alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 13.1

                      CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

        In connection with this Annual Report of Nordic American Tanker Shipping
Limited  (the  "Company")  on Form 20-F for the year ended  December 31, 2005 as
filed with the  Securities and Exchange  Commission  (the "SEC") on or about the
date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Herbjorn Hansson, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (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.

     A signed  original  of this  written  statement  has been  provided  to the
Company and will be retained  by the  Company  and  furnished  to the SEC or its
staff upon request.

Date: June 29, 2006

/s/ Herbjorn Hansson
-----------------------
Herbjorn Hansson
Chief Executive Officer


SK 01318 0002 681624
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 19

- 00575

- CR

GILBERT COLUNGA

v. THE STATE OF TEXAS

On Appeal from the 214th District Court of Nueces County , Texas Trial Court Cause No. 18FC

- 0688F

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed . The Court
orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED

. We further order this decision certified below for observance.
June 17, 2021
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Robert Taylor, Appellant.

—^Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Rothwax, J.), rendered on April 19, 1983, unanimously affirmed. Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted. *(See, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833.) We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Fein, Milonas, Kassal and Rosenberger, JJ.
BLUEFLY, INC.
                                  JUNE 30, 2004

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                            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 Quarterly Report of Bluefly, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, E. Kenneth Seiff,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

        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/ E. Kenneth Seiff
-----------------------
E. Kenneth Seiff
Chief Executive Officer
August 13, 2004
Exhibit 32.1

CEO/CFO Certification Pursuant to § 906 of the

Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
§1350)

The undersigned, as the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Pinnacle Bankshares Corporation, respectively,
certify that, to the best of their knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008, which accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable,
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Pinnacle Bankshares Corporation and subsidiary at the dates
and for the periods indicated.

The foregoing certification is made pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350) and
shall not be relied upon for any other purpose. The undersigned expressly disclaim any obligation to update the foregoing certification except as required by law.



|                  |  |  |  |                                      
|----------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|November 13, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ Robert H. Gilliam, Jr.           
|Date              |  |  |  | Robert H. Gilliam, Jr., President and
|                  |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer              
|                  |  | 
|November 13, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ Bryan M. Lemley                  
|Date              |  |  |  | Bryan M. Lemley, Secretary,          
|                  |  |  |  | Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Cedric James SINEGAL, also known as Boobie, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 08-30328

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Sept. 22, 2011.

Cristina Walker, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Western District of Louisiana, Shreveport, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Carol B. Whitehurst, Federal Public Defender’s Office Western District of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before KING, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Cedric James Sinegal in his proceeding pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Sinegal has not filed a response.

*129During the pendency of this appeal, Sinegal completed his sentence of imprisonment and began a term of supervision. The appeal is, therefore, moot. *See United States v. Booker,*645 F.3d 328 (5th Cir.2011). The appeal is dismissed and counsel’s motion to withdraw is denied as unnecessary.

APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTION DENIED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Great Basin Rangelands Research: Reno, NV
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Newsletter
                        Volume 1
                                    Volume 2Search small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us






Clements postersheadline bar Outreach


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### In the Matter of William C. Brennan (Admitted as William C. Brennan, Jr.), an Attorney, Respondent. Grievance Committee For the Second and Eleventh Judicial Districts, Petitioner.

Second Department,

May 5,1986

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Robert H. Straus (Vincent J. Carroll, Jr.,*of counsel), for petitioner.

*415
      *Paul B. Bergman, P. C.,*for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

The respondent was admitted to practice by this court on March 30, 1949.

On December 17, 1985, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, a jury found the respondent guilty of violating 18 USC § 1962 (count 1), 18 USC § 1962 (d) (count 2), 18 USC 1952 (a) (counts 3-10, and 17-22), 18 USC § 1343 (counts 11-16 and 23-25), and 18 USC § 1951 (a) (count 26). On February 3, 1986, the respondent was sentenced to concurrent terms of imprisonment of five years on counts 1, 2 and 26, those terms to run consecutively to five-year terms of imprisonment imposed on the remaining 23 counts. The five-year terms of imprisonment on the remaining 23 counts were suspended and the respondent was placed on probation for five years. A condition of probation was that the respondent have nothing to do, directly or indirectly with law, law enforcement or public office and trust. The respondent was further ordered to make restitution of $14,000 and was fined the full amount of $209,000 and a special assessment of $1,300.

