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

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency 

          - [FEMA-1766-DR] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Indiana (FEMA-1766-DR), dated June 8, 2008, and related determinations. 

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         July 29, 2008.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the President's June 30, 2008, amended declaration authorizing Federal funds for emergency protective measures, including direct Federal assistance, at 90 percent Federal funding of total eligible costs under the Public Assistance program, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Weather Service River Forecast Center has established that the rivers in the State of Indiana, which have experienced historical flooding, fell below flood stage on June 23, 2008. 

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in Presidential Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidential Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidential Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

R. David Paulison, 

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. E8-18432 Filed 8-8-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
#### William Henderson v. W. W. Tobey.

1. Parol *Evidence—Competent to Show the Consideration Different from That Expressed in the*Deed.—Parol evidence is admissible to show that the grantee agreed to pay taxes in addition to the consideration expressed in the deed.

Covenant.—To recover cost of redemption from tax sale. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Vermilion County; the Hon. Ferdinand Bookw alter. Judge presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, 1902.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

Opinion filed November 1, 1903.

D. D. Evans and Gr. M. McDowell, attorneys for the appellant.

O. M. Jones,' attorney for appellee.

Mr. Justice Burroughs

delivered the opinion of the court..

On November 14, 1900, the appellant conveyed to the appellee, by statutory form of warranty deed, certain lands in Vermilion county, Illinois, for the express consideration of $28,800. At the time the deed was made, the taxes on the lands for the year 1900 had not been paid, nor had they been, at the time the deed was made, extended by the county clerk against the lands, but under our statute such taxes were at that time, a lien upon the lands.

In June, 1901, the lands thus conveyed were sold for the taxes of 1900, as such taxes had not been paid, and the appellee afterward, but before this suit was commenced, redeemed the lands from such sale, it costing him $124.80 to do so. And by this action in covenant instituted in the Circuit Court of Vermilion County by the appellee against the appellant, the former thereby sought to recover the cost of such redemption from the latter under the covenants of warranty in the deed.

The appellant pleaded especially, by three pleas, that as a part of the consideration of the deed, the appellee, knowing the taxes on the lands for 1900 were unpaid, agreed by parol with the appellant, that he (appellee) would pay the *155taxes in question; and each plea confessed nominal damages of $1.

To these pleas the Circuit Court sustained a general demurrer. The appellant abided by his pleas, and the court gave judgment in favor of the appellee for the full amount of $124.30, to reverse which the appellant prosecutes this appeal, and urges that the pleas presented a good defense to the action for all but $1 damages, which they confessed; and that the court erred in sustaining the demurrer thereto and in awarding damages for more than $1.

And in that view we concur for the reasons given by us in the opinion in Lloyd v. Sandusky, 95 Ill. App. 593.

The judgment of the Circuit Court will therefore be reversed and the case remanded to that court with directions to overrule the demurrer to the pleas, and then proceed in the case as to law and justice appertain.
Dismissed and Opinion Filed September 21, 2017 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-17-01101-CV 

No. 05-17-01102-CV 

IN RE SENRICK S. WILKERSON, Relator 

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 3 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause Nos. F10-01183 and F10-01184 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Francis, Brown, and Whitehill 

Opinion by Justice Francis 

Before the Court is relator’s September 15, 2017 petition for writ of mandamus in which 

he asks the Court to obtain and review the grand jury transcripts, arrest warrants, and arrest 

reports related to his 2010 convictions and to order the trial court to hold an evidentiary hearing 

to review his convictions. This proceeding is a collateral attack on a final conviction and, 

therefore, falls within the scope of a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus under article 11.07 of 

the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 (West 

2015). Only the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction in final, post-conviction 

felony proceedings. Id; Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 

1991) (orig. proceeding); In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 717 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 

2001, orig. proceeding). 

 
 –2– 

Accordingly, we dismiss this proceeding for want of jurisdiction. 

171101F.P05 

/Molly Francis/ 

MOLLY FRANCIS 

JUSTICE
#### Helena Lynch v. New York Evening Journal Company.

Leave granted to remove papers from files. Settle order on notice.
#### CONNERS v. CITY OF NEW ORLEANS.

No. 14237.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

May 22, 1933.

M. C. Scharff, of New Orleans, for appellant.

Nat W. Bond and Henry B. Curtis, both of New Orleans, for appellee.

WESTEREIELD, Judge.

Martin J. Conners, plaintiff herein, alleges that he was a lieutenant in the fire department of the city of New Orleans, and, between the dates of July 15, 1924, and June 1, 1929, he performed the duties of a captain and should have received a captain’s salary under the authority of Act No. 208 of 1924. He prays for judgment against the city of New Orleans for $297.50, the difference between the salary he received as lieutenant and that which he claims to have been entitled to as captain for the period mentioned.

