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

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 522

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a credit against

the estate tax for certain transfers of real property for conservation purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 13, 1995

Mr. ZIMMER (for himself, Mr. SAXTON, Mr. GREENWOOD, Mr. PALLONE, Mr.

BEILENSON, Mr. ACKERMAN, Mr. BALDACCI, and Mr. EHLERS) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways

and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a

credit against the estate tax for certain transfers of

real property for conservation purposes.

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 ‘‘Federal Open Space

5 Acquisition and Preservation Act of 1995’’.
2

HR 522 IH

1 SEC. 2. ESTATE TAX CREDIT FOR CERTAIN TRANSFERS OF

2 REAL PROPERTY FOR CONSERVATION PUR3 POSES.

4 (a) GENERAL RULE.—Part II of subchapter A of

5 chapter 11 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating

6 to credits against tax) is amended by adding at the end

7 thereof the following new section:

8 ‘‘SEC. 2017. CREDIT FOR CERTAIN TRANSFERS OF REAL

9 PROPERTY FOR CONSERVATION PURPOSES.

10 ‘‘(a) GENERAL RULE.—If the executor makes a

11 qualified conservation transfer of any real property (or in12 terest therein), there shall be allowed as a credit against

13 the tax imposed by section 2001 with respect to the estate

14 of the decedent an amount equal to the value (as deter15 mined under this chapter with respect to the estate of the

16 decedent) of such property (or interest therein).

17 ‘‘(b) LIMITATION.—The amount allowed as a credit

18 under subsection (a) shall not exceed the amount of the

19 tax imposed by section 2001 with respect to the estate

20 of the decedent, reduced by the amount equal to the value

21 (as determined under this chapter with respect to the es22 tate of the decedent) of such property (or interest therein).

23 ‘‘(c) QUALIFIED CONSERVATION TRANSFER.—For

24 the purposes of this section, the term ‘qualified conserva25 tion transfer’ means any transfer of any real property in-
3

HR 522 IH

1 cluded in the gross estate of the decedent (or any interest

2 therein) if—

3 ‘‘(1) such transfer is to an agency of the United

4 States,

5 ‘‘(2) such transfer is accepted by such agency

6 for use exclusively for conservation purposes (as de7 fined in section 170(h)), and

8 ‘‘(3) such transfer is made without any pay9 ment or reimbursement from such agency.

10 ‘‘(d) DENIAL OF DOUBLE BENEFIT.—No deduction

11 shall be allowed under this chapter with respect to any

12 transfer for which the estate claims the benefits of this

13 section.’’

14 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections

15 for subchapter C of chapter 11 of such Code is amended

16 by adding at the end thereof the following new item:

‘‘Sec. 2017. Credit for certain transfers of real property for conservation purposes.’’

17 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

18 this section shall apply to transfers made after the date

19 of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
Exhibit
32.2





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 on Form 10-Q of Deer Consumer
Products, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended June 30, 2010, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
Zongshu Nie, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 (15 U.S.C. §78m or §78o(d)); 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:
      August 10, 2010
            By:
            /s/
      Zongshu NieZongshu
      Nie
              Chief Financial
      Officer





This
certification accompanies each Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-2537

CALVIN EARL BROWN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

PITT COUNTY SCHOOLS; DORIS R. GRUBBS, Coordinator Classified Personnel; JODI RITTENHOUSE,

Teacher, Stokes Elementary Schools; STEVE

JONES, Principal; SHIRLEY GRIMSLEY, Teacher,

Ayden Middle School; CLIFTON G. MOORE, Principal, Ayden Middle School,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard,

District Judge. (CA-00-21-4-H)

Submitted: January 17, 2002 Decided: January 25, 2002

Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Calvin Earl Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Kenneth Alexander Soo, Lisa

M. Lukasik, THARRINGTON, SMITH, L.L.P., Raleigh, North Carolina,

for Appellees.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Calvin Earl Brown appeals from the district court’s order

denying his motion to reconsider, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b), the

dismissal of his employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. See Brown v. Pitt County Sch., No. CA-00-21-4-H

(E.D.N.C. Nov. 16, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 32.2





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 annual report of Veracity Management Global, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended September 30, 2011 (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Marc L. Baker, Acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 results of operations of the Company.






/s/ Marc L. Baker


Marc L. Baker


Acting Chief Financial Officer


Dated: November 1, 2011





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Veracity Management Global, Inc. and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the quarterly report of NovaBay Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Thomas
J. Paulson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to the best of 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.





