alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In re INTERNATIONAL RY. CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

November 20, 1907.)

In the matter of the application of the International Railway Company to remove an action entitled “County Court, Niagara County. Susan McMerrick v. International Railway Company”—to the Supreme Court, Erie county. i

PER CURIAM.

Order reversed, with $10 / costs and disbursements, and motion granted, without costs.

SPRING, J, not sitting. *>*
#### DE CRISTOFANO, Respondent, v. RISOLO et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

March 29,1912.)

Action by Michele De Cristofano against Alfonso Risolo and another. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18
- 6941

MICHAEL CURTIS REYNOLDS , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. JENNIFER SAAD, Warden , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia , at Clarksburg

. Irene M. Keeley , Senior District Judge. ( 1:17

- cv
- 00124

- IMK )

Submitted : September 1 4 , 2018 Decided: September 20, 2018

Before NIEMEYER and KING , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Michael Curtis Reynolds, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 P ER CURIAM:
Michael Curtis Reynolds, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court ’ s order

a ccepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition

. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Reynolds ’ informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Reynolds has forfeited appellate
review of the court’s order. See Jackson v. Lightsey , 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rule s, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly , we affirm the district court ’ s judgment

. We deny Reynolds’ motions to compel , to show cause , for summary judgment , and for a hearing

. We deny as moot Reynolds’ motion for release pending appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                              15
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,818
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      8,826
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   152
<PP&E>                                           1,124
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  11,935
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,210
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        19,315
<OTHER-SE>                                    (15,649)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    11,935
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,307
<CGS>                                            2,617
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,617
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 102
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      6
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  6
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         6
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### The State v. Burns, *Appellant.*

Sherwood, J.

*{dissenting).*— I dissent for the following reasons: It is among the fundamentals of crimnal jurisprudence, that, in indictments for felonies, nothing material can be supplied by implication or *543intendment. 2 Hawk. P. C., ch. 25, secs. 60, 61; 1 Chitty’s Cr. L. 172; 1 Bish. Cr. Proc., secs. 79, 80, 81, 86, 88, 517, 518 and 519, especially last three sections. See also, 2 Hale P. C. 193; Russell on Crimes [4 Ed.] 676, note; *State v.*Hayward, 83 Mo. 299; *State*v. *Her*rell, 97 Mo. 105; *State v. Charles Meyers, ante,*p. 107, which last cases cited from our own reports tke foregoing opinion virtually overrules.

Tkat opinion is a new departure from all precedent, form and authority. If it be sufficient to say in an indictment that tke defendant witk a certain knife “did strike, stab and thrust in and upon tke left side of tke body of him, tke said Prank Pkelan, one mortal wound,” why would it not be also sufficient to say in another indictment tkat tke defendant witk a certain *pistol “did shoot, strike, discharge and fire off*in and upon tke left side of tke body of kim, tke said Prank Pkelan, one mortal wound *%*” Would any one contend tkat *such*an indictment would be good *%*If not good in tke *latter*•case, how then good in tke *former?*If all *forms*are to be discarded and held for naught; if only what tke indictment *means*is to be considered, then prosecutions in criminal causes will certainly be *greatly simplified.*'If, for instance, a man is to be charged witk uttering or passing counterfeit money all tkat tke indictment need charge is tkat he “ *shooed the queer.”*If he is to be •charged witk forgery, all that need be said is tkat he “ *wrongfully imitated the handwriting of A. B.”*

*

For the opinion of the court see p. 471. The dissenting opinion was rendered too late to be inserted in its proper place.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

No. 22

- 2153

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

MARK JORDAN,

Appellant

On Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

(D.C. No. 2:94

- cr

- 00524

- 001)

District Judge: Honorable Mitchell S. Goldberg

SUR PETITION FOR PANEL REHEARING

Present: J ORDAN

, BIBAS , and PORTER

, Circuit Judg es

The petition for rehearing filed by Appellant in the above

- entitled case having

been submitted to the judges who participated in the decision of this Court, it is hereby

OR D ERED that the petition for rehearing by the panel is granted

. The Clerk is directed

to file the amended opinion contemporaneously with this order. The revisions to the

opinion are at pages 15 and 16. As the revisions do not affect the disposition of the

appeal, the judgment will remain as filed.

