alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

OTW DAVIE LLC d/b/a OFF THE WALL GAMEZONE,

Appellant,

v.

TYLER SWERDLOFF, individually and as parent and legal guardian of 

N.S., a minor,

Appellee.

No. 4D22-2754

[February 9, 2023]

Appeal of a non-final order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth

Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Michael A. Robinson, Judge; L.T. Case 

No. CACE22006096.

Maureen G. Pearcy of Paul R. Pearcy, P.A., Miami, Anthony E. Torrente

and Ali S. Iftikhar of Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, Coral Gables, for 

appellant.

Neil Rose, Hollywood, and Eric S. Rosen of Rosen Injury Law, Davie, for 

appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

KLINGENSMITH, C.J., MAY and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
NO. 07-05-0149-CV

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL D

	APRIL 27, 2005

	______________________________

	THE FEED STORE, INC., d/b/a CHAD and PATRICIA LANGSTON, et al.,

											Appellants

	V.

	SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF HOUSTON, INC.,

											Appellee

	_________________________________

	FROM THE COUNTY CIVIL COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF HARRIS COUNTY;

	NO. 823,840; HON. GARY MICHAEL BLOCK, PRESIDING

	_______________________________

	MEMORANDUM OPINION

	_______________________________

Before QUINN, REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.

	Appellants The Feed Store, Inc., d/b/a Chad and Patricia Langston, et al. filed a notice of appeal on February 22, 2005.  However, they did not pay the $125 filing fee required from appellants under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 5.  Nor did they file an affidavit of indigence per Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 20.1.  By letter from this Court dated April 15, 2005, we informed appellants that “the filing fee has not been paid  in the  captioned appeal.  Unless the filing fee in the amount of $125.00 is paid by Monday, April 25, 2005, this appeal will be subject to dismissal.”  Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c); see Holt v. F. F. Enterprises, 990 S.W.2d 756 (Tex. App.--Amarillo 1998, pet. ref’d).  The deadline lapsed, and the fee was not received. 

	Because appellants have failed to pay the requisite filing fee as directed by the court, we dismiss the appeal pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(c). 

							Per Curiam
IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 261 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Department 

of Veterans Affairs should not retreat from its responsibility to support 

those veterans with combat wounds or service-connected disabilities. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 18, 2009 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN submitted the following resolution; which was referred 

to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 

the Department of Veterans Affairs should not retreat 

from its responsibility to support those veterans with 

combat wounds or service-connected disabilities. 

Whereas President Abraham Lincoln promised ‘‘. . . to care 

for him who bore the brunt of battle, his widow and his 

orphan . . .’’; 

Whereas it is the mission of the Department of Veterans Affairs ‘‘to care for him who shall have borne the battle, 

and for his widow, and his orphan’’; 

Whereas the Department of Veterans Affairs emphasizes that 

it will ‘‘provide veterans the world-class benefits and services they have earned—and to do so by adhering to the 

highest standards of compassion, commitment, excellence, 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 261 IH 

professionalism, integrity, accountability, and stewardship’’; 

Whereas one of the ways the Nation provides support for the 

men and women who fight overseas is to ensure that veterans’ programs are effective and reliable at home; 

Whereas the President is said to be considering a proposal 

that would authorize the Department of Veterans Affairs 

to recover or collect charges from a veteran’s private 

health insurance provider for hospital care and medical 

services furnished by the Department for a service-connected disability; 

Whereas the Department of Veterans Affairs is currently authorized to recover or collect from third-party insurers of 

veterans charges for hospital care and medical services 

furnished by the Department for non-service connected 

conditions; and 

Whereas expanding this policy to bill a veteran’s personal insurance for care that the Department of Veterans Affairs 

has a responsibility to provide would break the solemn 

compact between a veteran and the Government: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that— 

3 (1) the President should not formally propose a 

4 change in policy as significant as the proposal to au5 thorize the Department of Veterans Affairs to 

6 charge a veteran’s private health insurance provider 

7 for hospital care and medical services furnished by 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
3 

•HRES 261 IH 

1 the Department for a service-connected disability; 

2 and 

3 (2) the Department of Veterans Affairs should 

4 acknowledge its responsibility for financing the 

5 health care of veterans with service-connected dis6 abilities and combat wounds. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
#### KIRKWOOD BAPTIST CHURCH, Appellant, v. CITY COUNCIL OF the CITY OF KIRKWOOD, Respondent.

No. 65524.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division IV.

Oct. 11, 1994.

Albert A Michenfelder, Jr., Clayton, for appellant.

John M. Hessel, Mary B. Schultz, St. Louis, for respondent.

Before SIMON, KAROHL and AHRENS, JJ.

*MEMORANDUM OPINION*

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the decision of the City Council of the City of Kirkwood (Council) denying the Kirkwood Baptist Church’s (Church) request for a special use permit to construct a parking lot on its vacant lot located on the northeast corner of a block directly across the street from the Church. The vacant lot is adjacent to and nearby single family residences located on the same and nearby blocks. The vacant lot is zoned residential.

After conducting a public hearing, the Council voted three in favor of and three opposed to the special use permit, resulting in its denial. The findings of fact and conclusions of law which the three Council members opposed to the permit voted to adopt found that the proposed parking lot would have an adverse affect on the character of the neighborhood and the community’s general welfare. After reviewing the Planning and Zoning Commission’s report, the testimony, and the exhibits, we find that the Council’s decision is supported by competent and substantial evidence on the whole record and no error of law appears. *See Davco Food Inc. v. City of Bridgeton,*725 S.W.2d 32, 33 — 4[1—3] (MoApp.1986); *Erigan Co., Inc. v. Town of Grantwood Village,*682 S.W.2d 495, 496-97[l-3] (Mo.App.1982). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 87 (Friday, May 3, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19880-19881]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11164]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Customs Service

19 CFR Part 101


Extension of Port Limits of Columbus, OH

AGENCY: U.S. Customs Service, Department of the Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: This notice extends the period of time within which interested 
members of the public may submit comments concerning the proposal to 
amend the Customs Regulations pertaining to the field organization of

[[Page 19881]]

Customs by extending the geographical limits of the port of Columbus, 
Ohio, to include Rickenbacker Airport which is currently operating as a 
user fee airport. The comment period is being extended another 30 days.

DATES: Comments are requested on or before May 31, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments (preferably in triplicate) may be addressed to the 
Regulations Branch, U.S. Customs Service, Franklin Court, 1301 
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20229 and inspected at 
Franklin Court, 1099 14th Street, N.W., Suite 4000, Washington, D.C.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harry Denning, Office of Field 
Operations, (202) 927-0196.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A document was published in the Federal 
Register (61 FR 8001) on March 1, 1996, proposing to amend the Customs 
Regulations pertaining to the field organization of Customs by 
extending the geographical limits of the port of Columbus, Ohio, to 
include Rickenbacker Airport which is currently operating as a user fee 
airport. The document further stated that if the boundaries of the port 
are extended as proposed, the Customs Regulations would also be amended 
to remove Rickenbacker Airport's designation as a user fee airport. 
Customs solicited comments on the proposal and comments were due by 
April 30, 1996.
    Customs has received a request to extend the comment period to 
allow interested parties to have more time to consider the proposal as 
the long-term economic development interests of the Greater Columbus 
Community make it imperative that there be full consideration of the 
proposal. Customs believes the request has merit. Accordingly, the 
period of time for the submission of comments is being extended 30 
days.
    All comments submitted will be available for public inspection in 
accordance with the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552), section 
1.4, Treasury Department Regulations (31 CFR 1.4), and section 
103.11(b), Customs Regulations (19 CFR 103.11(b)), between 9:00 a.m. 
and 4:30 p.m. on normal business days, at the address stated above.

    Dated: April 30, 1996.
Marvin M. Amernick,
Acting Assistant Commissioner, Office of Regulations and Rulings.
[FR Doc. 96-11164 Filed 5-02-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4820-02-P
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 GULF UNITED ENERGY, INC. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his 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.








Date:  October 16, 2012





/s/ John B. Connally III


John B. Connally III, President and C.E.O.


(Principal Executive Officer)
#### Willie MOONEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 48273.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

May 17, 1994.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied June 28, 1994.

Application to Transfer Denied Aug. 15, 1994.

Rebecca L. Kurz, Asst. Appellate Defender, Kansas City, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Joanne E. Beal, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before LOWENSTEIN, P.J., and BERREY and SPINDEN, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

Appeal from the denial of a Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 22-10638

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Rene Rodriguez, 

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:22-CR-33-1

______________________________

Before Stewart, Dennis, and Willett, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The attorney appointed to represent Rene Rodriguez has moved for 

leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 

386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). 

Rodriguez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and 

the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 27, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 22-10638 Document: 00516689726 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/27/2023
No. 22-10638

2

counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for 

appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is 

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and 

the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

Case: 22-10638 Document: 00516689726 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/27/2023
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 21, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 25494]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12705]



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

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Dkt. C-3647]


Safe Brands Corporation, et al.; Prohibited Trade Practices, and 
Affirmative Corrective Actions

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Consent order.

