alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### MANN, Appellant, v. DOHT, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

May 1, 1896.)

Action by Samuel Mann against Henry Doht, as sheriff, etc.

J. Barnett, for appellant.

A. H. Parkhurst, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

We think this order must be reversed. The action was brought to recover possession of personal property. The subject-matter of the action was the possession of the property. In that the moving party had no interest. No judgment in this action could affect his light to possession or his title to. the property. Section 452 of the Code of Civil Procedure does not apply, because the moving party had no interest in the subject-matter of the action. Rosenberg v. Salomon, 144 N. Y. 92, 38 N. E. 982, is not controlling, for in that case the moving party had a direct interest in the action, in that, if the defendant succeeded, the property would go in payment of his debt, but if the plaintiff succeeded, it would not. The order ■should be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with $10 costs.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03

- 22

- 00432

- CV

Melissa Goodman , Appellant

v.

Housing Authority of the City of Austin , Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TRAVIS COUNTY NO. C

- 1

- CV

- 20

- 002172 , THE HONORABLE TODD T. WONG , JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant ’s brief was originally due on November 9, 2022

. On

December 7, 2022 , this C ourt sent a notice to appellant informing her that her brief was overdue

and that a fa ilure to file a satisfactory response by December 1 9, 2 022

, would result in the

dismissal of this appeal for want of p rosecution. To da te, appellant has not filed a brief or a

motion for extension of time. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want o f prosecution. See

Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).

__________________________________________ Edward Smith, Justice

Before Just ices Baker, Kelly , and Smith

Dismissed for Want of Prosecution

Filed: February 23, 2023
1- DECLARATION OF COUNSEL

Andrew Bates, OSB # 78134

6122 NE Sacramento

Portland, Oregon 97213

ATTORNEY FOR RYAN BUNDY

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

Plaintiff, ) 3:16-CR-00051-BR

vs. )

) DECLARATION OF

RYAN BUNDY, ) COUNSEL IN SUPPORT

) OF MOTION TO WITHDRAW

Defendant. )

)

Counsel declares in support of his Motion to Withdraw the following:

(1) On January 27, 2016, counsel was appointed to represent Ryan Bundy on charges of

Conspiracy to Impede Officers of the United States; Possession of Firearms and Dangerous 

Weapons in Federal Facilities; Use and Carry of a Firearm in Relation to a Crime of Violence; and 

Theft of Government Property.

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 300 Filed 03/12/16 Page 1 of 2
1 2 - DECLARATION OF COUNSEL

(2) Counsel can no longer ethically represent Mr. Bundy as the attorney / client 

relationship has completely broken down. Counsel believes that it is in the best interest of Mr.

Bundy for the court to appoint him a new attorney.

(3) Mr. Bundy is requesting that the court allow him to represent himself. A Feretta

hearing is scheduled for March 18, 2016, to make a determination on self-representation. Should 

the court allow Mr. Bundy to represent himself, it is anticipated that the court will want stand-by 

counsel appointed to assist Mr. Bundy. The Federal Defender’s office has agreed to have a CJA 

attorney present at that hearing who is willing to be appointed counsel or stand-by counsel on 

behalf of Mr. Bundy.

(4) A trial date is anticipated to be scheduled for early September, 2016, allowing adequate 

time for newly appointed counsel to prepare for trial or otherwise represent Mr. Bundy’s interest 

as stand-by counsel.

(5) Counsel has notified the government as well as the office of the federal defender of his 

intent to withdraw from the case and seek new representation for Mr. Bundy.

DATED this 12th day of March, 2016.

Respectfully Submitted,

/S/ Andrew Bates 

Andrew Bates

Attorney for Defendant

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 300 Filed 03/12/16 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                      32,607,001
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                      16,758,722
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             3,000,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                           400,435,545
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                121,867,202
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      44,019,274
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        43,841,653
<LOANS>                                    765,059,419
<ALLOWANCE>                                  6,771,702
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           1,510,745,516
<DEPOSITS>                                 722,418,494
<SHORT-TERM>                               631,196,293
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                         19,076,813
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    38,489,266
<OTHER-SE>                                  99,564,650
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>           1,510,745,516
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             68,513,571
<INTEREST-INVEST>                           28,821,319
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            97,334,890
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                          32,434,559
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          60,805,124
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                       36,529,766
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                6,370,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                           9,785,093
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                             39,035,748
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             32,229,080
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                  32,229,080
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                23,497,212
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.66
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.62
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.32
<LOANS-NON>                                 29,968,266
<LOANS-PAST>                                   226,727
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                             33,583,021
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             3,331,645
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                5,376,573
<RECOVERIES>                                 2,446,630
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            6,771,702
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         6,771,702
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
**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**

|                                 |                                                                               |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                |
|--------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                 | **PURCHASE POINT MEDIA              CORPORATION**                                  |
|                            |                                                                          |                                                                                                                                                                                                                           |
| Dated: May              7, 2007 | By:                                                                      | /s/ Albert              Folsom                                 |
|                                 | Albert              Folsom                                                         |
|                                 | President                and Chief                Financial                Officer |
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

CASTILLO GRAND HOTEL CONDOMINIUM RESIDENCES

ASSOCIATION , INC.
, Appellant,

v.