The petition for rehearing filed Appellant also having been submitted to all the

other available circuit judges of the circuit in regular active service and a majority of the

judges of the circuit in regular service not having voted for rehearing, it is hereby

ORDERED that the petition for rehearing by the Court en banc is denied.BY THE COURT,

s/

Circuit Judge

Date: March 25, 2024

J K/c c: All Counsel of Record
#### APGAR v. CONNELL.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

March 29, 1912.)

Action by Mary A. Apgar against Ellen Connell. No opinion. Motion granted, unless appellant complies with terms stated in order. Order filed.
|  | • | fully complies with the      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of      1934; and |
|--|---------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  | • | the information      contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the      financial condition and results of operations of the    Company. |
|--|---------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/      C. Troy Woodbury, Jr.                                              |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                        |
| Name:  | C.      Troy Woodbury, Jr.                                                  |
| Title: | Treasurer      and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial    Officer) |
| Date:  | July      13, 2009                                                          |

----
#### EVERETT, Appellant, v. JONES, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department

October 2, 1907.)

Action by Jane Esther Everett against Jesse Jones, as executor, etc.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered before another referee, with costs to the appellant to abide event, upon questions of law and fact. Held, that the decision and judgment were contrary to the evidence.

McLENNAN, P. j., dissents.
#### BIRMINGHAM BELT RAILWAY CO. V. JONES.

*Damages for Personal Injury.*

(Decided May 9, 1907.)

Appeal from Birmingham City Court.

Heard before Hon. Chales A. Senn.

Campbell & Johnson, for appellant.

Bowman, Harsh & Beddow, for appellee.

Opinion by

McClellan, J.

Affirmed.

Tyson, C. J., Dowdell and. Anderson, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 23**

 

 

**CONSENTOF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the RegistrationStatements on Forms S-3 (No.  333-128582 and 333-136151) and Forms S-8 (No. 333-103977,333-125445 and 333-134924), of Montpelier Re Holdings Ltd., of our report dated February 28, 2008relating to the consolidated  financialstatements and financial statement schedules and the effectiveness of internalcontrol over  financial reporting, whichappears in the Annual Report to Shareholders, which is incorporated in this AnnualReport on Form 10-K.

 
|  /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers |
|----------------------------------|
| Hamilton,  Bermuda               |

 

 

February 28, 2008

 

 

 

----
#### BRAND, Respondent, v. GLOCKNER, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

March 29, 1912.)

Action by Belle Brand against Jacob Glockner. E. W. S. Johnston, for appellant. W. J. Rosenstein, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Order filed. See. also, 143 App. Div. 909, 127 N. Y. Supp. 1113.
---

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Ronald W. Thiessen, Chief Executive Officer of Northern
Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (the Company), hereby 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 Annual Report on Form 40-F of the Company for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2012 (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.

| | By:    | /s/ R. Thiessen        
| | ------ | -----------------------
| |        |                        
| | Name:  | Ronald W. Thiessen     
| | Title: | Chief Executive Officer
| |        |                        
| | Date:  | March 28, 2013         



This written statement is being furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Companys Annual Report on Form
40-F. A signed original of this statement has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form
40-F pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not,
except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
Exchange Act). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by
reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it
by reference.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>      5
<LEGEND>       THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
               EXTRACTED FROM THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN
               THE REGISTRANT'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10Q FOR THE
               QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
               ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>   1,000

       

<S>                                            <C>

<PERIOD-TYPE>                                        6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                              46,931
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      419,447
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                         0
<PP&E>                                          15,880,065
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,694,281
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  15,618,329
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    0
<BONDS>                                         10,411,915
<COMMON>                                             3,582
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                        400,000
<OTHER-SE>                                               0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    15,618,329
<SALES>                                            834,800
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   895,654
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      377,496
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 314,086
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    204,072
<INCOME-TAX>                                        72,739
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                131,333
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                       131,333
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0