The exception of no cause of action is based upon the contention that the city of New Orleans is under no obligation and without authority to pay the debts of the fire department, which is a separate legal entity. The exception was properly maintained. Section 17 of the City Charter (Act No. 159 of 1912, page 253) creates a board of commissioners of the fire department of the city of New Orleans, whose duties it is declared shall be such as ordained by Act No. 58 of 1910. Section 15 of the act of 1910 authorizes the board of fire commissioners to institute and maintain suits and proceedings at law and in equity. It results from the foregoing that the board of commissioners of the fire department of the city of New Orleans is a separate legal entity from the city of New Orleans. Bowman v. Board of Commissioners, 145 La. 793, 83 So. 14.

This is an appeal from a judgment maintaining an exception of no cause of action.

. For the reasons assigned the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Affirmed.
Exhibit 32.2





Certification of Principal Financial Officer, 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 BLS Media, Inc. a Nevada corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Gary Prager, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.





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





/s/ Gary PragerGary Prager
Chief Financial Officer
August 11, 2009
Exhibit 32.1

 

**Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,**

**18 U.S.C. Section 1350**

 

 

 

I, Tony N. Frudakis, President and Treasurer of Skyview Holdings Corp. (the “Corporation”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, to my knowledge that:

 

1.  the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Corporation for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 (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 Corporation.

 

 
|  

Skyview Holdings Corp.

 

 

 

 

 

Date: April 11, 2011

By:

/s/ Tony N. Frudakis

 

 

 

Tony N. Frudakis

 

 

 

President and Treasurer

(Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer, and Principal Accounting Officer)

 

 

 

 

  |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Exhibit 23.1




Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm




We have issued our reports dated March 8, 2011, with respect to the consolidated financial statements, schedule and internal control over financial reporting included in the Annual Report of Stratasys, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the Registration Statements of Stratasys, Inc. on Form S-3 (File No. 333-108816, effective December 2, 2003) and on Forms S-8 (File No. 33-93362, effective June 9, 1995, File No. 333-32782, effective March 17, 2000, File No. 333-116210, effective June 4, 2004, and File No. 333-162830, effective November 3, 2009).




/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLPMinneapolis, MinnesotaMarch 8, 2011




---
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-5344

_____________________________

LAWRENCE ZEWIEY,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

_____________________________

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus - Original Jurisdiction.

January 26, 2018

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied on the merits.

LEWIS, OSTERHAUS, and BILBREY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized 

motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.

_____________________________
2

Lawrence Zewiey, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
#### Edward S. Root, Respondent, v. Adrian H. Joline and Douglas Robinson, as receivers of the New York City Railway Company, Appellants.

Judgment and order reversed, new trial ordered, costs to appellants to abide event, unless plaintiff stipulates to reduce verdict to $1,350, in which event judgment as so modified and order affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Settle order on notice.
B R A Z O S C O U N T Y A T T O R N E Y ’ S O F F I C E

R O D N E Y W . A N D E R S O N , C O U N T Y A T T O R N E Y

October 23, 2015

Clerk of the Court Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas P.O. Box 12308 Austin, Texas 78711

Re: PD-1316-15, State of Texas v. Cristan Drayce Williams

Clerk of the Court,

This case is on appeal from County Court at Law No. 2 of Brazos County, Texas. The trial and appellate prosecutor for the State is the Brazos County Attorney’s Office. Notices from the Court thus far have been provided instead to the Brazos County District Attorney’s Office. The State respectfully requests notice be provided to:

Rodney Anderson Brazos County Attorney 300 E. 26 th Street Suite 1300 Bryan, Texas 77803

For notice via e-mail, the Brazos County Attorney’s Office requests notice be sent to equisenberry@brazoscountytx.gov

.

Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.

Eric K. Quisenberry Assistant County Attorney Brazos County Attorney’s Office 300 E. 26 th Street, Ste. 1300 Bryan, Texas 77803 Phone: (979) 361-4300 Fax: (979) 361-4312 equisenberry@brazoscountytx.gov

Copied to: Benton Watson John Paschall Lisa McMinn PD-1316-15 COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS Transmitted 10/23/2015 11:49:14 AM Accepted 10/23/2015 12:54:20 PM

ABEL ACOSTA CLERK
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________** No. 22 - 51076 Summary Calendar

**____________ United States of America,**  Plaintiff
— Appellee **,** versus **Jose Humberto Hernandez -**  **Mendez,** Defendant
— Appellant **.**

**______________________________** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:22 - CR - 637 - 1

**_______ _______________________**  Before **Jones, S tewart,**  and **Duncan,** Circuit Judges **. Per Curiam**  **:** ***** Jose Humberto Hernandez - Mende z appeals his sentence of 30 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release imposed following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry after removal. He argues that the enhanced punishment provision in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is unconstituti onal because it allows a sentence above the otherwise applicable

**_____________________** * This opinion is not designated for publication. See **5th Cir .**  **R .**  47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED June 2, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 22-51076 Document: 00516773696 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/02/2023No. 22 - 51076