The Hobbs Act (18 USC § 1951) involves a knowing, willful and unlawful attempt to obstruct, delay and effect commerce by extortion. This crime is essentially similar to the New York felony of larceny by extortion *(see,*Penal Law § 155.05 [2] [e]; § 155.30 [6]; *Matter of Margiotta,*60 NY2d 147).

The respondent’s conviction included 14 counts of knowingly, willfully and unlawfully causing other persons to travel in interstate commerce and using and causing other persons to use a facility in interstate commerce with the intent to promote, manage, establish, carry on and facilitate the promotion, management, establishment and carrying on of an unlawful activity, namely, bribe receiving, in violation of 18 USC § 1952. This section has been held cognizable as a class D felony when the underlying activity is bribery *(see,*Penal Law § 200.00 [bribery in the second degree]; *Matter of Cuti,*89 AD2d 97). Since bribe receiving (Penal Law § 200.10) is also a class D felony in New York, we hold that these 14 counts are cognizable as class D felonies in New York.

Pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90 (4), the respondent ceased to be an attorney and counselor-at-law upon his conviction.

*416Accordingly, the petitioner’s motion is granted. The respondent is disbarred and the clerk of this court is directed to strike his name from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law forthwith.

Lazer, J. P., Gibbons, Bracken, Niehoff and Rubin, JJ., concur.
#### LOVELADIES PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., *ET AL.,*PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. BARNEGAT CITY SERVICE CO., INC., *ET AL.,*DEFENDANTS-PETITIONERS.

June 28, 1960.

*Messrs. Hiering & Grasso*for the petitioners.

*Messrs. Powell & Davis*for the respondents.

Denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 997 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 145
112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 997

                          [Report No. 112-65]

 To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to extend a water contract 
   between the United States and the East Bench Irrigation District.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 12, 2011

  Mr. Tester introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

              August 30 (legislative day, August 2), 2011

Reported under authority of the order of the Senate of August 2, 2011, 
                   by Mr. Bingaman, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to extend a water contract 
   between the United States and the East Bench Irrigation District.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``East Bench Irrigation District Water 
Contract Extension Act''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORITY TO EXTEND WATER CONTRACT.

    The Secretary of the Interior may extend the contract for water 
services between the United States and the East Bench Irrigation 
District, numbered 14-06-600-3593, until the earlier of--
            (1) the date that is 4 years after the date on which the 
        contract would have expired if this Act had not been enacted; 
        or
            (2) the date on which a new long-term contract is executed 
        by the parties to the contract.
                                                       Calendar No. 145

112th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 997

                          [Report No. 112-65]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to extend a water contract 
   between the United States and the East Bench Irrigation District.

