alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### P. H. Hartman, plaintiff in error, *vs.*The Mayor and Council of Columbus, defendant in error.

(By two judges.) — Where two actions are brought by the same plaintiff against the same defendant, in a Magistrate's Court, at the same term, on several promissory notes given for the same consideration, at the same time, and payable to plaintiff, the defendant is entitled to have them consolidated: *Provided,*that when consolidated, the aggregate amount does not oust the Court of jurisdiction. (R.) 6th March, 1872.

Practice. Consolidating actions. Before Judge Johnson Muscogee Superior Court. May Term, 1871.

The facts are in the opinion.

H. L. Benning, for plaintiff in error,

cited 2 D. and E. R., 639; 1 Tidd’s Pr., 614; 3 Ch. Pr., 643.

Blanford & Crawford, for defendant,

cited Acts 1868, Justices jurisdiction, R. Code, section 3196.

Montgomery, Judge.

The Mayor and Council of Columbus brought two suits against the plaintiffs in error, in a Magistrate’s Court, at the same term, the first on five promissory notes for $10 each, and the second on four — each of these also for $10 — the whole amounting to $90 — less than the jurisdictional limit of the Court. Defendant moved to consolidate the two cases, which motion the Court overruled, and the Superior Court, on *certiorari,*sustained the ruling.

Was the defendant entitled to have the cases consolidated? We think so. The hardship of having to bear the costs in many cases, where they might be reduced to one without detriment to the plaintiff, is well pointed out by Judge Harris, in *The Manufacturers’ Bank of Macon, vs. Goolsby,*35 Georgia Reports, 82.

The consolidation in that case was refused, only because it would oust the jurisdiction of the Court. Here no such re-*97suit would follow, and the Code, section 481, would seem to exclude the right of the plaintiff to bring several suits in a Magistrate’s Court, unless the aggregate amount of the debts sued on, would be more than the sum over which the Court had jurisdiction. Our judgment is confined to cases in a Magistrate’s Court.

Judgment reversed.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

MARK STIMUS,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 5:10cv63/RS/MD

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

et al.,

Defendants.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is before the court upon referral from the clerk. Plaintiff

commenced this action on March 23, 2010 by filing a myriad of notices and motions

(docs. 1-4). On March 26, 2010, plaintiff was given twenty-eight (28) days to file an

amended complaint or complaints and a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (doc.

6). Plaintiff responded by filing three more “notices” (docs. 7-9) as well as a letter

addressed to the clerk of court, which was found to be deficient and ordered to be

returned without filing (doc. 12). Since that time, there has been no further response

from plaintiff and on May 11, 2010, this court entered a show cause order (doc. 13)

directing the plaintiff to show cause, within fourteen (14) days, why his case should

not be dismissed for his failure to comply with an order of the court. This May 11,

2010 order was returned as undeliverable marked “Return to Sender - Inmate

Released.” Plaintiff has not filed a notice of change of address or complied with the

initial order. 

Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

1. That this cause be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for plaintiff’s

failure to prosecute and failure to comply with an order of the court.
Page 2 of 2

2. That the clerk be directed to close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 14 day of June, 2010. th

 

 /s/ Miles Davis

MILES DAVIS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Any objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed

within fourteen days after being served a copy hereof. Any different deadline that

may appear on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only, and does not

control. A copy of any objections shall be served upon any other parties. Failure to

object may limit the scope of appellate review of factual findings. See 28 U.S.C. §

636; United States v. Roberts, 858 F.2d 698, 701 (11 Cir. 1988). th

Case No: 5:10cv63/RS/MD
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

DEQUAN THOMAS,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO.: 4:10-CV-113-SPM/WCS

RWL COMMUNICATION INC,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the “Mediation Report” (doc.

16), which represents that the case has been settled. Pursuant to Northern

District of Florida Local Rule 16.2(D), it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. This case is hereby dismissed with prejudice.

2. The Court shall retain jurisdiction for a period of 60 days, during

which time any party may move to reopen for good cause shown.

DONE AND ORDERED this twenty-seventh day of December, 2010.

s/ Stephan P. Mickle

Stephan P. Mickle

Chief United States District Judge
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

# AGENCY:

Defense Intelligence Agency, National Defense Intelligence College.

# ACTION:

Notice of closed meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

Pursuant to the provisions of Subsection (d) of section 10 of Public Law 92-463, as amended by section 5 of Public Law 94-409, notice is hereby given that a closed meeting of the DIA National Defense Intelligence College Board of Visitors has been scheduled as follows:

# DATES:

Tuesday, 8 January 2008, 0800 to 1700; and Wednesday, 9 January 2008, 0800 to 1200.

