alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### NEW AMSTERDAM CASUALTY COMPANY v. JAMES H. GRAY, JR., and NINA GRAY WALLACE, Trading as G. & S. MOTOR COMPANY, a partnership, and FORD MOTOR COMPANY.

(Filed 21 September, 1960.)

Automobiles § 5—

Evidence tending to show that excessive heat arose from the floor board of the front seat and that fumes were emitted upon the operation of the automobile purchased from defendants, and that on a certain day after the ear had been driven a few miles it caught fire while not in operation and unattended, *is held*insufficient to be submitted to the jury in an action against the sellers for breach of implied warranty, there being no evidence from which the cause of the fire might be reasonably inferred.

*61Appeal by plaintiff from *Moms, J.,*May-June 1960 Term, of MARTIN.

This is an action to recover for alleged breach of implied warranty. H. H. Williams purchased a new automobile on 16 March 1959, and procured from plaintiff, Casualty Company, an insurance policy covering loss by fire. Williams was sole operator of the car and drove it at a moderate speed at all times. In operation an excessive amount of heat arose from the floor board of the front seat and fumes were emitted. Williams complained to the dealer. The dealer inspected the vehicle and installed a pressure cap and thermostat. The excessive heating continued. A service station attendant inspected the car and found nothing wrong. On 11 April 1959, while not in operation and unattended, the automobile caught fire. It was almost completely destroyed. The car had been driven less than 1000 miles since purchase and on the day of the fire had been driven only a few miles shortly before the fire was discovered. There was no foreign combustible material left in or about the vehicle. The Casualty Company paid Williams the full value of the car, took a subrogation assignment, and instituted this action against the dealer and manufacturer. Plaintiff alleged latent defect in materials and workmanship and breach of implied warranty of fitness.

At the close of plaintiff’s evidence defendants moved for nonsuit. Motion was allowed. From judgment of nonsuit and dismissal of the action plaintiff appealed.

*E. L. Coburn for plaintiff, appellant.*

*James and Speight and William C. Brewer, Jr., for defendant Ford Motor Company, appellee.*

*Griffin & Martin for defendant G. & S. Motor Company, appellee.*

Per Curiam.

If the automobile was defective in any respect, the record fails to disclose any evidence, direct or circumstantial, tending to show what the defect consisted of. No causal connection between the excessive heating and the fire is made to appear. Furthermore, there is no contention that heat or fumes had ever been emitted while the car was not in operation. Recovery may not be predicated on conjecture. No evidence has been adduced from which the cause of the fire may be reasonably inferred.

The judgment below is

Affirmed.
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

February 12, 2021

No. 04

- 20

- 00532

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF W.J.M., A CHILD

From the 408th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018

- CI

- 15709 Honorable Karen H. Pozza , Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellant’s motion for an extension of time to file his brief is GRANTED. Appellant’s brief is due on or before April 13, 2021

.

_________________________________ Irene Rios , Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said
court on t his 12th day of February, 2021

.

___________________________________ M ichael A. C ruz , Clerk of Court
##### 



Exhibit 32.1

INTERSTATE HOTELS & RESORTS,
INC.

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT SECTION 906
CERTIFICATIONS


In connection with this quarterly report on
Form 10-Q of Interstate Hotels & Resorts, Inc.
(the Registrant) for the three months ended
September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Steven D. Jorns, Chief Executive
Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| |    |                                                                                                                                                                
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | 1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements
    of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
    1934; and                                  
|
| | 2) | The information contained in the Report fairly
    presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
    results of operations of the Registrant.



| |                        
| | -----------------------
| | /s/ STEVEN D. JORNS    
| |                        
| | Steven D. Jorns        
| | Chief Executive Officer

Dated: November 8, 2004

42
DISMISS; and Opinion Filed October 4, 2018.

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 18

- 00045

- CV

RUBY GOODACRE , Appellant

V. COURTYARDS AT KIRNWO OD , Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC

- 17

- 05543

- C



### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Myers, Evans, and Brown Opinion by Justice Brown Appellant’s brief in this case is overdue. By postcard dated June 18, 2018, we notified
appellant that the time f

or filing her brief had expired and instructed her to file the brief with an
appropriate extension motion within ten days. We further cautioned appellant that failure to file

her br ief within the specified time would res ult in dismissal of the appeal.
To date, appellant has not filed a brief or otherwise communicated with the Court regarding
the status of the appeal

. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.8(a)(1);

42.3(b), (c).

