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

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-16-00468-CV

In the Matter of D.W. §

§

§

§

From the 323rd District Court

of Tarrant County (323-103885-16)

October 26, 2017

Opinion by Justice Meier

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of 

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Bill Meier 

 Justice Bill Meier
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23
                                                                      ----------



                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
                        -------------------------------
                                        



THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND STOCKHOLDERS
SAMSONITE CORPORATION:


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements on
Form S-8 (Nos. 333-05467, 333-19281, 333-20775 and 333-28663) of Samsonite
Corporation of our report dated March 17, 1998, except as to Note 19, which is
as of April 24, 1998, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Samsonite
Corporation and subsidiaries as of January 31, 1998 and 1997, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity and cash flows for
each of the years in the three-year period ended January 31, 1998, and the
related financial statement schedule, which report appears in the January 31,
1998 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Samsonite Corporation.



                                               KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP


Denver, Colorado
April 27, 1998
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. EG08-53-000, etc.]
 Docket No.Wessington Wind I, LLC
EG08-53-000Airtricity Pyron Wind Farm, LLC
EG08-54-000Airtricity Indale Wind Farm, LLC
EG08-55-000Airtricity Panther Creek Wind Farm, LLC
EG08-56-000Wolf Ridge Wind, LLC
EG08-57-000West Valley Leasing Company LLC
EG08-58-000Winnebago Windpower LLC
EG08-59-000( print page 45756)Sheldon Energy LLC
EG08-60-000Gunsight Mountain Wind Energy, LLC
EG08-61-000Willow Creek Energy, LLC
EG08-62-000Valencia Power, LLC
EG08-64-000CER Generation II, LLC
EG08-65-000Tvolumne Wind Project, LLC
EG08-66-000CPV Maryland, LLC
EG08-67-000Montgomery L'Energia Power Partners LP
EG08-68-000Silver Star I Power Partners, LLC
EG08-69-000
 Notice of Effectiveness of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status Take notice that during the month of June 2008, the status of the above-captioned entities as Exempt Wholesale Generators became effective by operation of the Commission's regulations. 18 CFR 366.7(a). Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.


[FR Doc. E8-18006 Filed 8-5-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, Case Number 09-20403-BC

Honorable Thomas L. Ludington

v.

D-4 MICHAEL CHARLES TRAYLOR, JR.,

Defendant.

_______________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, ACCEPTING

DEFENDANT’S PLEA OF GUILTY AS TO COUNT FIVE OF THE SECOND

SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT, AND TAKING THE RULE 11 PLEA AGREEMENT

UNDER ADVISEMENT

A plea hearing was conducted on June 29, 2010, by United States Magistrate Judge Charles

E. Binder pursuant to the defendant’s consent. Judge Binder issued his report on June 30, 2010,

recommending that this Court accept the defendant’s plea of guilty as to count five of the second

superseding indictment. As of today’s date, no party has filed any objections to Judge Binder’s

report and recommendation. The election to not file objections to the report releases the Court from

its duty to independently review the record. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985).

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the report and recommendation [Dkt. # 81] is

ADOPTED.

Case 1:09-cr-20403-TLL-CEB ECF No. 85, PageID.242 Filed 07/27/10 Page 1 of 2
-2-

It is further ORDERED that the defendant’s plea of guilty as to count five of the second

superseding indictment is ACCEPTED, and the Rule 11 Plea Agreement [Dkt. # 80] is taken

UNDER ADVISEMENT.

s/Thomas L. Ludington 

THOMAS L. LUDINGTON

United States District Judge

Dated: July 27, 2010

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served

upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first

class U.S. mail on July 27, 2010.

s/Tracy A. Jacobs 

TRACY A. JACOBS

Case 1:09-cr-20403-TLL-CEB ECF No. 85, PageID.243 Filed 07/27/10 Page 2 of 2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

ISAIAH BARKER,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 495 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 13th day of December, 2017

, the Petition for Allowance of

Appeal is DENIED

.
Exhibit 23.1

                       CONSENT OF ROBERT C. OLIVIERI, JR.
                      INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

The undersigned independent certified public accounting firm hereby consents to
the inclusion of its report on the financial statements of Log Point
Technologies, Inc, for the year ending June 30, 2000, and to the reference to it
as experts in accounting and auditing relating to said financial statements, in
the Form 10-KSB filed with the securities and Exchange Commission for Log Point
Technologies, Inc., dated September 26, 2000.

By:  /s/  Robert C. Olivieri, Jr.
--------------------------
          ROBERT C. OLIVIERI, JR.
          Certified Public Accounts


A Professional Corporation
2040 Street Road, Suite 8
Bensalem, Pennsylvania
September 26, 2000
#### Isabel Morales v. State.

No. 25775.

March 26, 1952.

Sam G. Reams, Judge Presiding.

No attorney for appellant of record on appeal.

*George P. Blackburn,*State’s Attorney, Austin, for the state.

WOODLEY, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of cattle theft under an indictment alleging theft of two cattle belonging to Pedro Pena. The jury assessed the punishment at 2 years in the penitentiary and rejected his plea for suspension of sentence.