# ADDRESSES:

National Defense Intelligence College, Washington, DC 20340-5100.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. A. Denis Clift, President, DIA National Defense Intelligence College, Washington, DC 20340-5100 (202/231-3344).

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The entire meeting is devoted to the discussion of classified information as defined in section 552b(c)(1), Title 5 of the U.S. Code and therefore will be closed. The Board will discuss several current critical intelligence issues and advise the Director, DIA, as to the successful accomplishment of the mission assigned to the National Defense Intelligence College.

      ( print page 60661)    
Dated: October 19, 2007.

L.M. Bynum,

OSD Federal Register, Liaison Officer, DOD.

[FR Doc. 07-5275 Filed 10-24-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-06-M
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 9-4 Filed 07/10/2007 Page 1 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 9-4 Filed 07/10/2007 Page 2 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 9-4 Filed 07/10/2007 Page 3 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 9-4 Filed 07/10/2007 Page 4 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 9-4 Filed 07/10/2007 Page 5 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 9-4 Filed 07/10/2007 Page 6 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 9-4 Filed 07/10/2007 Page 7 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 9-4 Filed 07/10/2007 Page 8 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 9-4 Filed 07/10/2007 Page 9 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 9-4 Filed 07/10/2007 Page 10 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 9-4 Filed 07/10/2007 Page 11 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 9-4 Filed 07/10/2007 Page 12 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 9-4 Filed 07/10/2007 Page 13 of 13
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED December 14, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-50749 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus DONALD MELVIN, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:04-CR-2788-1

-------------------- Before KING, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Donald Melvin raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States v. Doggett , 230 F.3d 160, 166 (5th Cir. 2000), which held that AlmendarezTorres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), still controls prior conviction enhancements under 21 U.S.C. § 841, notwithstanding Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000) . The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 203 (Monday, October 22, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 59541]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5201]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; Notice 
of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Neurological Disorders 
and Stroke Special Emphasis Panel Fellowship Review.
    Date: November 30, 2007.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Mandarin Oriental Hotel, 1330 Maryland Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20024.
    Contact Person: Joann McConnell, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Scientific Review Branch, NIH/NINDS/Neuroscience 
Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., Suite 3208, MSC 9529, Bethesda, MD 
20892-9529, (301) 496-5324, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c2afa1a1adacaca7a882acabaca6b1ecacabaaeca5adb4"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1c717f7f73727279765c727572786f32727574327b736a">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.853, 
Clinical Research Related to Neurological Disorders; 93.854, 
Biological Basis Research in the Neurosciences, National Institutes 
of Health, HHS)

    Dated: October 12, 2007.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-5201 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### STATE v. LEGGETT

No. 154 PC.

Case below: 40 N.C. App. 771.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 12 July 1979. Motion of Attorney General to dismiss appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 12 July 1979.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

SIMEI MOREIRA DA SILVA
, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 19

- 784

[ February 6, 2020 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit,

Broward County ; Elizabeth Anne Scherer , Judge; L.T. Case No.

99

- 12606C F 10A

.

Simei Moreira da Silva, Indiantown, pro se.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee and Paul Patti, III, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Melanie Leitman of Stearns Weaver Miller Weissler Alhadeff & Sitterson, P.A.

, Tallahassee, for Amicus Curiae

, Brenda D. Forman, Broward County Clerk of Court.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed

.

L EVINE
, C.J., G ROSS and D AMOORGIAN

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
```

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 205 (Wednesday, October 24, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60382-60383]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5236]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meetings.
    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis 
Panel; Small Grants for Behavioral Research in Cancer Control [R03].
    Date: November 14, 2007.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Hilton Rockville Executive Meeting Center, 1750 Rockville 
Pike, Rockville, MD 20852.
    Contact Person: Rhonda J. Moore, PhD., Scientific Review 
Administrator, Special Review and Logistics Branch, Division of 
Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 6116 
Executive Boulevard, Suite 701, Room 7151, Bethesda, MD 20892-8329, 
301-451-9385, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis 
Panel; Community Clinical Oncology Program & Minority Based 
Community Clinical Oncology.

[[Page 60383]]

    Date: November 26-27, 2007.
    Time: 7 p.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Courtyard Marriott Gaithersburg Washingtonian Ctr., 204 
Boardwalk Place, Gaithersburg, MD 20878.
    Contact Person: Gerald G. Lovinger, PhD., Scientific Review 
Administrator, Special Review and Logistics Branch, Division of 
Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, 6116 Executive 
Blvd., Room 8101, Bethesda, MD 20892-8329, 301-496-7987, 
[email protected].

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, 
Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 
93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer 
Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer 
Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer 
Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS).

    Dated: October 16, 2007.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-5236 Filed 10-23-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
```
Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 27-19      Filed 05/22/2008     Page 1 of 6

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 27-19      Filed 05/22/2008     Page 2 of 6

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 27-19      Filed 05/22/2008     Page 3 of 6

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 27-19      Filed 05/22/2008     Page 4 of 6

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 27-19      Filed 05/22/2008     Page 5 of 6

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 27-19      Filed 05/22/2008     Page 6 of 6
#### STATE v. FRONEBERGER

No. 32 PC.

