alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

THE MERCHANTS BANK,

Respondent

v.

EXECUTRIX CHERYL A. FUREY AND THE

ESTATE OF ANNE M. FUREY,

DECEASED,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 29 MM 2021

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW

, this 6th day of May , 2021, the Petition for Leave to File Petition for

Allowance of Appeal Nunc Pro Tunc is DENIED.
#### Eleven Waverly Associates, Appellant, v Eugene K. Waering, Jr., et al., Respondents.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

February 19,1987

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Rosenberg & Estis, P. C. (Gary M. Rosenberg*and *Susan R. Lipp*of counsel), for appellant. *Paul M. Chazan*for respondents.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Final judgment entered December 13, 1985 reversed, with *1094$30 costs, and the award of attorney’s fees to the tenant is vacated.

In this nonprimary residence proceeding, the petition was dismissed on the merits after a finding in tenant’s favor. Attorney’s fees were awarded to the prevailing tenant after a hearing. In making the award, the Civil Court reasoned that while a landlord who brings a successful holdover proceeding based on nonprimary residence should not receive attorney’s fees, since the dispute does not arise out of the lease, a tenant who successfully defends such a proceeding is entitled to attorney’s fees pursuant to Real Property Law § 234. This seems to us to be an anomalous and one-sided result. Bearing in mind the reciprocal purpose of section 234 — i.e., "to balance the rights of landlord and tenant in the context of what had been the standard attorney’s fee provision contained in the standard form lease” *(College Props. v Bruce,*122 Misc 2d 766, 768, *affd*104 AD2d 1063) — the statute should not be construed so as to entitle tenants to recover attorney’s fees in those same proceedings where recovery has been denied to landlords. In light of our holding that a prevailing landlord in a nonprimary residence proceeding may not recover attorney’s fees under a lease clause which speaks to a tenant’s default under the terms of a lease *(Cier Indus. Co. v Hessen,*NYLJ, Jan. 13, 1987, at 6, col 3 [App Term, 1st Dept]), we deny attorney’s fees to the prevailing tenant in this proceeding.

Ostrau, J.

(concurring). I concur only upon constraint of *Cier Indus. Co. v Hessen*(NYLJ, Jan. 13, 1987, at 6, col 3 [App Term, 1st Dept]). As expressed in my dissent in that case, a landlord is entitled to recover the legal expenses incurred in the successful prosecution of a nonprimary residence case. It would necessarily follow under the reciprocal provision of Real Property Law § 234, that a tenant may recover the legal expenses incurred in the successful defense of such cases. I do agree with the majority that if attorney’s fees are to be denied to landlords in these proceedings, fairness dictates that they be denied to tenants as well.

Sandifer, J. P., and Parness, J., concur; Ostrau, J., concurs in a separate memorandum opinion.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-14-00017-CV

Cynthia Ann TURNER,

Appellant

v.

Troy Adam TURNER,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 1, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012CVG-002200-C1

Honorable Alvino (Ben) Morales, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE STONE, JUSTICE ANGELINI, AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED. We 

ORDER that appellant, Cynthia Ann Turner, bear all costs of this appeal.

SIGNED February 5, 2014.

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, 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

April 28, 2009 

p0420 

Order 

 

April 28, 2009 

138124 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 138124 

 COA: 288963 

Lapeer CC: 07-009309-FC 

BENJAMIN IVAN ANDERSEN, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 15, 2009 

order 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.
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2124 

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to provide for institutional 

shared responsibility for student loan default. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 16, 2019 

Mr. HAWLEY introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to provide 

for institutional shared responsibility for student loan 

default. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Skin in the Game Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION REPAYING A 

6 PORTION OF STUDENT LOAN DEBTS. 

7 Section 454 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 

8 U.S.C. 1087d) is amended by adding at the end the fol9 lowing: 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•S 2124 IS

1 ‘‘(d) INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION REPAY2 ING A PORTION OF STUDENT LOAN DEBTS.— 

3 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Each institution of higher 

4 education participating in the direct student loan 

5 program under this part for a fiscal year shall be 

6 liable for 50 percent of any student loan balance 

7 that is in default for a loan made under this part 

8 that was used towards the cost of attendance at the 

9 institution. 

10 ‘‘(2) NO OFFSET.—An institution of higher 

11 education shall not increase the costs of tuition at 

12 the institution, charge any additional fee to stu13 dents, or otherwise increase the cost of attendance 

14 at the institution in order to offset the liability of 

15 the institution under paragraph (1).’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.2    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADDED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002   In connection with the Quarterly Report of Little Squaw Gold Mining Company (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ted R. Sharp, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss. 1350, as added by ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (a) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (b) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the period covered by the Report.  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Little Squaw Gold Mining Company and will be retained by Little Squaw Gold Mining Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.   Date:   November 14, 2006   By   /s/ Ted R. Sharp  Ted R. Sharp, Chief Financial Officer               1
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 Quarterly Report of Goldrich Mining Company, (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ted R. Sharp, Chief Financial Officer and Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 81 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 Goldrich Mining Company.