Pedro Pena testified that 2 heifers owned by one Vasquez disappeared from his pasture where he was taking care of them for the owner; that the cattle were in his possession and control and that he was in charge of them at the time they dis*143appeared, under an agreement with Vasquez, who was away picking cotton.

The heifers, together with a calf born to one of them after they were taken away, were found by Ranger Bridge and were identified and returned to Pena’s farm.

Appellant’s confession was offered in evidence wherein he said that he and his brother took the cattle from Pena’s pasture and hauled them to Alice where the brother sold them at the sales barn.

There was other testimony corroborating the state’s theory which need not be discussed.

Appellant testified and denied any knowledge of the theft. He claimed also that he did not know what was in the confession when he signed it. The jury, under appropriate instructions from the court, accepted the state’s theory, and the evidence sustains their verdict.

We overrule appellant’s contention that ownership was not properly alleged. The state may allege ownership of personal property to be in the actual owner, or in one who exercises the actual care, control and custody thereof, known in law as the special owner. See Branch’s Ann. P.C. Sec. 2434, p. 1316.

Under the facts, Pedro Pena was shown to be the special owner of the cattle, and there was no variance between the indictment alleging ownership in him and in the proof to the effect that he exercised care, control and custody over the cattle for the true owner, Vasquez.

The evidence being sufficient to sustain the conviction and no reversible error appearing, the judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the court.
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 23-12900

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RBF TRUST LLC,

a Florida company, et al.,

Defendants,

PAULO FERNANDO DE BASTOS, 

Defendant-Appellant,

USCA11 Case: 23-12900 Document: 34-1 Date Filed: 02/12/2024 Page: 1 of 3
2 Opinion of the Court 23-12900

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

D.C. Docket No. 0:22-cv-61831-AHS

____________________

Before JORDAN, JILL PRYOR, and LAGOA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“SEC”) motion 

to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction is GRANTED. Paulo 

Fernando De Bastos appeals from the district court’s order denying 

his motion for deposition via videoconference. The SEC argues 

that the court’s order was not a final order or an appealable interlocutory order because it was a pretrial discovery order not subject 

to immediate appeal, De Bastos’s interest in a remote deposition 

was merely a preference, and the order was not certified for interlocutory review. 

We agree. We lack jurisdiction to review the court’s order 

denying De Bastos a remote deposition because it did not end the 

litigation on the merits, and it is therefore not final and appealable. 

See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; World Fuel Corp. v. Geithner, 568 F.3d 1345, 

1348 (11th Cir. 2009); Rouse Constr. Int’l, Inc. v. Rouse Constr. Corp., 

680 F.2d 743, 745 (11th Cir. 1982). Additionally, the order is not 

immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine because De Bastos may raise arguments about the court’s denial of 

his motion to appear remotely for his deposition after a final 

USCA11 Case: 23-12900 Document: 34-1 Date Filed: 02/12/2024 Page: 2 of 3
23-12900 Opinion of the Court 3

judgment is issued in the case. See Plaintiff A v. Schair, 744 F.3d 

1247, 1252-53 (11th Cir. 2014); Richardson-Merrell, Inc. v. Koller, 472 

U.S. 424, 430-31 (1985) (stating that the collateral order doctrine is 

narrow, and its “reach is limited to trial court orders affecting rights 

that will be irretrievably lost in the absence of an immediate appeal”). Accordingly, De Bastos’s appeal is DISMISSED for lack of 

jurisdiction. 

USCA11 Case: 23-12900 Document: 34-1 Date Filed: 02/12/2024 Page: 3 of 3
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sloud, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Gene Sokolov, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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, as amended; 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:  November 21, 2008 |  | By   /s/ Gene Sokolov                                                    
|------------------------ |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                         |  |                                                                          
|                         |  | Gene Sokolov                                                             
|                         |  | Chairman, President Chief Executive Officer (Principle Executive Officer)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

BARBARA SUE MULLINS,

Plaintiff,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL

SECURITY,

Defendant.

Case No. 09-13410

SENIOR UNITED STATES

DISTRICT JUDGE

ARTHUR J. TARNOW

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE

JUDGE 

MICHAEL HLUCHANIUK

______________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION [21], GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT [17], DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT [20], AND REMANDING THE CASE TO THE

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY FOR FURTHER REVIEW

AND INVESTIGATION CONSISTENT WITH THE REPORT

On August 27, 2010, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and

Recommendation [21] recommending that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment

[17] be granted, that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [20] be denied, and

that the case be remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for further review

and investigation consistent with the Report. 

No objections were filed. 

The Court has reviewed the administrative record, the Magistrate’s Report and

Recommendation, and the parties’ pleadings in this case, and being fully advised in

the premises,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation [21] of the

Magistrate Judge is hereby ADOPTED and is entered as the findings and conclusions
of the Court. 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment [17] is GRANTED,

Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [20] is DENIED, and the case is

REMANDED to the Commissioner of Social Security for further review and

investigation consistent with the Report. 

SO ORDERED.

