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

FILED

November 22, 1999

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate Court Clerk

AT KNOXVILLE

DEBBIE KAY MARION, as next ) C/A NO. 03A01-9906-CV-00229

friend for JONI MARION and JOY )

K. BOWLING, children under the age ) SCOTT CIRCUIT

of 18 years, )

) HON. CONRAD TROUTMAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, ) JUDGE

)

vs. )

)

CHARLES DAVID BOWLING, )

)

Defendant-Appellant. )

D I S S E N T I N G O P I N I O N

I dissent on the issues of appointment of counsel and being present in court. 

I premise my analysis by saying that “there is no absolute right to counsel in

civil cases”. See Memphis Board of Realtors v. Cohen, 786 S.W.2d 951 (Tenn. App.

1989); Presley v. Hanks, 782 S.W.2d 482 (Tenn. App. 1989); In re: Rockwell, 673 S.W.2d

512 (Tenn. App. 1983), but in this case, defendant filed a motion seeking the appointment of

counsel, and as the majority notes, the Trial Court “did not respond to the motion”. 

Defendant contends that he wanted a jury trial, but due to his limited education

and lack of legal training, he did not timely make a demand. The majority’s response is that

defendant never asked for a jury trial.

Page 1
Defendant also argues that he was denied due process because he was not

permitted to be present for trial. As the majority notes, the record contains two motions

filed by defendant requesting that he be brought to attend pre-trial hearings, but apparently

the Trial Judge never entered an order on these motions. The majority quotes from Tolbert,

to the effect that “the question of whether to permit a prisoner/litigant in a civil case to be

physically present in court is within the trial court’s sound discretion”.

The failure of the Trial Judge to exercise his discretion on the motion for appointing

counsel, and his failure to exercise his discretion in determining whether the defendant

should be present for the trial, do not comport with fundamental fairness which is the right

of all litigants. Defendant was entitled to have the merits of these motions duly considered

by the Trial Judge. We said in Thornburgh v. Thornburgh, 937 S.W.2d 925, 926 (Tenn.

App. 1996), that while generally in civil cases relief may not be premised upon a theory of

ineffective assistance of counsel, there are cases where the facts are so egregious that

justice may require some relief. 

The majority bases its ruling in part on the assumption that the defendant

chose to represent himself and cited Irvin v. City of Clarksville. I cannot say on this record

that the defendant “chose to represent himself”. In my view, it was a denial of procedural

due process for the court to ignore motions of substance by proceeding as if they had not

been filed.

Clearly it is not a function of this Court to exercise a trial judge’s discretion,

and then decide if the discretion we exercized for the Trial Court was an abuse!

Accordingly, I would vacate the judgment and remand for a new trial for the

foregoing reasons.

__________________________

Herschel P. Franks, J.

Page 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 1st Home
Buy & Sell Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March
31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Samuel J. Alderson, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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.
  /s/ Samuel
      J. AldersonSamuel  J.
      Alderson
                Principal
      Financial Officer
                April
      8, 2008
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4057

To suspend temporarily the duty on the chemical DEMT.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 11, 1996

Mr. QUILLEN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on the chemical DEMT.

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

3 SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON DEMT.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following

7 new subheading:

‘‘ 9902.32.12 N,n-diethyl-m-toluidine

(DEMT) (CAS No. 91–67–8)

(provided for in subheading

2921.43.80) ........................... Free No change No change On or before

12/31/98 ’’.

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

9 this section applies to articles entered, or withdrawn from
2

•HR 4057 IH

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after

2 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
### I N THE UNI TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FI F TH CI RCUI T

No. 12-41279 Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. F L O R E N T I N O G A R C IA-MORENO, a lso known as Va l e n t i n o G a r c i a - G a r z a , a l s o known as Tino Garcia-Moreno, Defendant-Appellant

A ppeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:12-CR-1177-1
Before JONES, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Florentino GarciaMoreno has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a b rief in a ccordance with Anders v. C

alifornia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United S tates v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Garcia-Moreno has not filed a response. We h a ve r eviewed counsel’s brief a nd the relevant portions of the record reflected therei n . We

concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no n onfrivolous issue U n i t e d S t a te s C o u r t o f A p p e al s

F i f t h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D June 18, 2013 Ly l e W . Cay ce Clerk

* Purs uant to 5 T H C I R
. R

. 47. 5, the court has d eterm ined that this op inion should not be p ublis hed and is not p reced ent excep t und er the lim ited circum s tances s et forth in 5 T H C I R
. R. 47. 5. 4. Case: 12-41279 Document: 00512278195 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/18/2013No. 12-41279

for ap p e l l a t e r eview. A ccordingly, counsel’s motion for leave t o withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further r e s p o n sibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 T H C I R
. R. 42.2.