Case below: 55 N.C. App. 148.

Petition by defendant for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied and appeal dismissed 30 March 1982.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

May 21, 2012 

p0514 

Order 

 

May 21, 2012 

144403 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 14 4403 

 COA: 298234 

 Wayne CC: 10-000963-FH 

RUSSELL FRANK VALLEAU, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 22, 2011 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 12-15144

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 1:11-cr-00234-CAP-AJB-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

SOLOMON MANASSEH MUSTAFA, 

a.k.a. G, 

a.k.a. J, 

a.k.a. Black, 

 Defendant - Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Georgia

________________________

(March 7, 2014)

Case: 12-15144 Date Filed: 03/07/2014 Page: 1 of 3 
2

Before WILSON, Circuit Judge, MIDDLEBROOKS,

* and ALBRITTON,**

District Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

Solomon Manasseh Mustafa and his wife, Kalandra Wallace, were charged 

in a 12-count indictment with criminal offenses arising from their participation in a 

sex trafficking operation in the metropolitan Atlanta area. After a jury trial and the 

dismissal of one count of the indictment, Mustafa was convicted of the remaining 

counts and sentenced to life imprisonment. He appeals his conviction, raising the 

following issues:

1. Whether the district court erred in denying his motion pursuant to Batson 

v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), alleging racial discrimination in the 

selection of his jury.

2. Whether the district court erred in overruling his trial objections to 

testimony by a victim, a victim’s father, and Clayton County Police 

Officer Robert Boisis, in violation of the Confrontation Clause.

3. Whether the district court erred in overruling his objection to the 

prosecution’s “Golden Rule” argument.

 * Honorable Donald M. Middlebrooks, United States District Judge for the Southern

District of Florida, sitting by designation. ** Honorable William H. Albritton, United States District Judge for the Middle District of 

Alabama, sitting by designation.

Case: 12-15144 Date Filed: 03/07/2014 Page: 2 of 3 
3

4. Whether the cumulative effect of the district court’s errors deprived him 

of his constitutional right to a fair trial.

After review and consideration of the briefs and the record, and having the 

benefit of oral argument, we find no harmful error in the proceedings in the district 

court. Therefore, the decision of the district court is 

AFFIRMED.

Case: 12-15144 Date Filed: 03/07/2014 Page: 3 of 3
<PAGE>

                                                                    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

     Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection
with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of The Enstar Group, Inc. (the
"Corporation") for the period ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, the
Chief Financial Officer of the Corporation, certifies 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
Corporation.

                                          /s/ Cheryl D. Davis
                                          --------------------------------------
                                          Cheryl D. Davis
                                          Chief Financial Officer, Vice
                                          President of Corporate
                                          Taxes, and Secretary

August 9, 2005

     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to The Enstar Group, Inc. and will be retained by The Enstar
Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.

                                        33
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

                    The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) announces the persons who will serve on the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's Performance Review Board. This action is being taken in accordance with Title 5, U.S.C., Section 4314(c)(4), which requires that members of performance review boards be appointed in a manner to ensure consistency, stability, and objectivity in performance appraisals, and requires that notice of the appointment of an individual to serve as a member by published in the                     **Federal Register**                    .                

The following persons will serve on the SAMHSA Performance Review Board, which is responsible for making recommendations on performance appraisal ratings, pay adjustments, and performance awards for SAMHSA's Senior Executive Service (SES) members:

Eric Broderick, D.D.S.—Chairperson.

Westley Clark, M.D., J.D., M.P.H.

Randy Grinnell.

Anna Marsh, Ph.D.

Dennis Romero, M.A.

For further information about the SAMHSA Performance Review Board, contact the Division of Management Systems, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 1 Choke Cherry Road, Room 3-1017, Rockville, Maryland 20857, telephone (240) 276-1124 (not a toll-free number).

Dated: October 15, 2007.

Terry L. Cline,

Administrator, SAMHSA.

[FR Doc. 07-5158  Filed 10-18-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-M
#### STATE v. WASHINGTON

No. 436P82.

Case below: 57 N.C. App. 666.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 21 September 1982. Motion by Attorney General to dismiss appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 21 September 1982.