        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 120 (Friday, June 25, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 33738]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-13523]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation Nos. 731-TA-753, 754, and 756 (Fourth Review)]


Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate From China, Russia, and Ukraine

Determinations

    On the basis of the record \1\ developed in the subject five-year 
reviews, the United States International Trade Commission 
(``Commission'') determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (``the 
Act''), that revocation of the antidumping duty order on cut-to-length 
carbon steel plate from China and the termination of the suspended 
investigations on cut-to-length carbon steel plate from Russia and 
Ukraine would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of 
material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably 
foreseeable time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The record is defined in Sec.  207.2(f) of the Commission's 
Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background

    The Commission instituted these reviews on November 2, 2020 (85 FR 
69362) and determined on February 5, 2021 that it would conduct 
expedited reviews (86 FR 26067, May 12, 2021).
    The Commission made these determinations pursuant to section 751(c) 
of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)). It completed and filed its 
determinations in these reviews on June 21, 2021. The views of the 
Commission are contained in USITC Publication 5205 (June 2021), 
entitled Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from China, Russia, and 
Ukraine: Investigation Nos. 731-TA-753, 754, and 756 (Fourth Review).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: June 21, 2021.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2021-13523 Filed 6-24-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
[No. 37833-3-I.

Division One.

May 27, *1997.]*

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Darrell Vanzant, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 95-8-02853-7, James Bates, J., entered November 18, 1995. *Affirmed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
#### In the Matter of Jason M., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent.

— Appeal unanimously dismissed as moot, without costs. Memorandum: Because the dispositional order appealed from expired by its own terms on July 18,1984 and has been replaced by a subsequent order, we dismiss the appeal as moot. We note, however, that it was improper to modify the stipulated disposition which placed respondent, a juvenile delinquent, in a Title II facility *(see,*Executive Law, art 19-G, tit 2; Family Ct Act § 353.3 [3] [c]) to permit placement in secure detention under Title III (Executive Law, art 19-G, tit 3; Family Ct Act § 353.3 [3] [a], [b] solely because of alleged lack of space in a Title II facility *(see,*Family Ct Act § 352.2 [2]; § 355.1 [2]). (Appeal from order of Erie County Family Court, Honan, J. — transfer of delinquent.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Callahan, Doerr, Denman and Schnepp, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1997
<CASH>                                          205577
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  2069171
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     674045
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               3490631
<PP&E>                                         1610706
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1051432
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 5363748
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1853334
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                       5732135
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (2279948)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   5363748
<SALES>                                        3574136
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               3576680
<CGS>                                          1880998
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  3323901
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               16488
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 236291
<INCOME-TAX>                                      9200
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             227091
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    227091
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .08
        

</TABLE>
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1880 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 2,4-Dichloroaniline. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 27, 2005 

Mr. CLEAVER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 2,4-Dichloroaniline. 

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

3 SECTION 1. 2,4-DICHLOROANILINE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.05.74 2,4-Dichloroaniline (CAS 

No. 554–00–7) (provided for 

in subheading 2921.42.18) .. Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2008 ’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 
2 

•HR 1880 IH 

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ
#### NEALE, Respondent, v. WALTER, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

October 4 1907.)

Action by *1139Isabella Neale against John Walter. Max Schleimer, for appellant. Frederick W. Block, for respondent.

No opinion. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion to place the ease on the equity calendar granted ; the action being for the removal of a cloud on title, and not for ejectment.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                     SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002, SECTION 906
          CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERS

     In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of First Financial
Corporation (the "Company") for the Quarterly period ended March 31, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the
"Report"), Norman L Lowery , as the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and
Michael a Carty, as the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge:

1.   This Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 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.

May 7, 2004                            By  /s/ Norman L. Lowery
                                       -------------------------------------
                                       Norman L. Lowery, Vice Chairman & CEO

May 7, 2004                            By  /s/ Michael A. Carty
                                       ---------------------------------
                                       Michael A. Carty, Treasurer & CFO