2 Case: 12-41279 Document: 00512278195 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/18/2013
<PAGE>   1



                                                                      EXHIBIT 21

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

                                                State or other Jurisdiction of
Name                                            Incorporation of Organization
----                                            -----------------------------
British Trimmings Limited (1)                             England
Dominion Simplicity Patterns Limited (2)                  Canada
Itatrim Limited (3)                                       England
MacCulloch & Wallis (London) Limited (3)                  England
Simplicity Capital Corporation (4)                        Delaware
Simplicity Holdings, Inc. (5)                             Delaware
Simplicity Limited (2)                                    United Kingdom
Simplicity Limited (2)                                    New Zealand
Simplicity Pattern Co. Inc. (6)                           Delaware
Simplicity PTY Limited (2)                                Australia
Simplicity S.A. de C.V. (2)                               Mexico
Style Patterns (Australia) PTY Limited (2)                Australia
Style Patterns (N.Z.) Limited (2)                         New Zealand
Val-Mex, S.A. de C.V.                                     Mexico

Each Subsidiary does business under its own name.

(1)   British Trimmings Limited was acquired by the Registrant on December 22,
      1993.

(2)   Subsidiary of Simplicity Pattern Co. Inc.

(3)   Subsidiary of British Trimmings Limited.

(4)   Simplicity Capital Corporation was acquired by the Registrant on June 19,
      1998.

(5)   Subsidiary of Simplicity Capital Corporation.

(6)   Subsidiary of Simplicity Holdings, Inc.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 4 (Friday, January 5, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 428-429]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-174]



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


SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Issuer Delisting; Notice of Application To Withdraw From Listing 
and Registration; (NDE Environmental Corporation, Common Stock, $.0001 
Par Value) File No. 1-10361

December 29, 1995.
    NDE Environmental Corporation (``Company'') has filed an 
application with the Securities and Exchange Commission 
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 12(d) of the Securities Exchange 
Act of 1934 (``Act'') and Rule 12d2-2(d) promulgated thereunder, to 
withdraw the above specified security (``Security'') from listing and 
registration on the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (``BSE'').
    The reason alleged in the application for withdrawing the Security 
from listing and registration is that the Company has chosen to 
voluntarily delist rather than rectify its failure to maintain 
compliance with the listing requirements of the BSE. Specifically, the 
BSE has informed the Company that it has fallen below BSE requirements 
for continued listing based upon the company's most recent 10-Q. More 
specifically, the Company is below the following requirements: the 
market value of float shares, $140,981, is below the requirement of 
$500,000; and the shareholder's equity, $319,034, is below the 
requirement of $500,000. Additionally, the BSE has informed the Company 
that it also must list the Additional Shares issued as a result of the 
agreement with Proactive Partners, L.P., regarding a refinancing 
arrangement (4,815,586 shares of common stock).
    Any interested person may, on or before January 23, 1996 submit by 
letter to the Secretary of the Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 
Fifth Street NW., Washington, DC 20549, facts bearing upon whether the 
application has been made in accordance with the rules of the BSE and 
what terms, if any, should be imposed by the Commission for the 
protection of investors. The Commission, based on the information 
submitted to it, will issue an order granting the application after the 
date mentioned above, unless the Commission determines to order a 
hearing on the matter.


[[Page 429]]

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, 
pursuant to delegated authority.
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
FR Doc. 96-174 Filed 1-4-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-M
DYKEMA GOSSETT•A PROFESSIONAL LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY•39577 WOODWARD AVENUE•SUITE 300•BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MICHIGAN 48304 

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

IN THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

BAE INDUSTRIES, INC., a Michigan 

corporation, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

WHITESELL CORPORATION, an Alabama 

corporation, and WHITESELL 

INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, an 

Alabama corporation, 

Defendants. 

 

Case No. 08-cv-14497-AC-DAS 

Honorable Avern Cohn 

Marilyn A. Peters (P32095) 

Laura C. Baucus (P56932) 

William J. Hallan (P70993) 

Dykema Gossett PLLC 

Attorneys for BAE Industries, Inc. 

39577 Woodward Avenue, Suite 300 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304 

(248) 203-0768/ (248) 203-0796 

mpeters@dykema.com

lbaucus@dykema.com

whallan@dykema.com

 Philip J. Kessler (P15921) 

Daniel J. Dulworth (P41784) 

Timothy J. Lowe (P68669) 

Butzel Long 

Attorneys for Whitesell Corporation and 

Whitesell International Corporation 

150 West Jefferson Avenue, Suite 100 

Detroit, MI 48226 

(313) 225-7000 

kessler@butzel.com

dulworth@butzel.com

lowe@butzel.com

APPEARANCE

TO: Clerk of the Court 

 Counsel of Record 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Dykema Gossett, P.L.L.C., through Laura C. Baucus 

enters an appearance on behalf of Plaintiff in the above-captioned matter. Please direct future 

pleadings, notices and correspondence accordingly. 

