alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

KARP & WEISS, P.C.

3060 North Swan Road

Tucson, Arizona 85712-1225

Telephone (520) 325-4200

Facsimile (520) 325-4224

Stephen M. Weiss

PCC No. 61412

State Bar No. 002261

sweiss@karpweiss.com

Adam C. Page

PCC No. 66148

State Bar No. 025015

apage@karpweiss.com

Attorneys for Defendant Joye Vaught

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff

 v.

7. JOYE VAUGHT

Defendants

CR-18-00422-PHX-SPL (BSB)

NOTICE OF WAIVER OF 

PERSONAL APPEARANCE AT 

HEARING

Defendant Joye Vaught, by and through her undersigned attorney, hereby 

provides notice that she waives her right to be personally present at the upcoming 

hearing on pending motions scheduled for October 5, 2018, at 9:00 a.m. See Rule 

43(b)(3), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

DATED this 21st day of September, 2018.

KARP & WEISS, P.C.

By /s/ Stephen M. Weiss 

Stephen M. Weiss

Attorney for Defendant Vaught

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 321 Filed 09/21/18 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 21st day of September, 2018, I electronically 

transmitted the foregoing document on behalf of Joye Vaught to the Clerk of the Court 

by filing with the CM/ECF system and I understand a copy of the filing will be emailed 

to the following CM/ECF registrants:

Honorable Steven P. Logan: logan_chambers@azd.uscourts.gov

Reginald E. Jones: reginald.jones4@usdoj.gov

Peter Kozinets: peter.kozinets@usdoj.gov

John J. Kucera: john.kucera@usdoj.gov

Dominic William Lanza: dominic.lanza@usdoj.gov

Margaret Perlmeter: margaret.perlmeter@usdoj.gov 

Kevin M. Rapp: kevin.rapp@usdoj.gov

Andrew Stone: andrew.stone@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for Government

Paul J. Cambria, Jr.: pcambria@lglaw.com

Robert Corn-Revere: bobcornrevere@dwt.com

Bruce S. Feder: bf@federlawpa.com

James C. Grant: jimgrant@dwt.com

Michael D. Kimerer: MDK@kimerer.com

K. C. Maxwell: kmaxwell@bgrfirm.com

Erin E. McCampbell: emccampbell@lglaw.com

Michael L. Piccarreta: mlp@pd-law.com

Rhonda Neff: RNeff@kimerer.com

Attorneys for Defendants

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 321 Filed 09/21/18 Page 2 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Paul J. Cambria, Jr. (NY Bar No.1430909, admitted pro hac vice) 

Erin E. McCampbell (NY Bar No. 4480166, admitted pro hac vice) 

LIPSITZ GREEN SCIME CAMBRIA LLP 

42 Delaware Avenue, Suite 120 

Buffalo, New York 14202 

Telephone: (716) 849-1333 

Facsimile: (716) 855-1580 

pcambria@lglaw.com 

emccampbell@lglaw.com 

Attorneys for Michael Lacey 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

 Plaintiff, 

vs. 

Michael Lacey, et al., 

 

 Defendants. 

NO. CR-18-00422-PHX-SMB 

MOTION FOR LEAVE FOR COUNSEL 

TO APPEAR BY PHONE OR 

VIDEOCONFERENCING AT MAY 22, 

2023 HEARING 

NOW COMES the Defendant, Michael Lacey, by his attorney of record, to ask the Court 

to grant leave for his lawyer to appear by phone or videoconferencing at the May 22, 2023 Hearing 

in this matter. As good cause therefore, the Defendant submits the following: 

Mr. Lacey’s counsel has an unmoveable personal conflict. His daughter’s college graduation 

is on May 20, 2023, after which, counsel will host a graduation party on the evening of May 21, 2023. 

Additionally, counsel will be hosting out-of-town guests at the time of the May 22, 2023 Hearing. It 

is not possible to travel to and from the District of Arizona for the May 22, 2023 Hearing and attend 

these very important family milestones. 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1582 Filed 05/09/23 Page 1 of 2
2 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Further, because the government has seized the majority of Mr. Lacey’s assets, and the 

limited pool of assets available for trial costs was substantially depleted during the first trial in this 

case, assets necessary for travel and accomodations are in short supply and need to be preserved for 

the upcoming trial. 

