alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### PRESTO ROOFING COMPANY, INC., a Corporation, Respondent, v. James E. HAMMONS, et al., Appellants.

No. 77947.

Supreme Court of Missouri, En Banc.

Feb. 20, 1996.

Rehearing Denied March 26, 1996.

Georgia E. Hammons, James E. Ham-mons, Chesterfield, pro se.

Frank C. Dunne, Chesterfield, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Presto filed this action alleging a breach of contract and seeking damages, interest, reasonable attorneys’ fees, and enforcement of a mechanic’s hen. The trial court, after hearing the evidence, awarded Presto the contractual amount due, interest, and attorneys’ fees and impressed a mechanic’s hen against the Hammonses’ property. In this Court, Presto filed a petition for attorney’s fees *798under the contract and seeks damages for frivolous appeal.

Finding no error of law and determining that an opinion would have no precedential value, the trial court’s judgment is affirmed by this memorandum decision. *Rule 84.16(b).*The petition for attorney’s fees under the contract is denied, but Presto is awarded $2,000.00 as damages for the filing of a frivolous appeal. *Rule 84.19.*

The judgment is affirmed, but the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to enter a judgment against the Hammonses, jointly and severally, and in favor of Presto in the amount of $2,000.00 as damages for frivolous appeal.

All concur.
#### Marvin Lee GOFF, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 49146.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Sept. 13, 1994.

Raymond L. Legg, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

*782Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. .Gen., Joanne E. Beal, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before KENNEDY, P.J., and BRECKENRIDGE and SPINDEN, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Marvin Lee Goff appeals the denial of his motion for post-conviction remedies filed pursuant to Rule 24.035. We affirm the motion court’s judgment. Rule 84.16(b).
#### Oliver W. WILSON; Edna D. Wilson, Petitioners-Appellants, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 02-74144. Tax Court Nos. 3620-96, 3621-96.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 21, 2003.*

Decided July 23, 2003.

*624Before LEAYY, HAWKINS, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

Oliver W. and Edna D. Wilson, husband and wife, appeal pro se the tax court’s judgment upholding federal income tax deficiencies for 1992 and 1993. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a). We affirm.

The tax court properly determined that it had jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter in this case. *See*26 U.S.C. §§ 6213, 6214 & 7442; *see also Freytag v. Comm’r,*110 T.C. 35, 40-41, 1998 WL 44076 (1998). The record does not support petitioners’ contention that their federal income tax liability was discharged in any of their bankruptcy proceedings. *See*11 U.S.C. §§ 507(a)(8)(A)(iii) & 523.

The tax court did not clearly err in finding that petitioners were not involved in the trade or business of operating a restaurant or nightclub between 1990 and 1993. *See Comm’r v. Groetzinger,*480 U.S. 23, 27-35, 107 S.Ct. 980, 94 L.Ed.2d 25 (1987) (describing criteria considered in determining whether a taxpayer is engaged in a trade or business); *Sacks v. Comm’r,*69 F.3d 982, 986 (9th Cir.1995) (underlying factual determinations reviewed for clear error).

Accordingly, the tax court properly disallowed deductions for trade or business expenses relating to the operation of a restaurant or nightclub for those years. *See*26 U.S.C. § 162(a) (permitting deduction for all ordinary and necessary expenses incurred in *carrying on any trade or business)*(emphasis added); 26 U.S.C. § 195(a) (precluding deductions for business start-up expenditures). Likewise, the tax court properly disallowed net operating loss deductions carried forward from 1990 and 1991 because they were start-up costs. *See*26 U.S.C. §§ 172 & 263A (requiring capitalization of direct and indirect costs of developing real property for use in a trade or business).

We have not considered any new issues raised by petitioners in their reply brief. *See Eberle v. City of Anaheim,*901 F.2d 814, 818 (9th Cir.1990).

We have considered petitioners’ remaining contentions and conclude that they lack merit.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Modification to Terms of Employment for Gary R. Enzor



 Exhibit 10.1 

Modification to Terms of Employment for Gary R. Enzor 

March 27, 2014 
 Dear Gary: 

The following will modify your Employment Agreement dated November 3, 2004, as amended pursuant to letter agreements dated June 14,
2007 and December 30, 2012 (the “Employment Agreement”) with Quality Distribution, Inc. (the “Company) effective as of March 3, 2014 (the “Effective Date”). 

 

	 	1.	Section 3.1 is amended by substituting the following for the first sentence thereof: 

 As
compensation for all services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement, the Company agrees to pay to the Executive during the Term a base salary, payable bi-weekly, at the annual rate of $500,000 (the “Base Salary”). 

 

	 	2.	Section 3.2 is amended by substituting the following for the second sentence thereof: 


The annual cash bonus target opportunity shall be 85% of Base Salary, with an opportunity to receive such cash bonus (or greater) based upon
Executive’s extraordinary individual performance as determined by the Board. 
  