1800 45F.P05 /Ada Brown/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE– 2

– 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

RUBY GOODACRE, Appellant

No. 05

- 18

- 00045

- CV V.

COURTYARDS AT KIRNWOOD, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC

- 17

- 05543

- C. Opinion delivered by Justice Brown. Justices Myers and Evans participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED

.

Judgment entered this 4 th day of October, 2018.
#### NAN MATTOX HERNDON v. JACK DENNIS HERNDON.

(Filed 16 April, 1958)

Divorce and Alimony § 13: Judges § 3a—

The resident judge oí tlie district lias tlie jurisdiction to hear and determine motion for reasonable subsistence and counsel fees *pendente me*in an action ror alimony without divorce. G.S. 50-16.

Appeal by defendant from *Bickett,*Jin Chambers, October 22, 1957, at Raleigh, County of Ware.

Civil action for allotment of subsistence and support without divorce, and for reasonable subsistence and counsel fees *'pendente lite.*

Upon a hearing the resident judge of the Superior Court, Tenth Judicial District, at Raleigh, N. C., finding from the pleadings and affidavits that plaintiff and defendant were married on 28 December, 1956; that defendant separated himself from plaintiff on 22 July, 1957, and that he has since failed to provide plaintiff with necessary subsistence according to his means and station in life, entered an order for subsistence and counsel fees, and retained the cause subject to further orders of the court.

*249Defendant excepted thereto, and appeals to Supreme Court and assigns error.

*Charles M. Griwn, J. Harold-.Griffin, for plaintiff, appellee.*

*Emanuel & Emanuel, for ■ defendant, .'appellant.*

Per Curiam :

The only assignment of error presented on this appeal is based upon exception to the order entered, and to. the signing thereof.

The record discloses that this action was instituted, and has been prosecuted thus far, in accordance with provisions of G.S. 50-16. Hence the resident judge of Superior Court was empowered to make the order from which appeal is taken. See *Olham v. Oldham,*225 N.C. 47635 S.E. 2d 332. Therefore, the order is

.-Affirmed.
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION**I, Floyd C. Wilson, certify that:1.      I have reviewed this interim report on Form 10-Q of Petrohawk EnergyCorporation (the Company);2.      Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;3.      Based on my knowledge, the consolidated financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report;4.      The Company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Company and we have;a.      Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;b.      Evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report, based on ourevaluation; andc.      Disclosed in this report any change in the Company’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the Company’s fourth fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5.      The Company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’s auditors andthe audit committee of Company’s board of directors:a.      All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the Company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb.      Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: August 11, 2005                                    /s/ Floyd C. Wilson   Floyd C. Wilson        Chief Executive Officer and President
117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3606 

AN ACT 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to eliminate the 

requirement to specify an effective period of a transfer 

of Post-9/11 educational assistance to a dependent, and 

for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

†S 3606 ES

1 SECTION 1. ELIMINATION OF REQUIREMENT TO SPECIFY 

2 AN EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF A TRANSFER OF 

3 POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE TO A 

4 DEPENDENT. 

5 Section 3319(e) of title 38, United States Code, is 

6 amended— 

7 (1) in paragraph (1), by adding ‘‘and’’ after the 

8 semicolon; 

9 (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘; and’’ and 

10 inserting a period; and 

11 (3) by striking paragraph (3). 

Passed the Senate August 4, 2022. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3606 

AN ACT 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to eliminate 

a dependent, and for other purposes. a transfer of Post-9/11 educational assistance to the requirement to specify an effective period of
Long-Range 

Actuarial 

Balance

Annual 

Balance in 

75th Year

Long-Range 

Actuarial 

Balance

Annual 

Balance in 75th 

Year

Long-Range 

Actuarial 

Balance

Annual 

Balance in 

75th Year

-2.00% -4.34% 1.39% 1.98% -0.62% -2.36%

Summary Measures and Graphs

Category of Change: Payroll Taxes (including maximum taxable)

Proposed Provision: Raise the payroll tax rates gradually (for employees and employers combined) by 

0.1 percentage points in 2015; continue this increase each year for 20 years. By 2034, the combined 

employee and employer payroll tax rate would be 14.4 percent.

Present Law Change From Present Law in Results with this provision

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0

2009 2019 2029 2039 2049 2059 2069 2079

Percent

Year

OASDI Cost Rates and Income Rates

(as a percentage of taxable payroll)

Cost rates with this provision

Income rates under present law

Income rates with this provision

Cost rates under present law

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

2009 2019 2029 2039 2049 2059 2069 2079

Percent

Year

OASDI Trust Fund Ratio

(assets as a percentage of annual expenditures)

Present law With this provision

Estimates based on the intermediate assumptions of the 2009 Trustees Report Office of the Chief Actuary, Social Security

November 4, 2009

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0

2009 2019 2029 2039 2049 2059 2069 2079

Percent

Year

OASDI Cost Rates and Income Rates

(as a percentage of taxable payroll)

Cost rates with this provision

Income rates under present law

Income rates with this provision

Cost rates under present law

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

2009 2019 2029 2039 2049 2059 2069 2079

Percent

Year

OASDI Trust Fund Ratio

(assets as a percentage of annual expenditures)

Present law With this provision
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3691 

To reduce Federal spending and the deficit by terminating taxpayer financing 

of Presidential election campaigns. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 17, 2022 

Ms. ERNST introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To reduce Federal spending and the deficit by terminating 

taxpayer financing of Presidential election campaigns. 

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 ‘‘Eliminating Leftover 

5 Expenses for Campaigns from Taxpayers (ELECT) Act 

6 of 2022’’. 

7 SEC. 2. TERMINATION OF TAXPAYER FINANCING OF PRESI8 DENTIAL ELECTION CAMPAIGNS. 

9 (a) TERMINATION OF DESIGNATION OF INCOME TAX

10 PAYMENTS.—Section 6096 of the Internal Revenue Code 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3691 IS

1 of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following 

2 new subsection: 

3 ‘‘(d) TERMINATION.—This section shall not apply to 

4 taxable years beginning after December 31, 2021.’’. 

5 (b) TERMINATION OF FUND AND ACCOUNT.— 

6 (1) TERMINATION OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

7 CAMPAIGN FUND.— 

8 (A) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 95 of subtitle 

9 H of such Code is amended by adding at the 

10 end the following new section: 

11 ‘‘SEC. 9013. TERMINATION. 

12 ‘‘The provisions of this chapter shall not apply with 

13 respect to any Presidential election (or any Presidential 

14 nominating convention) after the date of the enactment 

15 of this section, or to any candidate in such an election.’’. 

16 (B) TRANSFER OF REMAINING FUNDS.— 

17 Section 9006 of such Code is amended by add18 ing at the end the following new subsection: 

19 ‘‘(d) TRANSFER OF FUNDS REMAINING AFTER TER20 MINATION.—The Secretary shall transfer the amounts in 

21 the fund as of the date of the enactment of this subsection 

22 to the general fund of the Treasury, to be used only for 

23 reducing the deficit.’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 3691 IS

1 (2) TERMINATION OF ACCOUNT.—Chapter 96 

2 of subtitle H of such Code is amended by adding at 

3 the end the following new section: 

4 ‘‘SEC. 9043. TERMINATION. 

5 ‘‘The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to any 

6 candidate with respect to any Presidential election after 

7 the date of the enactment of this section.’’. 

8 (c) CLERICAL AMENDMENTS.— 

9 (1) The table of sections for chapter 95 of sub10 title H of such Code is amended by adding at the 

11 end the following new item: 

‘‘Sec. 9013. Termination.’’. 

12 (2) The table of sections for chapter 96 of sub13 title H of such Code is amended by adding at the 

14 end the following new item: 

‘‘Sec. 9043. Termination.’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
J. 

0.94f1 

because this court has previously rejected this challenge. 2 See Hall v. 

State, 91 Nev. 314, 535 P.2d 797 (1975). Further, any challenge to the 

decision to deny parole was without merit because parole is an act of grace 

of the State and there is no cause of action when parole has been denied. 