S/ARTHUR J. TARNOW 

Arthur J. Tarnow

Senior United States District Judge

Dated: September 20, 2010

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of

record on September 20, 2010, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

S/LISA M. WARE 

Case Manager
**EXHIBIT
      32**





**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND 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,
      Valda
      Downing, 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
      Suncross Exploration Corporation on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September
      30, 2007, 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-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
      results of operations of Suncross Exploration Corporation.





Dated:
      November 13, 2007





By:           */s/
      Valda Downing*


Valda
      Downing


Chief
      Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)


and
      Chief
      Financial Officer (Principal Accounting Officer)
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.66


                    [SIMPLICITY PATTERN CO. INC. LETTERHEAD]



                                   May 4, 1998



Mr. Louis S. Oltman
51 Vernasa Drive
Langhorne, PA  19053

Dear Lou:

This letter will serve as Simplicity's official notification that we shall be
reinstating and extending your Employment Agreement (copy attached) dated
February 15, 1991 and renewed on February 18, 1994. When countersigned by you,
this letter will also serve as a binding agreement between us.

This new agreement will be effective as of February 15, 1998 and will expire
February 14, 2001.

For reference purposes, your current base salary is $184,140 per year.

The only changes to the attached agreement will be as follows:

1.       Upon termination without cause for reasons other than death or
         disability, you will receive your annual incentive compensation only
         for the year in which termination occurs. You will not be eligible for
         an incentive compensation award for any other year following the year
         of termination.

2.       The Executive Severance Policy adopted by the Board of Directors on
         July 27, 1997 will continue to apply to your employment with the
         company. However, for a termination without cause, you will only
         receive the greater of:

         (a)      the benefits outlined in your employment agreement

                                       or

         (b)      the benefits in the Executive Severance Policy.


<PAGE>   2

If the foregoing accurately sets forth the agreement between us, please indicate
your acceptance by signing in the space below.

                                        Sincerely,


                                        /s/Louis R. Morris
                                        Louis R. Morris



ACCEPTED:       /s/Louis S. Oltman
         --------------------------------
                Louis S. Oltman


cc:  Board of Directors
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

April 28, 2014

p0421 

# Order

Clerk April 28, 2014

148153

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 148153

COA: 314642

Macomb CC: 2011

- 004408

- FH

DAVID JOHN WILLIAMS,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 8, 2013

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Exhibit 23 (a)

                        Consent of KPMG Peat Marwick LLP


The Board of Directors
Southern Financial Bancorp, Inc.


We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement
Nos. 33-80285 and 33-80287 on Form S-8, and 333-00916 on Form S-3 of
Southern Financial Bancorp, Inc. of our report dated February 3, 1998,
relating to the consolidated balance sheet of Southern Financial
Bancorp as of December 31, 1997, and the related consolidated
statements of income, changes in stockholders' equity, and cash flows
for the year then ended, which report appears in the December 31, 1997
annual report on Form 10-K of Southern Financial Bancorp, Inc.


KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
Washington, D.C.
March 30, 1998
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4322

To amend the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 28, 1996

Mr. SCHUMER (for himself and Mr. CUMMINGS) introduced the following bill;

which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To amend the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement

Act of 1994.

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 ‘‘Criminal Offender

5 Anti-Drug Act’’.

6 SEC. 2. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Violent Crime Control and

8 Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is amended—

9 (1) by redesignating sections 20105, 20106,

10 20107, 20108, 20109 as 20107, 20108, 20109,

11 20110, and 20111, respectively; and
2

•HR 4322 IH

1 (2) by inserting after section 20104 the follow2 ing:

3 ‘‘SEC. 20105. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT.

4 ‘‘To be eligible to receive a grant under section 20102

5 or 20103, a State shall have a program of controlled sub6 stance testing and intervention for appropriate categories

7 of convicted offenders during periods of incarceration and

8 criminal justice supervision, consistent with guidelines is9 sued by the Attorney General.’’.

10 ‘‘SEC. 20106. USES OF FUNDS.

11 Notwithstanding any other provision of this subtitle,

12 funds provided under sections 20102 and 20103 may be

13 used for offender controlled substance testing and inter14 vention programs during periods of incarceration and

15 criminal justice supervision, consistent with the guidelines

16 issued by the Attorney General.’’.

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

18 subsection (a) which inserts section 20105 of the Violent

19 Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 shall

20 apply to grants made on or after October 1, 1998.

Æ
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Office of the Secretary 

          - [Transmittal No. 08-73] 

# AGENCY:

Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 July 1996. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM, (703) 601-3740.  The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittal 08-73 with attached transmittal, and policy justification. 

Dated: August 1, 2008. 

Patricia L. Toppings, 

OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer,   Department of Defense.

      ( print page 46601)          ( print page 46602)          ( print page 46603)          ( print page 46604)          ( print page 46605)    

BILLING CODE 5001-06-M 

 [FR Doc. E8-18256 Filed 8-8-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
----

----

|   | (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. |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| August      14, 2009 | /s/      James Roszel |
|----------------------|-----------------------|
|                 | James      Roszel     |
|                 | President             |

----