The Government does not object to this Motion. 

The Court will find attached a proposed Order. 

 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 8th day of May, 2023, 

Paul J. Cambria, Jr. 

LIPSITZ GREEN SCIME CAMBRIA LLP 

 By: /s/ Paul J. Cambria, Jr. 

Paul J. Cambria, Jr. 

Attorneys for Michael Lacey 

On May 8, 2023, a PDF version 

of this document was filed with 

Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF 

System for filing and for Transmittal 

Of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the 

Following CM/ECF registrants: 

Kevin Rapp, kevin.rapp@usdoj.gov 

Peter Kozinets, peter.kozinets@usdoj.gov 

Daniel Boyle, daniel.boyle2@usdoj.gov 

Margaret Perlmeter, margaret.perlmeter@usdoj.gov 

Andrew Stone, andrew.stone@usdoj.gov 

Austin Maxwell Berry, austin.berry2@usdoj.gov

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1582 Filed 05/09/23 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32








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 Don Marcos Trading Co. (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”), we, Earl T. Shannon and Scott W. Bodenweber, President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, respectively, 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 result of operations of the Company.





Date: May 13, 2011




/s/ Earl T. Shannon


Earl T. Shannon


President





Date: May 13, 2011





/s/ Scott W. Bodenweber


Scott W. Bodenweber


Chief Financial Officer
Eon. 3111 Crow, Pago 2 

“1. A odsaion of me-half of one paraent 

up o n o h0 loliumlaaahreoeiptb 0r eeo& exeauOcw, 

ettmlnleiirator or guaxllui, upon the approval of 

the l x h ib l8s~athr nU flzml @o88lemat OS the #MJaouat or suoh emouter, mlmlalstxator or guardian, 

butnomoratbnonna web 0olmds8l0naha11be 

aharged 011 nay aooaunt rewired by any suah axaoutor, adndaletrator QT guortllan. 

* 

. . . .- 

Art.1010 3926, Yapmats Annote ted Clrll stntubeu 

embraaoa fire 8oationh 

nlth Eeotlon 1. 

We are aonoqrnad here prlaalpally 

In the aa of Igles v. Oheim, l&2 3. r, 

959, 00Mtrtllng ArtlOl@ 3926, it ii5 mid, 

: ): ‘<S:,, I::,+.. y :: :~. .; 
BBnonble Will Czaw, Pege 3 

I .’ ., ..,. : 

,, ,:: ,..,.:_. :c.,:-: !.:, : >>i., :;‘.:!: ,~:.:. 

.~ ‘. 

. 

,. 

. . 

:
Administrative Office of the United States Courts FOR COURT USE ONLY

TRANSCRIPT ORDER

DUE DATE:

OAO 435

AZ Form (Rev. 1/2015)

1. NAME 2. PHONE NUMBER 3. DATE

4. FIRM NAME

5. MAILING ADDRESS 6. CITY 7. STATE 8. ZIP CODE

9. CASE NUMBER 10. JUDGE DATES OF PROCEEDINGS

11. 12. 

13. CASE NAME LOCATION OF PROCEEDINGS

14. 15. STATE

16. ORDER FOR

9 APPEAL 9 CRIMINAL

9 NON-APPEAL 9 CIVIL

9 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT

9 

IN FORMA PAUPERIS

BANKRUPTCY

OTHER (Specify)

17. TRANSCRIPT REQUESTED (Specify portion(s) and date(s) of proceeding(s) for which transcript is requested.)

PORTIONS DATE(S) PORTION(S) DATE(S)

9TESTIMONY (Specify)

9PRE-TRIAL PROCEEDING

9OTHER (Specify)

9VOIR DIRE

9OPENING STATEMENT (Plaintiff)

9OPENING STATEMENT (Defendant)

9CLOSING ARGUMENT (Plaintiff)

9CLOSING ARGUMENT (Defendant)

9OPINION OF COURT

9JURY INSTRUCTIONS

9SENTENCING

9BAIL HEARING

18. ORDER

CATEGORY

ORIGINAL + 1

(original to Court,

copy to ordering party)

FIRST

COPY

# OF

ADDITIONAL

COPIES

DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS

(Check all that apply.)