WATERMARK CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC and HOTEL OWNER

CWI

- GG RCFL PROPERTY OWNER
, Appellee s

.

No. 4D2023

- 1587

[ July 3, 2024 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Michael A. Robinson , Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE19

- 021992

.

Joseph David Garrity of Lorium Law, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Christopher D. Donovan, Bonita Springs, and Jodi Kleinick and James L. Ferguson of Paul Hastings LLP, New York, New York, and William K. Whitner and Eric D. Stolze of Paul Hastings LLP, Atlanta, Georgia, Marc Huling and Carlianne K. Peake of Roetzel & Andr ess, LPA, Naples, for appellee , Hotel Owner CWI

- GG RCFL Property Owner.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed

.

C IKLIN
, L EVINE and C ONNER

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
EXHIBIT 32.1
 
 STATEMENT OF
 PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
 PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 
 I, Kanwar J. S. Chadha, certify that pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002:
 
 The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended October 31, 2004 of Entrada Networks, Inc. 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended October 31, 2004 of Entrada Networks, Inc. fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Entrada Networks, Inc.
 
 
 _/s/ Kanwar J. S. Chadha ___
 Name: Kanwar J. S. Chadha, Ph.D.
 President and Chief Executive Officer
 Date: December 15, 2004
*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.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-41256

Summary Calendar

SUSAN BALDWIN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL BRANCH

AT GALVESTON; GARLAND D. ANDERSON,

Dr.; JOHN C. JENNINGS; ALVIN L. LEBLANC,

M.D.; CATHY VAN HOOK, M.D.; BEREL HELD,

M.D.; TURNER SHARP, M.D.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Southern District of Texas

(G-95-CV-362)

July 21, 1997

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, JOLLY and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Susan Baldwin appeals an adverse summary judgment dismissing her claims
2

of (1) intentional race discrimination under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983, 1985, and

2000d and (2) defamation under the laws of Texas. Baldwin, who was a third-year

medical resident at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, claims

that she was not promoted to her fourth year of residency solely because of her

race.

Baldwin’s case is totally devoid of merit. The record does not contain a

single piece of evidence indicating that Baldwin was not promoted because of her

race. To show racial bias, counsel for Baldwin primarily relies on one of Baldwin’s

evaluations which contains the phrase “innate inability to be taught.” The

purportedly racially offensive word is “innate.” The argument counsel advances

based thereon exceeds the limits of logical reasoning and sorely tests this court’s

patience as it obviously did the district court. The record is abundantly clear that

the decision not to promote Baldwin was based solely upon her poorsurgicalskills

as reflected in numerous performance evaluations. That the word “innate” was

used in a detailed discussion of Baldwin’s shortcomings as a surgeon does not

create a triable issue of fact regarding whether the hospital’s proffered reasons for

the failure to promote were pretextual. Baldwin’s other arguments regarding

pretext are equally meritless.

Baldwin also maintains that the district court erred in granting summary
3

judgment because it did not permit the conduct of adequate discovery on the merits

of the lawsuit. The record reflects neither abuse of discretion nor error on the part

of the district court.

Counsel is cautioned to be cognizant of the requirements of Rule 11 of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in all future filings in this court and in the trial

courts in this circuit. A failure to comply therewith will be at counsel’s peril.

The judgment appealed is AFFIRMED.
# C_2009083EN.01001701.xml

| 7.4.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 83/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.4.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 83/17

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5289 — Agusta/CAE/Rotorsim)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2009/C 83/03

On 27 February 2009, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32009M5289. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32009M5289. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1871 

To authorize a nuclear physics program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 16, 2015 

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

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

A BILL 

To authorize a nuclear physics program. 

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

3 SECTION 1. NUCLEAR PHYSICS PROGRAM. 

4 (a) PROGRAM.—As part of the activities authorized 

5 under section 209 of the Department of Energy Organiza6 tion Act (42 U.S.C. 7139), the Director shall carry out 

7 a research program, and support relevant facilities, to dis8 cover and understand various forms of nuclear matter. 

9 (b) FACILITY CONSTRUCTION.— 

10 (1) IN GENERAL.—Consistent with the Office of 

11 Science’s project management practices, the Director 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1871 IH

1 shall continue to support the construction of the Fa2 cility for Rare Isotope Beams. 

3 (2) REPEAL.—Section 981 of the Energy Policy 

4 Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16321) is repealed. 