_______________________________________________________________________

              August 30 (legislative day, August 2), 2011

                       Reported without amendment
```
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Sustainable Agricultural Water Systems Research: Davis, CA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Information
                        Final ReportsSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us






Docsheadline bar Final Reports


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
28 April 2015

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

301 Fannin, Room 245

Houston, TX 77002

RE: Case No. 14-15-00370-CV; In Re: Connie Vasquez Harrison; 14 Court of Appeals - Houston [14^^

District]

Dear Sirs:

Terry L. Hart

Attorney at Law

4265 Sail Felipe,Suite 1100

Houston TX 77027

Email; i]iart@teiTyhartla\v.com

® 713.968.9818

® 713.968.9817

© 713.898.9129

I efiled a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus on Sunday morning, August 26, 2015

with the 14^*^ Court of Appeals. Iwas advised by the court clerk that there was a problem

with this filing. I attempted to refile the petition earlier today, but am now advised that the

newly filed petition is different than the original one. The correct petition is the one I

attempted to file on Sunday morning. Attached is a new copy of that petition. Please

accept this petition as the correct filing.

Sincerely,

Terry L. flart

Lit

Enc.

ACCEPTED

14-15-00370-CV

FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

4/28/2015 3:09:29 PM

CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK

 FILED IN 14th COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 4/28/2015 3:09:29 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v David L. Maull, Also Known as Poochie, Appellant.

(Appeal No. 2.)

[944 NYS2d 713]

Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied. Present — Smith, J.E, Centra, Peradotto and Martoche, JJ.
#### Harnetha Morgan, as Ancilliary Administratrix C.T.A. of the Estate of Charlie Morgan, Deceased, and as Guardian of Christopher Morgan, an Infant, Respondent, v Patricia Morgan, Also Known as Patricia Payne, Appellant.

In an action for the partition of certain real property, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Vitale, J.), dated October 3, 1983, which denied her motion “for an order dismissing plaintiff’s action pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1), (7) and (8) on the grounds that a defense is founded upon documentary evidence, the Complaint fails to state a cause of action and the Court has no jurisdiction of the person of the defendant”.

Order reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and defendant’s motion to dismiss granted.

On March 18, 1968, Charlie Morgan married Harnetha Reeder in Maryland. One child was born from that marriage, viz., Christopher Morgan.

EPTL 6-2.2 (c) (eff Sept. 1, 1975) provides that:

> “A disposition of real property to persons who are not legally married to one another but who are described in the disposition as husband and wife creates in them a joint tenancy, unless expressly declared to be a tenancy in common”.

On August 2,1976, Charlie Morgan and Patricia Payne, a/k/a Patricia Morgan, a woman whom he had met in the summer of 1973 and with whom he had been living since October 1974, together purchased the subject West Hempstead, New York, real property. The deed, dated August 2, 1976 was to “charlie MORGAN and PATRICIA MORGAN, his wife”.

On February 27,1980, Charlie Morgan executed a will devising the subject property to his son, Christopher. Charlie Morgan died later that day in Mississippi from the effects of lung cancer. The will was probated in Mississippi on March 14, 1980. This partition action by plaintiff, Harnetha Morgan, Charlie Morgan’s legal wife and Christopher’s mother, ensued. Defendant Patricia Payne then brought the subject motion to dismiss.

As a matter of law, under EPTL 6-2.2 (c), the August 2,1976 deed to “charlie morcan and patricia Morgan, his wife” created a joint tenancy. Plaintiff adduced no legally competent *791evidence to contradict defendant’s documentary evidence as to the title or to show that the joint tenancy was effectually changed prior to Charlie Morgan’s death. Accordingly, on Charlie Morgan’s death, defendant Patricia Payne, a/k/a Patricia Morgan, as surviving joint tenant, became sole owner of the property (see, *City of Corning v Stirpe,*262 App Div 14, *affd*293 NY 808) and her motion to dismiss under CPLR 3211 (a) (1) and (a) (7) should have been granted.

The argument made on appeal that a constructive trust should be imposed under the rationale of *Vincent v Vincent*(80 AD2d 582) was not raised at Special Term and, in any event, lacks merit. Mollen, P. J., Niehoff, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-12-00091-CR

James Daniel Harris

v.

The State of Texas

§

§

§

§

§

From the 89th District Court

of Wichita County (49,178-C)

April 10, 2014

Opinion by Justice Gabriel

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of 

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

/s/ Lee Gabriel

By _________________________________

 Justice Lee Gabriel
III 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 165 

Designating July 23, 2011, as ‘‘National Day of the American Cowboy’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 5, 2011 

Mr. ENZI (for himself, Mr. BARRASSO, Mr. BAUCUS, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mr. 

CONRAD, Mr. HATCH, Mr. CRAPO, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. JOHNSON of South 

Dakota, Ms. MURKOWSKI, Mr. REID, Mr. RISCH, and Mr. ROBERTS) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 

the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Designating July 23, 2011, as ‘‘National Day of the 

American Cowboy’’. 

Whereas pioneering men and women, recognized as ‘‘cowboys’’, helped establish the American West; 

Whereas the cowboy embodies honesty, integrity, courage, 

compassion, respect, a strong work ethic, and patriotism; 

Whereas the cowboy spirit exemplifies strength of character, 

sound family values, and good common sense; 

Whereas the cowboy archetype transcends ethnicity, gender, 

geographic boundaries, and political affiliations; 

Whereas the cowboy is an excellent steward of the land and 

its creatures, who lives off the land and works to protect 

and enhance the environment; 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 165 IS 

Whereas cowboy traditions have been a part of the culture of 

the United States for generations; 

Whereas the cowboy continues to be an important part of the 

economy through the work of many thousands of ranchers across the Nation who contribute to the economic 

well-being of every State; 

Whereas millions of fans watch professional and working 

ranch rodeo events annually, and rodeo is one of the 

most-watched sports in the Nation; 

Whereas membership and participation in rodeo and other organizations that promote and encompass the livelihood of 

cowboys span every generation and transcend race and 

gender; 

Whereas the cowboy is a central figure in literature, film, and 

music and occupies a central place in the public imagination; 

Whereas the cowboy is an icon in the United States; and 

Whereas the ongoing contributions made by cowboys and 

cowgirls to their communities should be recognized and 

encouraged: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates July 23, 2011, as ‘‘National Day 

3 of the American Cowboy’’; and 

4 (2) encourages the people of the United States 

5 to observe the day with appropriate ceremonies and 

6 activities. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS