alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
03-14-00626-CV

____________________________________________________ 

In the Court of Appeals for the Third Judicial District

Austin, Texas

____________________________________________________ 

Glenn Hegar, Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of Texas, and

Ken Paxton, Attorney General of the State of Texas

Appellants

v.

Budget PrePay, Inc.,

Appellee.

____________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 126th Judicial District Court, Travis County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. D-1-GN-11-001189 

The Honorable Gisela D. Triana, Presiding 

____________________________________________________

NOTICE OF AUTOMATIC SUBSTITUTION OF PUBLIC OFFICERS

TO THE HONORABLE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS:

Glenn Hegar, Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of Texas, and Ken 

Paxton, Attorney General of the State of Texas, Appellants, file this notice of 

automatic substitution under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 7.2(a). Glenn 

Hegar succeeded Susan Combs as Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of 

Texas on January 2, 2015, and Ken Paxton succeeded Greg Abbott as Attorney 

General of the State of Texas on January 5, 2015. Accordingly, Glenn Hegar and 

Ken Paxton should be substituted as Appellants in this action. 

Notice of Automatic Substitution of Public Officers Page 1 

ACCEPTED

03-14-00626-CV

4097841

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

2/10/2015 4:26:35 PM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 2/10/2015 4:26:35 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
Therefore, Glenn Hegar, Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of 

Texas, and Ken Paxton, Attorney General of the State of Texas, request that they be 

substituted for former officeholders Susan Combs and Greg Abbott in this action.

Respectfully submitted,

KEN PAXTON

Attorney General of Texas

CHARLES E. ROY

First Assistant Attorney General

JAMES E. DAVIS

Deputy Attorney General for Civil Litigation

ROBERT O’KEEFE

Division Chief

Financial Litigation, Tax, and Charitable Trusts Division

/s/Charles K. Eldred 

CHARLES K. ELDRED

Attorney in Charge

Financial Litigation, Tax, and

Charitable Trusts Division

State Bar No. 00793681

P.O. Box 12548

Austin, Texas 78711-2548

512-475-1743 

512-477-2348 (fax)

charles.eldred@texasattorneygeneral.gov

Attorneys for Appellants

Notice of Automatic Substitution of Public Officers Page 2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on February 10, 2015, a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing Notice of Automatic Substitution of Public Officers was sent to the 

Appellee’s attorneys of record below via e-service and/or electronic mail as follows: 

Scott M. Seidel

SEIDEL LAW FIRM

6505 West Park Boulevard, Suite 306

Plano, TX 75093

Scott.Seidel@earthlink.net

Anthony C. Gulotta

GULOTTA LAW GROUP, P.C

6375 Flank Drive, #200

Harrisburg, PA 17112-4600

tgulotta@gulottalawgroup.com

/s/Charles K. Eldred 

CHARLES K. ELDRED

Notice of Automatic Substitution of Public Officers Page 3
In The 

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-12-00380-CR 

RITCHIE LAWSON, APPELLANT 

 

V. 

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE 

 

On Appeal from the 364th District Court 

Lubbock County, Texas 

Trial Court No. 2012-434,666, Honorable Blair Cherry, Presiding 

 

September 5, 2013 

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

 

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. 

Appellant Ritchie Lawson appeals his conviction for sexual assault. On appeal, 

he questions the sufficiency of the evidence underlying that conviction. We affirm the 

judgment. 

We review challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence under the standard 

discussed in Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010). No further 

explanation of the standard is necessary.
2

As mentioned in appellant's brief, the complainant testified that appellant had sex 

with her without her consent. Because the testimony of the complainant alone, if 

believed, is sufficient to sustain a conviction, Franco v. State, 339 S.W.3d 793, 794 

(Tex. App.–Amarillo 2011, no pet.), there appears of record some evidence upon which 

rational jurors could conclude, beyond reasonable doubt, that appellant committed the 

crime for which he was convicted. Nonetheless, appellant believes that the 

complainant's testimony was not credible, that it was contradicted by other evidence, 

and, therefore, it cannot support the conviction. 

It is true that appellant denied engaging in sex with the complainant and that 

evidence appears of record indicating that the complainant engaged in what some could 

categorize as erratic or odd behavior. Yet, other evidence illustrated the presence of 

appellant's semen/DNA in her vagina. Taken as a whole, the circumstances before the 

jury simply triggered its duty to resolve credibility issues and decide who and what to 

believe. Again, that is the function of a jury, and we defer to the manner in which it 

resolved those issues. Franco v. State, 339 S.W.3d at 794 (stating that any 

inconsistencies in the evidence were for the jury to resolve, as were issues regarding 

the credibility of the complainant, and we defer to the jury's determination of those 

issues). 

Appellant’s sole issue is overruled, and the judgment is affirmed. 