ESTIMATED COSTS

30 DAYS 9 9 PAPER COPY

PDF (e-mail)

ASCII (e-mail)

14 DAYS 9 9

7 DAYS 9 9

DAILY 9 9

HOURLY 9 9

REALTIME 9 9

CERTIFICATION (19. & 20.)

By signing below, I certify that I will pay all charges

(deposit plus additional).

E-MAIL ADDRESS

NOTE: IF ORDERING MORE THAN ONE FORMAT, 

THERE WILL BE AN ADDITIONAL CHARGE.

19. SIGNATURE

20. DATE

TRANSCRIPT TO BE PREPARED BY

ESTIMATE TOTAL

PROCESSED BY PHONE NUMBER

ORDER RECEIVED DATE BY

DEPOSIT PAID DEPOSIT PAID

TRANSCRIPT ORDERED TOTAL CHARGES

TRANSCRIPT RECEIVED LESS DEPOSIT

ORDERING PARTY NOTIFIED

TO PICK UP TRANSCRIPT

TOTAL REFUNDED

PARTY RECEIVED TRANSCRIPT TOTAL DUE

DISTRIBUTION: COURT COPY TRANSCRIPTION COPY ORDER RECEIPT ORDER COPY

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 125 Filed 04/30/18 Page 1 of 1
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 52 Filed 04/06/18 Page 1 of 1
#### Willistene BANKHEAD and Kendell Smith, by his Mother and Next Friend, Willistene Bankhead, Appellants, v. ST. LOUIS HOUSING AUTHORITY, Respondent.

No. 65085.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.

Aug. 23, 1994.

Robert A. Samuels, St. Louis, for appellants.

Robert L. Nussbaumer, St. Louis, for respondent.

Before GRIMM, P.J., and CARL R. GAERTNER and AHRENS, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs, Kendell Smith, a minor, and Wil-listene Bankhead, his mother and next friend, appeal from a summary judgment entered by the circuit court in favor of defendant, St. Louis Housing Authority, on plaintiffs’ amended petition alleging negligent failure to repair.

The judgment is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence, and no error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no prec-edential value. However, we have furnished the parties with a memorandum opinion setting forth the facts and reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed according to Rule 84.16(b).
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

James Michael Thompson,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Qal Dalmi Auto Sale LLC, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. CV-18-00478-PHX-JJT

ORDER 

 At issue is Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 17), which is supported 

by the Declaration of Hyung S. Choi (Doc. 18). 

 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a), the Court entered default 

against Defendants Qal Dalmi Auto Sale LLC and Qahtan H. Abdulameer on May 7, 

2018. (Doc. 14.) The Court now has discretion to enter a default judgment against 

Defendants pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b). See Aldabe v. Aldabe, 616 

F.2d 1089, 1092 (9th Cir. 1980); Draper v. Coombs, 792 F.2d 915, 924 (9th Cir. 1986). 

Factors the Court should consider in deciding whether to grant default judgment include: 

(1) the possibility of prejudice to Plaintiff, (2) the merits of the claims, (3) the sufficiency 

of the complaint, (4) the amount of money at stake, if any, (5) the possibility of a dispute 

concerning material facts, (6) whether default was due to excusable neglect, and (7) the 

policy favoring a decision on the merits. Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th 

Cir. 1986). 
- 2 - 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

 As Plaintiff demonstrates in his Motion (Doc. 17), the Eitel factors weigh heavily 

in favor of an entry of default judgment against Defendants. Plaintiff also shows that the 

requested damages are supported by the evidence and reasonable. The Court’s conclusion 

is therefore straightforward: Plaintiff is entitled to the requested default judgment against 

Defendants. 

 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment 

(Doc. 17) is granted. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of Court to enter final judgment 

in favor of Plaintiff James Michael Thompson and against Defendants Qal Dalmi Auto 

Sale LLC and Qahtan H. Abdulameer, jointly and severally, in the amount of $31,500, 

plus attorney’s fees of $3,995 and court costs of $592, for all of which sums let execution 

issue. This judgment shall bear interest at the legal rate from the date of entry of 

judgment until satisfied. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of Court to close this case. 

 Dated this 1st day of August, 2018. 