	 	3.	Section 3 is amended by inserting a new Section 3.5, and renumbering the prior Section 3.5 and the remaining sections (and references thereto) accordingly: 


Annual Equity Award. The Executive shall be eligible at the discretion of the Compensation Committee, to receive an annual equity
award, at target, equal to 150% of Executive’s base salary compensation. The Executive’s annual equity award, if any, shall be made at the same time as annual equity awards are normally made to similarly situated employees of the Company,
pursuant to the Quality Distribution, Inc. 2012 Equity Incentive Plan (“Equity Plan”). 
 The Company requests your
signature and your subsequent delivery of this letter agreement to the Company to evidence confirmation of your understanding of, and agreement to, the above-described changes to the terms of your employment as of the Effective Date. Except as set
forth herein, all other terms and provisions of the Employment Agreement remain unchanged and in full force and effect. 
  

			
	QUALITY DISTRIBUTION, INC.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ John T. Wilson

		 	John T. Wilson
		 	Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary
	
	Agreed to and accepted as of the date first written above.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Gary R. Enzor

		 	Gary R. Enzor
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ROBERT FOX, JR.,

Plaintiff, No. 08-CV-14727-DT

vs. Hon. Gerald E. Rosen

PENNY RODGERS, et al.,

Defendants.

________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND 

RECOMMENDATION OF APRIL 28, 2009

At a session of said Court, held in

the U.S. Courthouse, Detroit, Michigan

on May 29, 2009 

PRESENT: Honorable Gerald E. Rosen

 Chief Judge, United States District Court

This matter having come before the Court on the April 28, 2009 Report and

Recommendation of United States Magistrate Mona K. Majzoub recommending that the

Court grant, in part, and deny, in part, the Motion to Dismiss filed by several of the

Defendants on March 31, 2009, for failure to exhaust administrative remedies; and no timely

objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation having been filed; and the

Court having reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, and the Court’s

file of this action and having concluded that, for the reasons stated in the Report and

Recommendation, Defendants’ Motion should be granted, in part, and Plaintiff’s claims

against Defendants McLain, Clark, Fairbanks, McClellan, Pramstaller and Richardson

2:08-cv-14727-GER-MKM Doc # 61 Filed 05/29/09 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 862
should, accordingly, be dismissed, as recommended by the Magistrate Judge; and the Court

being otherwise fully advised in the premises,

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report

and Recommendation of April 28, 2009 [Dkt. # 48], be, and hereby is, adopted by this Court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, for the reasons set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s

Report and Recommendation, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. #37] be, and hereby is,

GRANTED, in part, and DENIED, in part. Defendants’ Motion is granted with respect to

Defendants McLain, Clark, Fairbanks, McClellan, Pramstaller, and Richardson, but denied

with respect to Defendants Lovin and Wight. Accordingly,

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants McLain,

Clark, Fairbanks, McClellan, Pramstaller and Richardson are DISMISSED, without

prejudice, for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

s/Gerald E. Rosen 

Chief Judge, United States District Court

Dated: May 29, 2009

2:08-cv-14727-GER-MKM Doc # 61 Filed 05/29/09 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 863
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on May 29, 2009 , I electronically filed the foregoing paper with the Clerk

of the Court using the ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following: 

 Ronald W. Chapman, Joseph T.Froehlich; Anthony D. Pignotti , and

I hereby certify that I have mailed by United States Postal Service the paper to the following nonECF participants:

 Robert Fox,, Jr., #208615, Parnell Correctional Facility, 1780 E. Parnell, Jackson, MI 49201 .

s/Ruth A. Brissaud 

Ruth A. Brissaud, Case Manager

(313) 234-5137

2:08-cv-14727-GER-MKM Doc # 61 Filed 05/29/09 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 864
#### Gregory K. WILSON, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.

No. 65964.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Dec. 27, 1994.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Jan. 31, 1995.

*842David C. Hemingway, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Millie Aulbur, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before REINHARD, P.J., and GARY M. GAERTNER and CRAHAN, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals the denial, without an evi-dentiary hearing, of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous, and an extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

LATASHA ADAMS, 

 Case No. 5:08-cv-15028-JCO-MJH 

 Plaintiff, Hon. John Corbett O’Meara 

 Magistrate Judge Michael Hluchaniuk 

v. 

KAREN HANSON, 

 Defendant. 

_______________________________________________________________________/ 

BARRY A. WOLF, ATTORNEY AT 

LAW, PLLC 

BARRY A. WOLF (P40709) 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

140 E. Second Street, Suite 215 

Flint, MI 48502 

(810) 762-1084 

Bwolf718@msn.com

PLUNKETT COONEY 

H. WILLIAM REISING (P19343) 

RHONDA STOWERS (P64083) 

Attorneys for Defendant 

111 E. Court St., Suite 1B 

Flint, MI 48502 

(810) 342-7001 

wreising@plunkettcooney.com 

_______________________________________________________________________/ 

STIPULATION TO ADJOURN MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER 

 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties, 

that Defendant’s Motion for Protective Order, previously scheduled for oral 

argument on 5/14/09, and pending the resolution of the Motion for Summary 

Judgment scheduled for hearing on 5/21/09, is adjourned. 

 IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED, that if, for some unforeseen 

reason, the 5/21/09 hearing date on the Motion for Summary Judgment is 

Case 5:08-cv-15028-JCO-MJH Document 20 Filed 05/15/2009 Page 1 of 2
adjourned, the Motion for Protective Order may be rescheduled for hearing before 

Magistrate Judge Michael Hluchaniuk. 

 IT IS ALSO STIPULATED AND AGREED that, if rescheduling becomes 

necessary, the parties will notify the court of that need. 

s/ Barry A. Wolf w/consent______ s/ H. William Reising________

Barry A. Wolf P40709 H. William Reising P19343 

Date: May 14, 2009 

Branches.06002.90133.1797462-1

Case 5:08-cv-15028-JCO-MJH Document 20 Filed 05/15/2009 Page 2 of 2
### IN THE UNI TED STAT ES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 12-40229 Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. IRYS DENIESSE NINO, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:11-CR-712-1
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent I ry s D eniesse Nino has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 ( 1967), and United State s v . Flores , 632 F.3d 229 ( 5th Cir. 2011). Nino has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record r e flected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the ap peal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to wi t h d raw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D Octob er 16 , 20 12 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 , the cour t has d ete rm inedt hat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t forth in 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 12-40229 Document: 00512021073 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/16/2012No. 12-40229

further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 T H C I R
. R. 42.2.

2 Case: 12-40229 Document: 00512021073 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/16/2012
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 Annual Report of
CenterPoint Energy Resources Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2008 (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, David M. McClanahan, Chief Executive
Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge,
that:





1.           The
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 Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








/s/
      David M. McClanahanDavid
      M. McClanahanPresident
      and Chief Executive OfficerMarch 11,
      2009
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3772

To establish certain disclosure requirements relating to franked mail sent

by Members of the House of Representatives.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 10, 1996

Mr. CASTLE (for himself, Mr. BACHUS, Mr. BLUTE, Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, Mr. GOSS, Ms. GREENE of Utah, Mr. JACOBS, Mr. LOBIONDO, Mr.

MCHALE, Mr. PARKER, Mr. POSHARD, and Mr. SHAYS) introduced the

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on House Oversight

A BILL

To establish certain disclosure requirements relating to

franked mail sent by Members of the House of Representatives.

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

3 SECTION 1. DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS.

4 (a) RELATING TO EACH MAILING.—Any franked

5 mail sent by a Member of the House of Representatives

6 shall bear on its face, or on the envelope or outside cover

7 or wrapper in which the mail matter is sent, the following

8 notice: ‘‘THIS MAILING WAS PREPARED, PUBLISHED,

9 AND MAILED AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE.’’, or a notice to
2

•HR 3772 IH

1 the same effect in words which may be prescribed under

2 subsection (c).

3 (b) RELATING TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.—

4 There shall be published in the Congressional Record, on

5 an annual basis, a summary tabulation setting forth, for

6 the office of each Member of the House of Representa7 tives, the total number of pieces of franked mail mailed

8 during the year involved and the total cost of those

9 mailings.

10 (c) REGULATIONS.—The House Commission on Con11 gressional Mailing Standards shall prescribe such rules

12 and regulations and shall take such other action as the

13 Commission considers necessary and proper for Members

14 to conform to the provisions of this subsection and appli15 cable rules and regulations.

16 (d) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this section—

17 (1) the term ‘‘Member of the House of Rep18 resentatives’’ means a Representative in, or a Dele19 gate or Resident Commissioner to, the Congress;

20 and

21 (2) the term ‘‘franked mail’’ has the meaning

22 given such term by section 3201(4) of title 39, Unit23 ed States Code.
3

•HR 3772 IH

1 (e) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section shall apply with

2 respect to sessions of Congress beginning after the date

3 of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO 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 Travelport Limited (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended
March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Jeff Clarke, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Michael E. Rescoe, as Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, each 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 the best of
his knowledge:



|                                                                            |  | 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|/s/ JEFF CLARKE Jeff Clarke Chief Executive OfficerMay 12, 2009             |  | 
|/s/ MICHAEL E. RESCOE Michael E. Rescoe Chief Financial OfficerMay 12, 2009 |  | 

---



QuickLinks
EXHIBIT 31.2

              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                      SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

I, Douglas E. Ford, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Sawadee Ventures,
     Inc.;

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 period presented in this
     quarterly report;

4.   I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
     procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
     registrant and have:

     a.   designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 registrant's disclosure controls
          and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
          this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
     c.   presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
          effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
          evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

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

     a.   all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
          controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
          record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
          identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
          internal controls; and
     b.   any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
          employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
          controls; and

6.   I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were
     significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could
     significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most
     recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to
     significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
8th day of May, 2007.


/s/ Douglas E. Ford
----------------------------
Chief Financial Officer
##### 



EXHIBIT 32
 Certification pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Year ended
December 31, 2006 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and2.
    
    that as of the date of this statement, the information contained in
the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.
 March 14, 2007
    
    /s/ William J. WagnerDate
    
    William J. WagnerPresident and Chief Executive OfficerMarch 14, 2007
    
    /s/ William W. Harvey, Jr.Date
    
    William W. Harvey, Jr.Executive Vice President, Finance and
Chief Financial Officer