/s/ Ted R. Sharp

DATE:  May 16, 2011

Ted R. Sharp, Chief Financial Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Goldrich Mining Company and will be retained by Goldrich Mining Company to be furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### BELL v. MARTIN

No. 99 PC.

No. 62 (Spring Term).

Case below: 43 N.C. App. 134.

Petitions by plaintiff and defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 8 January 1980.
##### 



EXHIBIT 12.1
 GRACECHURCH CARD FUNDING (NO. 9) PLC
Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F, and all reports on
Form 6-K containing distribution or servicing reports filed in respect
of periods included in the year covered by this annual report, of
Gracechurch Card Funding (No. 9) PLC;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a
whole, 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 misleading as of the last day of the period covered by this annual
report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information
required to be provided to the trustee by the servicer under the
pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement, for inclusion in these
reports is included in these reports;4.
    
    I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
servicer under the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement and
based upon my knowledge and the annual compliance review required
under that agreement, and except as disclosed in the reports, the
servicer has fulfilled its obligations under that agreement; and5.
    
    The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the
servicers compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon
the report provided by an independent public accountant, after
conducting a review in compliance with the Uniform Single Attestation
Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedure, as set forth in the
pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement.
 Name:    Paul Gerard Turner
Title:      Director
Date:      June 23, 2006
 - 26 -
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





I, Thomas F. Cooke, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Saratoga Resources, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Saratoga Resources, Inc.





| |        |                        
| | ------ | -----------------------
| | By:    | /s/ Thomas F. Cooke    
| | Name:  | Thomas F. Cooke        
| | Title: | Chief Executive Officer
| | Dated: | April 15, 2009
---

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

I, John Bristow, Chief Executive Officer of Rockwell Diamonds
Inc. (the Company), hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the
best of my knowledge:

(1) The Annual Report on Form 20-F of
the Company for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2010 (the Annual Report)
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

By:          /s/ J.
Bristow

________________________________Name:    John
BristowTitle:      Chief Executive
Officer
  Date:      August 31, 2010

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

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

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. CASE NO. 5:10cr12/RS

KELAWANOIA W. MCKAY,

Defendant.

_______________________________/

ORDER

Before me is the Government’s Motion To Continue Sentencing (Doc. 9). 

IT IS ORDERED that the sentencing hearing presently scheduled for June 2,

2010, is continued and is rescheduled for June 30, 2010, at 10:45 a.m.

ORDERED on May 28, 2010.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
#### STATE v. WILLS

No. 133 PC.

Case below: 32 N.C. App. 787.

Petition by Attorney General for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 13 June 1977.
**Exhibit 99.1**

** **

**CERTIFICATION**

** **

**Bysigning below, each of the undersigned officers hereby certifies pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that, to his or her knowledge, (i) this report for the quarter endedMarch 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in thisreport fairly represents, in all material aspects, the financial condition andresults of operations of Liberty Homes, Inc.**

** **

** **

**Signedthis 15th day of May, 2003.**

** **

** **
| **/s/  Edward J. Hussey**                     |   | **/s/  Marc A. Dosmann**                                           |
|-----------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------|
| **Edward  J. Hussey**Chief Executive  Officer |   | **Marc  A. Dosmann**Vice President –  Chief Financial Officer |

 

This written statement is beingfurnished to the Security and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to thisreport.  A signed original of thiswritten statement has been provided to Liberty Homes, Inc. and will be retainedby Liberty Homes, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission orits staff upon request.

 

----
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

 PENSACOLA DIVISION

HENRY SORGE,

Petitioner,

vs. CASE NO.: 3:10cv114/LAC/MD

WALTER A. MCNEIL,

Respondent.

O R D E R

Petitioner has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254

(doc. 1) and a supporting memorandum (doc. 2). He has paid the filing fee (doc. 4), and

provided one service copy of his petition and memorandum. Before the court can order

service, however, petitioner must submit one additional copy of his petition and

memorandum, so that both the named respondent and the Attorney General of the State

of Florida may be served. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

Petitioner shall, within twenty-eight (28) days of the docketing date of this order,

submit one additional service copy of his petition and memorandum. This case number

should be written on the copies. Failure to comply with this order may result in a

recommendation to the District Court that this case be dismissed. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 29th day of April, 2010.