Date:
August 13, 2009














/s/
Thomas Paulson


__________________________________________


Thomas J.
Paulson


Chief
Financial Officer and Treasurer








This
Certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 USC Section 1350, subject to
the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other
purpose.
Case 2:09-cv-12269-RHC-MJH Document 60 Filed 02/12/2010 Page 1 of 15
Case 2:09-cv-12269-RHC-MJH Document 60 Filed 02/12/2010 Page 2 of 15
Case 2:09-cv-12269-RHC-MJH Document 60 Filed 02/12/2010 Page 3 of 15
Case 2:09-cv-12269-RHC-MJH Document 60 Filed 02/12/2010 Page 4 of 15
Case 2:09-cv-12269-RHC-MJH Document 60 Filed 02/12/2010 Page 5 of 15
Case 2:09-cv-12269-RHC-MJH Document 60 Filed 02/12/2010 Page 6 of 15
Case 2:09-cv-12269-RHC-MJH Document 60 Filed 02/12/2010 Page 7 of 15
Case 2:09-cv-12269-RHC-MJH Document 60 Filed 02/12/2010 Page 8 of 15
Case 2:09-cv-12269-RHC-MJH Document 60 Filed 02/12/2010 Page 9 of 15
Case 2:09-cv-12269-RHC-MJH Document 60 Filed 02/12/2010 Page 10 of 15
Case 2:09-cv-12269-RHC-MJH Document 60 Filed 02/12/2010 Page 11 of 15
Case 2:09-cv-12269-RHC-MJH Document 60 Filed 02/12/2010 Page 12 of 15
Case 2:09-cv-12269-RHC-MJH Document 60 Filed 02/12/2010 Page 13 of 15
Case 2:09-cv-12269-RHC-MJH Document 60 Filed 02/12/2010 Page 14 of 15
Case 2:09-cv-12269-RHC-MJH Document 60 Filed 02/12/2010 Page 15 of 15
#### Brian W. O’Connor, Appellant, v Blodnick, Abramowitz & Blodnick, et al., Respondents.

[678 NYS2d 528]

In an action, *inter alia,*to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DeMaro, J.), dated September 3, 1997, which denied his motion to enlarge his time to complete discovery.

Ordered that the order is reversed, with costs, and the plaintiffs motion is granted; and it is further,

Ordered that the plaintiffs time to complete discovery is extended until 30 days after service upon him of a copy of this decision and order, with notice of entry.

*863On the record presented, the Supreme Court’s denial of the plaintiffs motion to enlarge the time in which to complete discovery was an improvident exercise of discretion *(see, Tewari v Tsoutsouras,*75 NY2d 1; CPLR 2004). O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Thompson, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.
null

420.7214
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Josh Demidio, Appellant

No. 06-21-00102-CV v.

Paris Police Department Officers Helms, 

Peek and Hines, Appellee

Appeal from the 62nd District Court of 

Lamar County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 90565). 

Memorandum Opinion delivered by Justice 

van Cleef, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice 

Stevens participating. 

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that the appeal should be dismissed 

for want of prosecution. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

We further order that the appellant, Josh Demidio, pay all costs incurred by reason of this 

appeal.

RENDERED JUNE 24, 2022

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
#### The State Bank, Plaintiff, v. Solomon Feigin and Others, Defendants. Max Brimberg and Others, Plaintiffs, v. Solomon Feigin and Others, Defendants.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Motions denied, without costs. No opinion. Hirschberg, P. J., Woodward, Jenks, Gaynor and Miller, JJ., concurred.
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. 1350





I, Frank
Slootman, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of
Data Domain, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 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 the Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Data Domain, Inc.




Date:
      May 8, 2009
            
            By:
            
            /s/
      FRANK SLOOTMANFrank
      SlootmanChief
      Executive Officer
I OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

February 9, 1959 

I 

, 3011. Rogers Kellay 

Senate Chmber 

,:.uetin, Texas 

Dear Senator Xallejr: 

By your letter 

the opinion of this Cepa 

as it afiects the movement of perishable f&rults end vogetables produced in this state. In this connection, hoNever, 

your attention is directed to the Peat t&it the suspension 

shoul@ have the effeot of a general lew; thnt is, thb auspension sfiould apply to fruits and vegetables of a parishable ~nature wherever they mry be 3roduoad in the State of 

Texas. 
!ion. Rogers Kelley, February 9th, 1939, ?age 2. 

‘!!ith reference to your socon inquiry, you are aavisea 

tkzt this Department has heretofore, on January 24, 1939, by 

In opinfon addressed to Hon. n, Lee O*Duniel, Covernor of 

Texas, hzld that laws of the State of Terns can not be 

suspended by resolution, but nust be suspended by bill. 

Article 3, Section 30 or the Constitution prohibits the 

passage of nny law excapt by bill. The Supre!a Court of 

this stats In the case of City of San Antonio Pa. I.iiaklejohn, 

09 Tex. 79, 33 S. 7:. 735, holds that a ‘law my not be repealed by resolution, and states thet *the act dich destroys should be of equal dignity with that which establishes.” 

The suspension of e law Is in effect a partial and linited 

mpeal thereof, and we theral’ore aZvise tha% the suspension 

of the lav: to which you refer must be acco=lplished by bill 

rather than by resolution or any other method oi prOCedUra 

resorted to in the Legislature. 

Yours .very truly 

ATTORK?‘!! GZ%%RAL OF, T%AS
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
Largo Vista Group, Ltd (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending
December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"Report"), the undersigned, Deng Shan, Interim Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 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 results of operations of the Company.





Date:
April 14, 2008





/s/ Deng
Shan


Deng
Shan, Principal Executive Officer






This
certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Luis Nolacko, Appellant.