Brian Quinn 

Chief Justice

Do not publish.
Argued and submitted March 11,

reversed and remanded with instructions April 3, 2003

#### In the Matter of the Suspension of the Driving Privileges of BADR RABBANI, *Respondent, v.*DRIVER AND MOTOR VEHICLE SERVICES DIVISION (DMV), *Appellant.*

0112-12778; A118215

65 P3d 1130

Richard D. Wasserman, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the briefs were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, and Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General.

Jon Faraday Strock argued the cause and filed the brief for respondent.

Before Edmonds, Presiding Judge, and Kistler and Schuman, Judges.

PER CURIAM

*273PER CURIAM

The Driver and Motor Vehicle Services Branch (DMV) appeals from a judgment that set aside its suspension of petitioner’s driving privileges for his refusal to take a breath alcohol test. We reverse.

On appeal, petitioner raises no issues concerning his arrest or the information that the officer provided before asking him to take the breath test. DMV found that the officer asked petitioner to take a breath test and that he refused. The trial court held that there is not substantial evidence to support DMVs decision. DMV found that petitioner originally agreed to take the test but that, when the “Please Blow” prompt appeared on the machine and the officer again asked him to take the test, he stated “No, I wasn’t driving.” The officer took that statement as a refusal and did not permit petitioner to take the test when he later asked to do so. The officer’s testimony at the administrative hearing provides substantial evidence to support those findings.

We have held that anything substantially short of an unqualified and unequivocal agreement to take the test constitutes a refusal and that, once a motorist refuses, there is no right to change his or her mind. *Caldeira v. DMV,*181 Or App 168, 171, 45 P3d 489, *rev den,*334 Or 631 (2002). Under that rule and DMVs findings, DMVs order suspending petitioner’s driving privileges was correct.

Reversed and remanded with instructions to reinstate DMV order suspending driving privileges.
# Official Journal C 70A/11 F

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 70A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6511 February 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 70A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6511 February 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | Council |
| 2022/C 70 A/01 | Notice of vacancy CONS/AD/176/22 | 1 |

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

Council

2022/C 70 A/01

Notice of vacancy CONS/AD/176/22

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Exhibit 10.37



---



Silicon
Valley Bank

Extension Agreement



|Borrower: |  | eGain Communications Corporation
|--------- |  | --------------------------------



|Date: |  | July 28, 2006
|----- |  | -------------



This Extension Agreementis entered into between Silicon Valley Bank (Silicon) and the borrower named above (Borrower).



The Parties agree to amend the Loan and Security Agreement
between them, dated October 29, 2004 (as amended, the Loan Agreement), as follows, effective as of the date hereof. (Capitalized terms used but not defined in this Amendment, shall have the meanings set forth in the Loan Agreement.)



1. ExtensionRevolving Line. The words July
28, 2006, set forth in Section 4 of the Schedule are hereby amended to read October 2, 2006.



2. Representations True.Borrower represents and warrants to Silicon that all representations and warranties set forth in the Loan Agreement, as
amended hereby, are true and correct.



3. General
Provisions.This Amendment, the Loan Agreement, any prior written amendments to the Loan Agreement signed by Silicon and Borrower, and the other written documents and agreements between Silicon and Borrower set forth in full all of
the representations and agreements of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersede all prior discussions, representations, agreements and understandings between the parties with respect to the subject hereof. Except as herein
expressly amended, all of the terms and provisions of the Loan Agreement, and all other documents and agreements between Silicon and Borrower shall continue in full force and effect and the same are hereby ratified and confirmed.



|                                                                                                                        |  |                                                                 |  | 
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|Borrower:                                                                                                               |  | Silicon:                                                        |  | 
|                                                                                                                        |  |                                                                
|EGAIN COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION                                                                                        |  | SILICON VALLEY BANK                                             |  | 
|                                                                                                                        |  |                                                                
|By____________________________ President or Vice President  By____________________________ Secretary or Asst Secretary |  | By____________________________  Title__________________________ |  | 



-1-
EXHIBIT
      32.2





Certification
      Pursuant to


Exchange
      Act Rule 15d-14(b) and


18
      U.S.C.
      Section 1350





In
      connection with the Annual Report of US Dry Cleaning Corporation
      (the ”Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending September 30, 2007, as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, Robert Y. Lee, Principal Accounting Officer of the
      Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to Exchange Act Rule
      15d-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
      the
      Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, that:





i.The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
                13(a) or
                15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





ii.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 required by Section 906, or other document
      authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
      by Section 906, has been provided to US Dry Cleaning Corporation and will be
      retained by US Dry Cleaning Corporation and furnished to the Securities and
      Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.








Dated:  January
      15, 2008






/S/
      ROBERT Y. LEE


Name:
      Robert Y. Lee


Title:  Principal
      Accounting Officer
STATE of North Carolina v. Daniel BARKER, Defendant.