 /s/ Miles Davis

MILES DAVIS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Page 2 of 2

Case No: 3:10cv114/LAC/MD
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. 4:10CR11-SPM

RONTARION LAMAR REED

 /

 ORDER FOR PSYCHIATRIC OR PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATION

The Defendant, Rontarion Lamar Reed, through his attorney, has moved for a psychiatric

or psychological examination to determine his competency to stand trial. See 18 U.S.C.

§4241(a). The government has moved for such an examination and also for an examination to

determine Mr. Reed’s sanity at the time of the charged offense. See Fed. R. Crim. P.12.2 ( c );

18 U.S.C. § 4242(a). Good cause has been shown for an examination within the Bureau of

Prisons.

Mr. Reed is currently in the custody of the United States Marshal’s Service in

Tallahassee.

For these reasons,

IT IS ORDERED:

1. Based on 18 U.S.C. § 4247(b), the defendant is committed to the custody of the

Attorney General or his designated representative for placement in a suitable facility.

2. It is recommended that the facility be the one at Butner, North Carolina, or Miami,

Florida.

3. The commitment is for the period needed to meet the requirements of this order. The

commitment period under 18 U.S.C. § 4247(b) will begin when the defendant arrives at the
facility. Any period in custody prior to that time will be pretrial detention en route to the

commitment.

4. The examination must determine whether at this time there is reasonable cause to

believe that the defendant is suffering from a mental disease or defect rendering him incompetent

to the extent that he is unable to understand the nature and consequences of the proceeding

against him or to assist properly in his defense. The examination must also determine whether

the defendant was insane at the time of the charged offense. The examination must be conducted

as soon as practicable after arrival facility.

5. The appropriate authorities of the facility must render a written report as soon as

practicable. The report must be filed with the court, with copies to the attorneys for the

defendant and for the government. The report must include:

a. The defendant’s history and present symptoms;

b. A description of the psychiatric, psychological, and medical tests that were

employed and their results;

c. The examiner’s findings; and

d. The examiner’s opinions on diagnosis, prognosis, whether the defendant was

insane at the time of the charged offense, and whether he suffers from a mental disease or defect

to the extent that he is unable to understand the nature and consequences of the proceeding

against him or to assist properly in his defense.

2
6. The United States Marshal Service transport the Defendant to the designated 

facility as soon as possible.

SO ORDERED this twenty-third day of June 2010.

s/ Stephan P. Mickle

Stephan P. Mickle

Chief United States District Judge

3
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

JONATHAN WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00080-MP-AK

ALACHUA COUNTY,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Extend Time to File an Amended

Motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 13). Having considered said motion, the Court is of

the opinion that it should be GRANTED, and the Clerk shall mail to Plaintiff at his new address

at Madison Correctional Institution a new form motion for leave to proceed IFP which he shall

complete and return with the necessary information on or before July 23, 2010.

DONE AND ORDERED this 9th day of July, 2010

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge
#### CARDING SPECIALISTS v. GUNTER & COOKE

No. 95 PC.

Case below: 32 N.C. App. 485.

Petition by defendants for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 3 May 1977.
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-17-0000868

21-JUN-2019

07:50 AM
The Honora ble Russell G. Clark, United States District Judge for the Western 1 District of Missouri. United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 97-3585

_____________ United States of America, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Western District of Missouri. Melvin Leroy Bedell, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. *

_____________ Submitted: March 10, 1998 Filed: March 18, 1998

_____________ Bef ore BOWMAN, FLOYD R. GIBSON, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD , Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM. Thegovernment appeals a downward departure ordered by the District Court 1 at th e sentencing of Melvin Leroy Bedell following his guilty plea to one count o f embezzlement. Because the government failed to ma ke a timely objection to either the absence of advance notice of the court's intention to depart downward on the ground th e court in fact used at sentencing or the departure itself, and thus failed to give th e court an opportunity to correct its errors, our review is for plain error only.-2-

We agree with the government that the District Court erred and that the erro r was plain. We do not agree, however, that the casepresents plain error of the sort that requi res reversal. Applying the plain-error standard of review of United States v
. Olano , 113 S. Ct. 1770 (1993), we sustain the sentence imposed by the District Court. AFFIRMED. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<PAGE>


EXHIBIT 16
LETTER REGARDING CHANGE
IN CERTIFYING ACCOUNTANT



</Page>
<PAGE>
                               /Letter Head/


April 7, 2000

Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

Gentlemen:

I have read Item 8 of Part II of Form 10 KSB of Gene-Cell, Inc. and I am in
agreement with the statements contained therein so far as they relate to my
firm.  I have no basis to agree or disagree with other statements of the
registrant contained therein.

/s/ Schvaneveldt & Company
---------------------------
April 11, 2000


</Page>