See NRS 213.10705; Niergarth v. Warden, 105 Nev. 26, 28, 768 P.2d 882, 

883 (1989). Accordingly, we 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 

Ginons 

Douglas 

Saitta 

cc: Hon. James E. Wilson, District Judge 

Mark Moor 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Carson City District Attorney 

Carson City Clerk 

2See Moor v. State, Docket No. 47889 (Order of Affirmance, January 

10, 2007); Moor v. Warden, Docket No. 53554 (Order of Affirmance, 

November 3, 2009). 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

2 

gringEMESSMAMRke-17".- . •=1-47113/fallaRE'W NAME
<PAGE>

                                                            Exhibit 21

Subsidiaries of the Registrant              Place of Incorporation
------------------------------              -----------------------

WPI Electronics, Inc.                       New Hampshire
WPI Magnetec, Inc.                          New Hampshire
WPI Power Systems, Inc.                     New Hampshire
WPI Oyster Termiflex, Inc.                  New Hampshire
WPI Terimflex International Sales, Inc.     Massachusetts
WPI DecisionKey, Inc.                       New Hampshire
WPI Micro Palm,  Inc.                       New Hampshire
WPI Micro Processor Systems, Inc.           New Hampshire
WPI Oyster Termiflex Limited                England and Wales
WPI Oyster Terminals, Inc.                  New Hampshire
WPI UK Holding, Inc.                        New Hampshire
WPI UK Holding II, Inc.                     New Hampshire
WPI Group (U.K.)                            England and Wales
WPI Husky Computers, Inc.                   Florida
WPI Husky Computers Limited                 England and Wales
WPI Husky Computers GmbH                    Germany
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 24, 2020

No. 04-19-00563-CV

Miriam LEDEZMA,

Appellant

v.

LAREDO HOUSING AUTHORITY,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CVD000029L1

Honorable Hugo Martinez, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellant’s unopposed second motion for an extension of time to file the appellant’s 

brief is granted. We order appellant to file the appellant’s brief by February 3, 2020. Counsel is 

advised that no further extensions of time will be granted absent a timely motion that (1) 

demonstrates extraordinary circumstances justifying further delay, (2) advises the court of the 

efforts counsel has expended in preparing the brief, and (3) provides the court reasonable 

assurance that the brief will be completed and filed by the requested extended deadline. The 

court does not generally consider a heavy work schedule to be an extraordinary circumstance.

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 24th day of January, 2020.

___________________________________

Michael A. Cruz,

Clerk of Court
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the
quarterly report of bebe stores, inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended January 1, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Manny Mashouf,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on 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.



|                        |  |  |  |  |  |                        
|----------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Dated: February 9, 2011 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Manny Mashouf      
|                        |  |  |  |  |  | Manny Mashouf          
|                        |  |  |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 32 (Thursday, February 16, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 9004]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-3735]



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


DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Agency Form Under Review by the Office of Management and Budget

    DOC has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for 
clearance the following proposal for collection of information under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35).
    Agency: Bureau of the Census.
    Title: 1995 Census Test - Integrated Coverage Measurement (Housing 
Unit Follow-up).
    Form Number(s): DG-1377.
    Agency Approval Number: None.
    Type of Request: New collection-EXPEDITED REVIEW.
    Burden: 330.
    Number of Respondents: 2,241.
    Avg Hours Per Response: 5 minutes.
    Needs and Uses: Prompted by the need to improve estimation 
techniques during the decennial census, the Census Bureau has developed 
an Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM) approach to be tested during 
the 1995 Census Test. The ICM approach will utilize a separately 
sampled group of blocks within the 1995 Census Test sites which will be 
independently listed and then interviewed in addition to being 
enumerated in the census test. We will reconcile differences between 
the independent roster obtained in the ICM interviews and the census 
test results. This reconciliation will allow us to measure our coverage 
of persons in missed housing units and coverage of persons missed 
within housing units enumerated in the census test. Before ICM 
interviews are conducted, the independent listing will be enhanced by 
matching to existing census records. We will use the Housing Unit 
Follow-up Form to resolve non-matches and duplicate addresses. ICM 
interviews will then be conducted at housing units on the ``enhanced 
listing.''
    Affected Public: Individuals or households.
    Frequency: One-time.
    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.
    OMB Desk Officer: Maria Gonzalez, (202) 395-7313.
    Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained 
by calling or writing Gerald Tache, DOC Forms Clearance Officer, (202) 
482-3271, Department of Commerce, room 5312, 14th and Constitution 
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230.
    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information 
collection should be sent to Maria Gonzalez, OMB Desk Officer, room 
10201, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.

    Dated: February 9, 1995.
Gerald Tache,
Departmental Forms Clearance Officer, Office of Management and 
Organization.
[FR Doc. 95-3735 Filed 2-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-07-F