Honorable John J. Tuchi

United States District Judge
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MAYES

TELLES PLLC

3636 N. CENTRAL AVENUE, SUITE 1000

PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85012

J. Blake Mayes (No. 024159)

Claudia Z. Horan (No. 030243)

MAYESTELLES PLLC

3636 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1000

Phoenix, Arizona 85012

Telephone: 602.714.7900

Facsimile: 602.357.3037

courts@mayestelles.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATED DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

RICK NORTHERN and ELIZABETH 

NORTHERN, husband and wife,

Plaintiff,

v.

DON LENNY KING and JANE DOE 

KING, husband and wife; and JOHN 

and JANE DOES I-X, ABC 

CORPORATIONS AND 

PARTNERSHIPS I-X, 

Defendants.

No. 2:18-CV-00440-DMF

NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT

Plaintiffs and Defendants, by and through counsel undersigned, together submit this 

Notice to the Court that the parties have reached a settlement agreement in this matter.

DATED this 8

th day of March, 2018.

Broening Oberg Woods and Wilson MAYESTELLES PLLC

By: /s/ Claudia Horan for _______ By: /s/ Claudia Horan

William Phillips J. Blake Mayes

Attorneys for Defendants Claudia Z. Horan

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:18-cv-00440-DJH Document 12 Filed 03/08/18 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MAYES

TELLES PLLC

3636 N. CENTRAL AVENUE, SUITE 1000

PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85012

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 8th day of March, 2018, I caused the foregoing document 

to be filed electronically with the Clerk of Court through the CM/ECF System for filing; and 

served on counsel of record via the Court’s CM/ECF system:

William Phillips

Broening Oberg Woods & Wilson

PO Box 80527

Phoenix, Arizona 85036

Attorneys for Defendant

/s/ Claudia Z. Horan ______________

Case 2:18-cv-00440-DJH Document 12 Filed 03/08/18 Page 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6891

GEORGE CLEVELAND, III,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN LARRY CARTLEDGE, in their official and individual 

capacity; OFFICER I. MAYES, in their official and individual 

capacity; OFFICER M. JONES, in their official and individual 

capacity; WARDEN (UNKNOWN NAME), in their official and 

individual capacity; LIEBER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, in 

their official and individual capacity; OFFICER TYRELL 

ADMORE, in their official and individual capacity; 

CONTRABAND LT. CHARLES HARTZOG, in their official and 

individual capacity; BUSINESS EMPLOYEE T. WAY, in their 

official and individual capacity; MACDOUGALL CORRECTIONAL 

INSTITUTION, in their official and individual capacity; 

OFFICER FRANCINE BACHMAN, in their official and individual 

capacity; DIRECTOR BRYAN STIRLING, of the SCDC, in their 

official and individual capacity; UNKNOWN NAMES OF THE 

OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE SCDC, in their official and 

individual capacity,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. 

(4:15-cv-04512-RBH)

Submitted: December 20, 2016 Decided: December 22, 2016

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and WYNN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
2

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

George Cleveland, III, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

George Cleveland, III, appeals the district court’s order 

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying 

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, 

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. 

Cleveland v. Cartledge, No. 4:15-cv-04512-RBH (D.S.C. May 23, 

2016). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

AFFIRMED
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk October 28, 2011

jam 

# Order

October 28, 2011

143957 (32)

MARVIN MILES,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 143957
COA: 303983 PAROLE BOARD,

Defendant-Appellee.

___________________ ________________

On order of the Chief Ju stice, the motion to waive f ees is considered and it
is DENIED because MCL 600.2 963 requires that a prisone r pursuing a civil action be liable for filing fees. Within 21 days of the certification of this order, plaintiff shall pay to the Clerk of the Court the initial partial filing fee of $8.00, shall submit a copy of this order with the payment, and shall refile the copy of the pleadings which is being returned
with this order. Failure to comply with this orde r shall result in the appeal not being
filed in this Court. If plaintiff timely files the partial fee and refiles the pleadings, monthly payments shall be made to the Department of Corrections in an amount of 50 percent of the deposits made to plain tiff’s account until the payments equal the balance due of $367.00. This amount shall then be remitted to this Court. Pursuant to MCL 600.2963(8) plaintiff shall not file further appeals in this Court until the entry fee in this case is paid in full.
The Clerk of the Court sh all furnish two copies of this order to plaintiff and return plaintiff’s pleadings with this order.
OCCICC Of THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

? 