2:08-cv-14497-AC-DAS Doc # 9 Filed 10/24/08 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 330
2 

DYKEMA GOSSETT•A PROFESSIONAL LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY•39577 WOODWARD AVENUE•SUITE 300•BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MICHIGAN 48304 

 

Respectfully submitted, 

DYKEMA GOSSETT PLLC

By: s/Laura C. Baucus 

Laura C. Baucus (P56932) 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

39577 Woodward Avenue, Suite 300 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304 

(248) 203-0796 

E-mail: lbaucus@dykema.com

Date: October 24, 2008 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 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: Philip J. Kessler, Daniel J. 

Dulworth and Timothy J. Lowe. 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 

s/Laura C. Baucus 

Dykema Gossett PLLC 

Attorneys for Defendants 

39577 Woodward Avenue, Suite 300 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304-5086 

Ph: (248) 203-0796 

E-mail: lbaucus@dykema.com

 Laura C. Baucus (P56932) 

Date: October 24, 2008 

BH01\920434.1 

ID\LCB 

2:08-cv-14497-AC-DAS Doc # 9 Filed 10/24/08 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 331
Summary Translation	Exhibit 4.59


 


 Maximum Pledge
Contract


 


Contract No.:2013JIYINZUIBAOZIDI13121743


 


 


Pledgor : LI YONG HUI


 


Pledgee : CITIC Shijiazhuang Branch


 


Signing Date : August 23, 2013


 


Pledge Definition : To ensure multiple loans Party B (Pledgee)
has lent to Ganglian Finance Leasing Co., Ltd, Party A (Pledgor) is willing to provide the Maximum Pledge Guarantee hereunder for
Party B.


 


Maximum Amount: RMB150, 000,000


 


Pledge Term : From August 23, 2013 to February 16, 2014
EXHIBIT 10.19

FEI Company Board of Directors Compensation Program  (As approved by the Board of Directors on July 17, 2003)

Annual Retainers (payments are made pro rata, quarterly)

|$ | 15,000 |  | Annual base retainer for all outside Board members ($3,750 per quarter)                                               
|- | ------ |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|$ | 10,000 |  | Annual additional retainer for membership on Audit Committee ($2,500 per quarter)*                                    
|$ | 5,000  |  | Annual additional retainer for membership on Compensation or Nominating and Governance Committee ($1,250 per quarter)*
|$ | 2,500  |  | Annual additional retainer for committee chair ($625 per quarter)                                                     
|$ | 10,000 |  | Annual retainer for Lead Director position ($2,500 quarterly)                                                         

*If
a director serves on more than one committee, the annual additional retainer for service on the second committee is $2,500. For example, a director serving on the Audit Committee and Compensation
Committee would receive a total retainer of $12,500. A director serving on the Compensation Committee and Nominating and Governance Committee would receive a total retainer of $7,500.

Payments made on a per meeting basis

|$ | 1,000 |  | Payment for attendance at a Board or Committee meeting whether attending in person or by teleconference.
|- | ----- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Option Share Grants of Company Common Stock

Initial
grant of 15,000 option shares of Company Common Stock on joining the Board with the grant vesting at 2.78% of the total grant per month of service. In addition, at the time of each annual
shareholder meeting, each director who is elected receives an additional option grant of 7,500 shares vesting at 2.78% of the total grant per month of service.

---



QuickLinks
EXHIBIT 99.1
------------





                       WRITTEN CERTIFICATION OF
        CO-CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



     The undersigned, the Co-Chief Executive Officers and the Chief
Financial Officer of AMLI Residential Properties Trust ("the "Company"),
each hereby certifies that, to the best of each of their knowledge:

     (a)   the Company's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
           December 31, 2002 filed with the Securities and Exchange
           Commission (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements
           of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
           1934; and

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





Date:      March 20, 2003         By:  /s/ Allan J. Sweet
                                       ------------------------------
                                       Allan J. Sweet
                                       Co-Chief Executive Officer



Date:      March 20, 2003         By:  /s/ Philip N. Tague
                                       ------------------------------
                                       Philip N. Tague
                                       Co-Chief Executive Officer



Date:      March 20, 2003         By:  /s/ Robert J. Chapman
                                       ------------------------------
                                       Robert J. Chapman
                                       Chief Financial Officer



     The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a
separate disclosure document.
V

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4226

To require approval of an application for compensation for the injuries of

Eugene Hasenfus.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 26, 1996

Mr. ROTH introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on the Judiciary

A BILL

To require approval of an application for compensation for

the injuries of Eugene Hasenfus.