[676 NYS2d 882]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dunlop, J.), rendered March 21, 1997, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree is unpreserved for appellate review *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Luperon,*85 NY2d 71, 78; *People v Udzinski,*146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see,*CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s sentence was not excessive *(see, People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Ritter, J. P., Santucci, Joy and Florio, JJ., concur.
## Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Tarsadeus Tarceyla Fisher , Appellant

No. 06

- 22

- 00127

- CR v.

The State of Texas , Appellee Appeal from the 6th District Court of

Lamar County, Texas (Tr. Ct

. No. 29423 ).

Memorandum Opinion delivered by Chief

Justice Morriss

, Justice Stevens and Justice

van Cleef participating

.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that the appeal should be dismissed

for want of jurisdiction . Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

We n ote that the appellant, Tarsadeus Tarceyla Fisher , has adequately indicated h er

inability to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED NOVEMBER 18, 2022

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey , Clerk
#### Godfrey Goldmark v. U. S. Electro-Galvanizing Company.

Motion denied, with ten dollars costs.
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT SANTOS M ARLENY VELASQUEZ DE C AR C AM O, Pe titione r, v. LORETTA E. LYNC H, Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde n t . No. 11-72100 Age n c y No. A095-731-944 M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d De c e m

be r 9, 2015 ** B e fore : W ALLAC E, R AW LINSON, a

n d IKUTA, C irc uit Judge s. Santos M arle ny

Ve la s que z de C arc am o , a native and c i tiz e n

of El Sa lva dor, pe titions for re vie w of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls’ (“ B IA” ) orde r de ny ing he r m otion to re c onside r. W e have jurisdic tion unde r 8 U.S.C . § 1252. W e de ny the p e tition for re v i e w. 

# FIL ED DEC 15 2015 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public a t ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a )(2).In he r ope ning brie f, Ve la sque z de C arc am o fa ils to m ake any argum e nt tha t the B IA a buse d its disc re tion in de ny ing he r m otion to re c onside r. Se e MartinezSe rrano v . IN

S , 94 F.3d 1256, 1260 (9th C ir. 1996) (de ny ing the pe tition for re vie w whe re pe titione r fa ile d “ t o a ddre ss how theB IA a buse d its disc re tion by

de ny ing his m otion to re ope n

an d re c onside r its de c ision” ). PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE W DE NIE D.

1 1 - 7 2 1 0 0 2
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-22-00049-CV

Mario Angel Diaz

v.

Marina Diaz

On Appeal from the

444th District Court of Cameron County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2020-DCL-03823

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against 

appellant.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

August 18, 2022
#### ST. JOHNSBURY AND LAMOILLE COUNTY RAILROAD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 330, Docket 72-1893.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued Dec. 8, 1972.

Decided Dec. 22, 1972.

Robert J. Kurrle, Barre, Vt. (Richard E. Davis, Barre, Vt., of counsel), for plaintiff-appellant.

Robert D. Raehlin, St. Johnsbury, Vt. (Downs, Raehlin'& Martin, St. Johns-bury, Vt., of counsel), for defendant-appellee.

Before LUMBARD, SMITH and MANSFIELD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The judgment is affirmed upon the carefully considered opinion of Judge Oakes, reported at 341 F.Supp. 1368 (D.Vt.1972).
**Exhibit 32**

**SECTION 906 CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND**

**CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF**

**BOISE INC.**

We are providing this Certificate pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C., Section 1350. Itaccompanies Boise Inc.’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 (the Report). 

 

**
 
**

I, AlexanderToeldte, Boise Inc.’s chief executive officer, certify that: 

(i) The Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and 

(ii) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, Boise Inc.’s financial condition and results of operations. 

 

I, Robert M. McNutt, Boise Inc.’s chief financial officer, certify that:

(i) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and 

(ii) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, Boise Inc.’s financial condition and results of operations. 

 

Date: November 3, 2009 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 will be retained by Boise Inc. and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3944

To permit States to enforce certain State requirements for the labeling of

bottled spring water.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 1, 1996

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina introduced the following bill; which was

referred to the Committee on Commerce

A BILL

To permit States to enforce certain State requirements for

the labeling of bottled spring water.

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

3 SECTION 1. BOTTLED SPRING WATER.

4 Any State may enforce a requirement of the State

5 respecting where water which is bottled must be collected

6 before it may be labeled as spring water if such require7 ment is more restrictive than the Federal requirement re8 specting where water which is bottled must be collected

9 before it may be labeled as spring water. Such Federal

10 requirement is in regulations of the Secretary of Health
2

•HR 3944 IH

1 and Human Services published at part 165 of title 21 of

2 the Code of Federal Regulations.

Æ
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,

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 April 28, 2009

l0420 

# Order

April 28, 2009

138079

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 138079 COA: 288359 Muskegon CC: 07-055289-FC BENJAMIN JOHN JAGER, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the December 1, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0518

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

ROBERT CRAIG BRITZIUS,

Defendant and Appellant.

GRANT

Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the 

Appellant is given an extension of time until March 24, 2022, to 

prepare, file, and serve the Appellant’s opening brief. 

Electronically signed by:

Bowen Greenwood

Clerk of the Supreme Court

February 17 2022

02/17/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0518