF THE STATE







1.     NAME OF STATUTORY TRUST:

First Interstate Statutory Trust I






2.     ADDRESS OF THE STATUTORY
TRUST’S PRINCIPAL OFFICE:

c/o U.S. Bank National Association

225 Asylum Street, Goodwin Square

Hartford, Connecticut 06103

Attn: Corporate Trust Services Division






3.     APPOINTMENT OF STATUTORY AGENT







	Name of Agent	 	
Business Address
	 	 	 
	Sheree Mailhot 	 	
U.S. Bank National Association
	 	 	
225 Asylum Street, Goodwin Square
	 	 	
Hartford, Connecticut 06103
	 	 	 
	 	 	


	 	 	
Residence Address
	 	 	 
	 	 	
30 Carleton Place
	 	 	
Bristol, Connecticut 06010







Acceptance of appointment



/s/ Sheree Mailhot




Signature of Agent - Sheree Mailhot






4. EXECUTION BY ALL TRUSTEES



Dated this 11th day of March, 2003








	Type of Print names of signing trustees	 	Signatures
	

	U.S. Bank National Association,	 	By:	 	/s/ Sheree Mailhot

	as Trustee	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	Name:  Sheree Mailhot
	 	 	 	 	Title: Vice President
















Reference an 8 1/2 x 11 attachment if additional space is required.



 







 





STATE OF CONNECTICUT
                
                }

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE STATE } S.S. HARTFORD



I hereby certify that this is a true
copy of record in this Office



In Testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand,
and affixed the Seal of said State, at Hartford,
this 12th day of MARCH A.D. 2003




	 
	/s/ Susan Bysiewicz



SECRETARY OF THE STATE




 






 





Office of the Secretary of the State of Connecticut




               I, the Connecticut Secretary of the State, and keeper of the seal thereof, DO
HEREBY CERTIFY, that



          FIRST INTERSTATE STATUTORY TRUST I



is in existence.



Susan Bysiewicz



Secretary of the State



Date Issued: March 12, 2003
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULES 13a-14(a) AND 15d-14(a) UNDER THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002

I, Donald A. Gilles, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended
March 31, 2006, of Valley Commerce Bancorp;

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 registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rule 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
ensure that 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 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

     (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the first fiscal quarter
of 2006 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer 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's board 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 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 registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.


Date: May 10, 2006
                                   /s/ Donald A. Gilles
                                   -------------------------------------
                                   Donald A. Gilles
                                   President and Chief Executive Officer

                                       26