. 

? 

h 

t malmumn, at 

er on the aourt 

to nc, es aounty auditor, t!mt 

lblp be mirm quertion whether 

rrl.caerr’ court oould le@ally 

BOllt.r~Ot 6d8bt t0 b8 liTUidllt8d Ollt Of MtiaIpatti revenue8 or a subrequent fear arid f reque6tod Cat they withhold aonrmation of this 

trM88OtiOn, panding le,lal EdVi8e ir0:~. the 

County Judge on the pint. The enaloeed letter from the Oounty Jiadm of MoLennaa County, 

nddre88ad to M, resulted. 
. 

Honorablr ¶Wn A. Craven, Paga 8 

'I 8h~ll thaak you to adrirr me ihethrr 

01! BOt 4 CweiO#lm8' &rPrt OM ~Oh48. 

road maohlwry for one peain&, jwlng a 

part of muoh purahe8e priae out of 194l remllUe8 and iUW lntorert bra&q varrant or 

t or balaaoo ot puraham pirio* 

of Road and &i&a8 rulld rwenuu for lOti." 

73 

Tha lottor from Honorable D. T. HoDanlol, County 

r 

,uyelte you, uhiah wa8 enoloud with your inwiry, 

'lu you know, the Comml8~foner8' Ogurt 

oi thlr oounty d88ire8,tO purohare oertaln 

r c d l q ui& mmand~~ohlamy t for oaeot tho 

r 

ainotr in tho Oounty, but .ruoh preoinot 

008 not have 8uirioi43t avallabl8 fund8 duriXl$ the fW 1941 to a- On the n808S8tlI'$' 

work in nroh proolnot e+ fully par for the 

equipmnt uhloh the Court oontsm late8 

Suah 8itUIItion r4i8.8 the roll olr! ng quest b$- on, 

to-wit I 

wVan Comml88loner8* Oouit purohase r&d 

maahlnery for me preolnot, lng a part of 

suoh purohase prloe out of 1 B”p 41 raYonue8 nnd 

lrrue lntere8t beurlm mrrmt or note for 

mnt of b:ilanae OS puroharro prioe to be pai B 

ayout et Road tml Rrldee fund revewes for 194R?t 

“In aonnectlon with thla question I cdl 

your attention to Artlole 11, Sectloh 7, o? 

the Texae Constitution, and alec call your attention to the iollowin~ case8 w!-Aoh apparmtly 

bear on the subject, as r0ii0w: 

"Clt? of Tezsll v8. DessaJnt., 9 Z.Y:. 3S?; 

Plc:Ilel vs. City of iyr-co 53 5.X. 332; 

Lesatcr vs. Lopez, 201 A.?;. 1041; and, 

Case or Tras?!nC. k!aoklne C0mpar.y vs. Camp 

CO‘Anty, 23-E 5:;;. 1. 

-“By reassn cf the r l:n& in 5% c53es a'3ovc 

cited as wall as Ar:,:ole 11, Sectkm '?! of the 

Texas Constitution, there is rreat douot tn A~ 
Xonorablo Tom A. Craton, Pam S 

. 

mind that the Oomml88ioner8* Court oan oblluate 

future revenuo8 fGr tho paymat of a prermt 

obli&atiGn in the manner aontecnplated; however, 

1 feel that t'cf8 aatter should be subdttd to 

thm Attoraoy Oonerel for an opinion and I will 

l pprooiak it if mu will do 80.” 

?h# ObO- 8t4ted QW8tiOIl 18 aamruwd la tho efflrm- 

‘hwtiag that thr foregoing fully (LMer8 your inquiry, wa are 

i 

Your8 very truly 

ATTORNEY G-AL OF ‘XXB
EXHIBIT B

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 177-2 Filed 06/06/18 Page 1 of 8
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 177-2 Filed 06/06/18 Page 2 of 8
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 177-2 Filed 06/06/18 Page 3 of 8
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 177-2 Filed 06/06/18 Page 4 of 8
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 177-2 Filed 06/06/18 Page 5 of 8
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 177-2 Filed 06/06/18 Page 6 of 8
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 177-2 Filed 06/06/18 Page 7 of 8
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 177-2 Filed 06/06/18 Page 8 of 8