5 (c) ISOTOPE DEVELOPMENT AND PRODUCTION FOR

6 RESEARCH APPLICATIONS.— 

7 (1) IN GENERAL.—The Director shall carry out 

8 a program for the production of isotopes that the 

9 Director determines are needed for research and ap10 plications, including— 

11 (A) the development of techniques to 

12 produce isotopes; and 

13 (B) support for infrastructure required for 

14 isotope research and production. 

15 (2) COORDINATION.—In making the determina16 tion described in paragraph (1), the Secretary 

17 shall— 

18 (A) ensure that isotope production activi19 ties do not compete with private industry unless 

20 critical national interests necessitate the Fed21 eral Government’s involvement; and 

22 (B) consider any relevant recommendations 

23 made by Federal advisory committees, the NaVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:09 Apr 25, 2015 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1871.IH H1871

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1871 IH

1 tional Academies, and interagency working 

2 groups in which the Department participates. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# L_2009277EN.01001901.xml

| 22.10.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 277/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.10.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 277/19

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 14 October 2009

appointing the Secretary-General, High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, of the Council of the European Union for the period from 18 October 2009 until 31 October 2009

(2009/772/EC, Euratom)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 207(2) thereof,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 121(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | The term of office of the current Secretary-General, High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, of the Council of the European Union will end on 17 October 2009 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The term of office of the current Secretary-General, High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, of the Council of the European Union will end on 17 October 2009 (1).

| (2) | The Secretary-General, High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, of the Council of the European Union should be appointed until 31 October 2009, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The Secretary-General, High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, of the Council of the European Union should be appointed until 31 October 2009,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

Mr Javier SOLANA MADARIAGA is hereby appointed Secretary-General, High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, of the Council of the European Union for the period from 18 October 2009 until 31 October 2009.

Article 2

This Decision shall be notified to Mr Javier SOLANA MADARIAGA by the President of the Council.

It shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 14 October 2009.

For the Council

The President

E. ERLANDSSON

---

(1)  
  OJ L 236, 7.7.2004, p. 16.

1

---
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

April 6, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice 127547 (30) Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. GRIEVANCE ADMINISTRATOR, Stephen J. Markman, Justices Petitioner-Appellant,

v SC: 127547 ADB: 01-55-GA GEOFFREY N. FIEGER, Respondent-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for re consideration of this Court’s December 21, 2006 order denying the motion for stay of pr oceedings pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s consideration of the petition for certiorari in this case is DENIED as moot, inasmuch as the U.S. Supreme Court denied cer tiorari on February 20, 2007.

t0403 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.

April 6, 2007

Clerk
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF **TEXAS** AUSTIN3 \ 

### 82

n$E&.iirOW~

OndortLis motion, of H. 3. No. EO5, Rho ia tho dedgnated agent?" &~ea Bill Nor POb, Aate of this 49th Logialature,~ $8 an eat amdiing aortain seotloneof I?oueo Bill lo. 457, Chaptar4, Aots OS the 46th Lsgisl&ture, RegularSeksaion, 1939. Eoueo Bill Ho. 409, Aate of the 46th Legi;ilatum, 1m Art10163

l,4W3-3.,

Vwnon*a AnaotatedPenal Qod*, Seation 8 OS xoatue

Bill No. 406 A8tr o? the 49th Legl6latur0, a~- Soetlon69 of Hotwe Sill la. 409, Aats or the 46th Logirlatum, ahiah road* aa ~wted above in yaw lottsr. Itwill beg II&M that SUbiOn a6 Or &%0x0 l&wda VUI&O~'#&t&3- fatedPenal Qode (II. B. Ho. 40?, Aots of the 44th Lo&a%* fun ) **prcnid** 08t

vho tons 

### *~duignatea agontcrt amns l aak ootm$r tax eolloatorin tho Statswho amy peciornhii8 butloo undu thie sot' through sny xe5ulardeputy.”

.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED FEBRUARY 25, 2022

NO. 03

- 21

- 00352

- CR

The State of Texas , Appellant

v.

William Derek Groves , Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 27TH DISTRICT COURT OF LAMPASAS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE BYR NE, JUSTICES TRIANA AND KELLY

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE KELLY

This is an appeal from an order granting Groves ’ s motion to sup press evidence signed by the

trial court

. Having reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there

was no reversible error in the order

. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court ’s order to

suppress evidence

. The State shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court an d in

the court below.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Stephen J. Verleye, Chief Executive Officer of Applied Microsystems
Corporation (the "Registrant"), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C.
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

        (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Registrant, to which this
        certification is attached as an exhibit (the "Report"), fully complies
        with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
        1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

        (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
        material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
        the Registrant.

Dated: August 14, 2002                      /s/  Stephen J. Verleye
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Stephen J. Verleye
                                            Chief Executive Officer