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

SUMMARY: In settlement of alleged violations of federal law prohibiting 
unfair or deceptive acts or practices and unfair methods of 
competition, this consent order requires the respondents, among other 
things, to have reliable scientific evidence to substantiate certain 
claims regarding the environmental benefits, the level of engine 
protection and the safety of any antifreeze, coolant or deicer. The 
consent order also requires the respondents to provide a disclosure 
statement cautioning consumers that Sierra antifreeze may be harmful if 
swallowed. In addition, the consent order prohibits the respondents 
from misrepresenting the recyclability of such products and their 
packages.

DATES: Complaint and Order issued March 26, 1996.\1\

    \1\ Copies of the Complaint and Decision and Order are available 
from the Commission's Public Reference Branch, H-130, 6th Street & 
Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel Winston, FTC/S-4002, Washington, 
D.C. 20580, (202) 326-3153.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On Tuesday, December 12, 1995, there was 
published in the Federal Register, 60 FR 63717, a proposed consent 
agreement with analysis In the Matter of Safe Brands Corporation, et 
al., for the purpose of soliciting public comment. Interested parties 
were given sixty (60) days in which to submit comments, suggestions or 
objections regarding the proposed form of the order.
    No comments having been received, the Commission has ordered the 
issuance of the complaint in the form contemplated by the agreement, 
made its jurisdictional findings and entered an order to cease and 
desist, as set forth in the proposed consent agreement, in disposition 
of this proceeding.

(Sec. 6, 38 Stat. 721; 15 U.S.C. 46. Interprets or applies sec. 5, 
38 Stat. 719, as amended; 15 U.S.C. 45)
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-12705 Filed 5-20-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-M
EXHIBIT 31



CERTIFICATION



I, Anthony N. DeMint,
certify that:



1. I have
		reviewed this report on Form 10-KSB of Your Domain.com;
2. Based on
		my knowledge, this annual 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 misleading with respect to the period covered
		by this report;
3. Based on
		my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
		included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects
		the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
		small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this
		annual report;
4. I am the
		sole officer and director and I am responsible for establishing and
		maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange
		Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and
		have:

> Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
> 				disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my
> 				supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
> 				small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
> 				is made known to me by others within those entities,
> 				particularly during the period in which this report is being
> 				prepared;
> 		Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer
> 				disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report
> 				my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
> 				controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by
> 				this report based on such evaluation; and
> 		Disclosed in this report any change in the small business
> 				issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred
> 				during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter
> 				(the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case
> 				of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
> 				reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business
> 				issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

1. I have
		disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over
		financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors of the
		small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the
		equivalent functions):

> All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
> 				design or operation of internal control over financial reporting
> 				which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small
> 				business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and
> 				report financial information; and
> 		Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
> 				other employees who have a significant role in the small
> 				business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.



Date: February 7,
2005





/s/ Anthony N. DeMint_________

Anthony N. DeMint

President and

Chief Accounting
Officer
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-30,337-06

EX P ARTE RODERICK O’ NEAL DIXON, Appli cant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 679611-D IN THE 208 DISTRICT COURT T H F ROM HARRIS COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the T ex as C o d e of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of ag g ravated sexual assault of a child and sentenc ed to forty y ear s’ imprisonment. The First Court of Appea ls aff irmed his conviction. Dixon v. State , No. 01-95-00432- CR (Tex. App.—Houston [1 ] Mar. 4, 1999)(not st desig nated f

or publication). Ba sed on the trial court’ s findings of fac t as well as this Court’s independe nt r eview of the entire rec ord, we deny relief on Applicant’s actua l innocenc e claim. Applicant’s claim of ineffe ctive assistance of counse l is dism issed as subseque nt. T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O . Art. 11.07 § 4.2

Filed: J une 26, 2019 Do not publish
Exhibit 31.2



Certification of Principal Financial Officer

Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

and Securities and Exchange Commission Release 34-46427



I, Martin Thorp, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Four Rivers BioEnergy Inc., for the quarter ended April 30, 2008;



2. Based on my knowledge, 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 misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;



3. Based on my knowledge, 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, the periods presented in this quarterly report;



4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:



a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;



b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



c) disclosed in this report any change in registrants internal control over financial reporting the occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting;



5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



a) all deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



|                     |                                                                   
|-------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date:  June 16, 2008 | /s/ Martin Thorp                                                  
|                     | Martin Thorp
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)