2 statutory maximum of two years of imprisonment and one year of supervised release based on facts that are neither alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. See also 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) (setting otherwise applicable two - year maximum prison term); 18 U.S.C. §§ 3559(a) (classifying felonies) , 3583(b) (setting maximum supervised release terms for different felony classes) . Hernandez - Mendez has filed an unopposed moti on for summary disposition and a letter brief correctly conceding that the only issue he raises is foreclosed by Almendarez - Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998). See United States v. Pervis , 937 F.3d 546, 553 - 54 (5th Cir. 2019) . He explains that he has raised the issue to preserve it for possible further review. Accordingly, because summary disposition is appropriate, see Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis , 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969), Hernandez - Mendez’s motion is **GRANTED** , and the district court’s judgment is **AFFIRMED** . Case: 22-51076 Document: 00516773696 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/02/2023
J. J. 

### See id. We therefore conclude that the district court did not err in denying appellant's motion. Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

cc: Hon. Elissa F. Cadish, District Judge Deangelo Lamont Mitchell Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                             752
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,752
<PP&E>                                         815,001
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 816,753
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,453,907
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       663,738
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,300,892)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   816,753
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  165,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               240,565
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               167,356
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             146,847
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (719,768)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (719,768)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (719,768)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.13)


</TABLE>
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NOS. WR-87,260-01 & WR-87,260- 02

EX P ARTE RONALD T. SPRIG GS, Applicant
ON AP P LICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORP US AND MA NDAM US

CAUSE NO. 71,817-E IN THE 108 DISTRICT COURT T H F ROM P OTTE R COUNTY
Per curiam . O R D E R Applicant has filed an app l i ca t ion for writ of m andamus and/or habea s corpus pursuant to this Court’s authority to issue extraordinary writs. T E X . C O N S T . art. V, § 5(c)
. He challeng es the order finding him in contempt of court. The Court denies leave to file ap p lications for mandamus and habe as cor

pus and lifts the stay

of the unde rly ing or der of contempt and c ommitm ent.
Filed: June 27, 2018 Do not publish
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

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

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

_______________________________________ __ Clerk October 24, 2011

d1017 

# Order

October 24, 2011

142845(17)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 142845 COA: 302278 LAWRENCE PARKER, Saginaw CC: 09-032202-FH Defendant-Appellant. 10-033937-FH

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for rec onsideration of this Court’s June 28, 2011 order is considered, and it is DENIED, beca use it does not appear that the order was entered erroneously.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

February 17, 2023

No. 04-23-00125-CV

IN RE Philip M. ROSS

Original Proceeding1

ORDER

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice

On February 14, 2023, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus containing a request 

for stay. After considering the petition and this record, this court concludes relator is not entitled 

to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 52.8(a). Relator’s request for stay is DENIED as moot.2

It is so ORDERED on February 17, 2023.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: ________________________

 MICHAEL A. CRUZ, 

 CLERK OF COURT

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2020-CI-05671, styled Commission for Lawyer Discipline v. Philip Martin 

Ross, pending in the 224th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Stacey L. Mathews presiding.

2 Opinion to follow.
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT
-----------------------------

[LOGO] KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
          
          Certified Public Accountants
          1305 Walt Whitman Road
          Melville, NY  11747-4302

To the Stockholders and Board of Directors Reliance Bancorp, Inc.:

We consent to incorporation  by reference in the  Registration  Statements (Nos.
33-81278 and 333-20379) on Form S-8 of Reliance Bancorp, Inc of our report dated
July 23, 1998, relating to the consolidated  statements of condition of Reliance
Bancorp,  Inc.  and  subsidiary  as of June 30,  1998  and 1997 and the  related
consolidated  statements  of income,  changes in  stockholders'  equity and cash
flows for each of the years in the three-year  period ended June 30, 1998, which
report is  incorporated  by reference to the June 30, 1998 Annual Report on Form
10-K of Reliance Bancorp, Inc.

/s/  KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
     Melville, New York
     September 28, 1998
#### Michael S. HARE, Appellant, v. LINE CREEK ASSOCIATES, INC., Richard A. Erickson, Defendants, K.G.D., Inc., Respondent.

No. WD 52114.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Jan. 28, 1997.

Rehearing Denied March 4, 1997.

*302Douglas J. Patterson, Leawood, KS, for appellant.

Darren S. Black, Phillip A. Miller, Armstrong, Teasdale, Schlafly & Davis, Kansas City, for respondent.

Before ULRICH, P. J., and HANNA and SPINDEN, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Michael Hare appeals from the summary judgment entered by the trial court in favor of KGD, Inc. The trial court found that Mr. Hare’s claims against KGD in this breach of contract case were barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel based on a prior suit brought by Mr. Hare. No precedential purpose exists in publishing a written opinion. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).