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

3 SECTION 1. APPROVAL OF APPLICATION.

4 Eugene Hasenfus, who was injured on October 5,

5 1986, shall be deemed to have been an employee of the

6 United States Government in the performance of his du7 ties at the time of his injury for the purpose of determin8 ing eligibility for compensation for his injuries under sec9 tion 8102 of title 5, United States Code, and the applica-
2

•HR 4226 IH

1 tion for such compensation shall be deemed filed in a time2 ly manner on his behalf. Such application shall be ap3 proved, and payments shall be made thereon as computed

4 by the Secretary of Labor pursuant to the provisions of

5 section 8101 et seq. of title 5, United States Code.

6 SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON COMPENSATION.

7 A claim or award for compensation for legal or other

8 services rendered in connection with obtaining relief au9 thorized by section 1 shall be valid only if approved by

10 the Secretary of Labor, any contract to the contrary not11 withstanding.

Æ
#### Janis L. CLOE, Appellant, v. FLORENCE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, et al., and Gun-Ko Control, Inc. Respondents.

No. WD 52197.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Nov. 12, 1996.

Jimmie D. James, Independence, for Appellant.

Mark Eugene Johnson, Kansas City, for Florence Construction Co.

Hal D. Meltzer, Overland Park, KS, for Gun-Ko Control, Inc.

Before SPINDEN, P.J., and SMART and EDWIN H. SMITH, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from an order granting summary judgment to respondent Florence Construction Company.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

 

KAREN M. KEYS, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v. Case No. 09-11105

ARKEMA INC.,

Defendant.

 /

JUDGMENT

In accordance with the court’s “Opinion and Order Granting Defendant’s Motion

for Summary Judgment,” dated November 24 , 2009,

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that judgment is entered in favor of

Defendant Arkema, Inc., and against Plaintiffs Karen M. Keys, Douglas E. Woznick,

Dennis J. Kucyk, Thomas Ray, Michael J. Harris, and William D. Malnar. Dated at

Detroit, Michigan, this 24th day of November, 2009.

 DAVID J. WEAVER

CLERK OF THE COURT

BY: S/Lisa Wagner 

Lisa Wagner, Deputy Clerk 

and Case Manager to

Judge Robert H. Cleland

S:\Cleland\JUDGE'S DESK\C2 ORDERS\09-11105.KEYES.Judgment.wpd

2:09-cv-11105-RHC-PJK Doc # 29 Filed 11/24/09 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 390
EXHIBIT
32.2











CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I,
Carey G. Birmingham, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report of Michael Lambert, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended
February 28, 2009 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-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results of operations of Michael Lambert, Inc.





Date:  April
14, 2009





By:
      /s/ Carey G.
      BirminghamCarey
      G. Birmingham,Chief
      Financial Officer
                (Principal
      Accounting Officer)
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT 

Leonard Green 

Clerk

100 EAST FIFTH STREET, ROOM 540 

POTTER STEWART U.S. COURTHOUSE 

CINCINNATI, OHIO 45202-3988 

Tel. (513) 564-7000 

www.ca6.uscourts.gov

 Filed: July 02, 2012 

 

Mr. David J. Weaver 

U.S. District Court 

for the Eastern District of Michigan 

231 W. Lafayette Boulevard 

Fifth Floor Theodore Levin U.S. Courthouse 

Detroit, MI 48226-0000 

 Re: Case No. 11-1426, FMIO, Inc., et al v. Township of Summerfield, et al

Originating Case No. : 2:09-CV-12561 

Dear Mr. Weaver: 

 Enclosed is a copy of the mandate filed in this case. 

 Sincerely yours, 

 

 

s/Karen S. Fultz 

Case Manager 

Direct Dial No. 513-564-7036 

cc: Mr. Frederick Lucas 

 Ms. Cindy Rhodes Victor 

Enclosure 

 

 Case: 11-1426 Document: 006111355738 Filed: 07/02/2012 Page: 1 2:09-cv-12561-BAF-MKM Doc # 50 Filed 07/02/12 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 729
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

 

________________ 

 No: 11-1426 

________________ 

 

 Filed: July 02, 2012 

FMIO, INC.; RICHARD A. GARST 

 Plaintiffs - Appellants 

v. 

TOWNSHIP OF SUMMERFIELD 

 Defendant - Appellee 

 

MANDATE

 Pursuant to the court's disposition that was filed 05/17/2012 the mandate for this case hereby 

issues today. 

 

COSTS: None 

 Case: 11-1426 Document: 006111355738 Filed: 07/02/2012 Page: 2 2:09-cv-12561-BAF-MKM Doc # 50 Filed 07/02/12 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 730