No. COA18-178

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: October 16, 2018

NO ERROR.
**Exhibit 32.2**





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


18
      U.S.C.
      SECTION 1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
      connection with the annual report of Infosmart Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2007 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Po Nei Sze, Chief
      Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) of the Company, hereby certify
      as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63,
      Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my
      knowledge:




(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
      applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and




(2)
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company at the dates
      and for the periods indicated.


Date:
                    April 1, 2008
              
              /s/
                  Po Nei SzePo
                    Nei Sze
                  Chief
                      Financial Officer
                    (Principal
                      Financial Officer)


A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 191 (Tuesday, October 4, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 57925]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19778]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Advisory Group to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue; Renewal 
of Charter

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Charter for the Internal Revenue Service Advisory Council 
(IRSAC) will renew for a two-year period beginning November 4, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Lorenza Wilds, National Public 
Liaison, 202-622-6440 (not a toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given under section 
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988), 
and with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury to announce the 
renewal of the Internal Revenue Service Advisory Council (IRSAC). The 
primary purpose of the Advisory Council is to provide an organized 
public forum for senior Internal Revenue Service executives and 
representatives of the public to discuss relevant tax administration 
issues. As an advisory body designed to focus on broad policy matters, 
the IRSAC reviews existing tax policy and/or makes recommendations with 
respect to emerging tax administration issues. The IRSAC suggests 
operational improvements, offers constructive observations regarding 
current or proposed IRS policies, programs, and procedures, and suggest 
improvements with respect to issues having substantive effect on 
Federal tax administration. Conveying the public's perception of IRS 
activities to Internal Revenue Service executives, the IRSAC is 
comprised of individuals who bring substantial, disparate experience 
and diverse backgrounds. Membership is balanced to include 
representation from the taxpaying public, the tax professional 
community, small and large businesses, state tax administration, and 
the payroll community.

    Dated: September 28, 2005.
C. Anthony Burke,
Branch Chief, National Public Liaison.
[FR Doc. 05-19778 Filed 10-3-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
STATE of North Carolina v. Carl Vincent CHOPPY, Jr.

No. COA18-167

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: October 16, 2018

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 31.2 

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, J. Roe Buckley, Chief Financial Officer of Mewbourne Development Corporation, Managing General Partner of Mewbourne Energy Partners 04-A, L.P. (the“Registrant”), certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterlyreport on Form 10-Q of Mewbourne Energy Partners 04-A, L.P. 

 

2. Based on myknowledge, this quarterly 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 misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this quarterly report; 

 

3. Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this quarterly report; 

 

4. The registrant’s othercertifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have: 

 

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant is made known to us particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared; 

 

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of thisquarterly report (the “Evaluation Date”); and 

 

(c)presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date; 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

(a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and 

 

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrols; and 

 

6. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I haveindicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date or our most recent evaluation, including anycorrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses. 

 

Date: November 14, 2005
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 Annual Report of Corinthian Colleges, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the
fiscal year ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Peter C. Waller, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to section 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Peter C. Waller    
|Peter C. Waller        
|Chief Executive Officer
|August 25, 2009
Exhibit 13.01

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United
States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Brasil Telecom Participações S.A. (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:

The annual report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 of the Company, as amended by the Form 20-F/A to which this statement is
filed as an exhibit (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the company.



|                      |  |                                      
|--------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|Dated: August 7, 2009 |  | /s/ Luiz Eduardo Falco Pires Corrêa  
|                      |  | Name: Luiz Eduardo Falco Pires Corrêa
|                      |  | Title: Chief Executive Officer       
|                      | 
|Dated: August 7, 2009 |  | /s/ Alex Waldemar Zornig             
|                      |  | Name: Alex Waldemar Zornig           
|                      |  | Title: Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.3


[COMPASS BANK LOGO]                                        1263 West Main Street
                                                           Dothan, Alabama 36301
                                                           www.compassweb.com
                                                           334-712-7000


February 23, 2004



Ms. Tonya Weaver
Boyd Brothers Transportation, Inc.
3275 Highway 30
Clayton, AL 36016


Re:  Waiver of Loan Covenants under Credit and Security Agreement
between Compass Bank ("Bank") and Boyd Brothers Transportation, Inc.
("Borrower") dated April 11, 2000.

Dear Tonya:

As of December 31, 2003 Boyd Brothers Transportation, Inc. was in violation of
Section 6.01 of the above referenced Credit and Security Agreement (as amended,
the "Agreement").  The Borrower has requested and the Bank has agreed to waive
the defaults under this Agreement existing as of December 31, 2003 solely by
virtue of the violations of Section 6.01 as outlined above.  This one-time
limited waiver is effective only in the specific instance and for the purpose
for which given and nothing contained or provided herein shall be construed as
granting a waiver of any default except as specifically set forth herein or as
allowing Borrower to violate or fail to perform fully (i) Section 6.01 of
Agreement after December 31, 2003, or (ii) any other provisions of the Loan
Documents at any time.


Sincerely,



/s/ Steven M. McCarroll
Steven M. McCarroll
City President