alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 12,911.

#### Mrs. Emma Henkle vs. Mrs. Florence Bussey, Wife, and C. A. McGowan, Husband. In Re C. A. McGowan Applying for Certiorari, or Writ of Review, to the Court of Appeals, Third District, State of Louisiana.

Certiorari, under Constitution, Art. 101, will not issue to review decisions of Court of Appeals as to questions of fact. *{In re*Ingersoll, 50 An., recently decided; *In re*McLain, 50 An., recently decided; *Tn re*Murff, 50 An., recently decided).

Applicants to Supreme Court for *certiorari*under Art. 101 of the Constitution from decisions of Courts of Appeal, should assigntheir particular grounds of complaint, and specify wherein, in their view, the decisions sought to he reviewed depart from the jurisprudence of the State.

*1136
      *Foster & Broussard*for Petitioner.

*W. F. Blackman*and *Julian*Moioton, Respondent Judges, for themselves.

Submitted on briefs November 7, 1898.

Opinion handed down November 21, 1898.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Nicholls, C. J.

*In re*McLain *et al.,*No. 12,903 of the docket of this court, it was held (affirming *In re*Ingersoll, recently decided, and *In re*Murff, No. 12,996, recently decided), that the writ of *certiorari*authorized to issue under Art. 101 of the Constitution, was not intended to enable parties to review in the Supreme Court decisions of the Courts of Appeals on mere questions of fact.

The decision which relators seek in this proceeding to have reviewedns a decision of the Court of Appeals of the Third Circuit in a petitory[aetion based upon the evidence adduced.

In the brief filed on behalf of the relators counsel say:

> “We have quoted at length (the evidence) from the record only for the purpose of showing that the judges of the Circuit Court have drawn wrongful conclusions from the same, and only for the purpose of showing that they, in coming to their conclusions, have never referred to the salient .parts of the evidence, but to only disconnected parts thereof apparently justifying their conclusions. We admit the propositions they lay down to be correct ones of law.”

Under such conditions *we*must decline to review the judgment of the Court of Appeals. In the Murff case this court said:

> “ This writ of *certiorari*was not given to clothe the court with appellate jurisdiction, but to issue only in exceptional cases, mainly to secure uniformity .of jurisprudence.”

In matters of this character we expect not only that the legal principles upon which the case sought to be reviewed was decided should not be admitted to be correct, but that general^ they should be specially attacked, and the claimed departure of the Court of Appeals in their decisions from the jurisprudence of the State should be specifically pointed out to us.

For the reasons herein assigned it is hereby ordered, adjudged *1137and decreed that relator’s application for a review of the judgment of the Court of Appeals of the Third Circuit, referred to in his petition herein, be and the same is hereby dismissed.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 455 Introduced in House (IH)]

                                    

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 455

     To authorize the Secretary of the Army to carry out a 5-year 
 demonstration program to determine the effectiveness of technology to 
  remedy contaminated sediments in river beds, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 9, 1995

Mr. Traficant introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To authorize the Secretary of the Army to carry out a 5-year 
 demonstration program to determine the effectiveness of technology to 
  remedy contaminated sediments in river beds, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Mahoning River Clean-up Act''.

SEC. 2. STUDY OF MAHONING RIVER.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Army is authorized to 
undertake a study to assess the environmental condition of the Mahoning 
River in northeast Ohio and western Pennsylvania to determine the 
extent of environmental degradation caused by industrial pollution.
    (b) Specific Requirements.--The study under this section shall 
include an analysis of water and sediment quality and an analysis of 
the natural resources in the area. The study shall identify the 
pollutants that exceed water or sediment quality standards and shall 
identify the point and nonpoint sources of the pollutants.
    (c) Report.--At the conclusion of the study authorized by 
subsection (a), the Secretary of the Army shall submit to Congress a 
report on the results of the study, together with a comprehensive 
protection plan recommending specific actions to restore and maintain 
the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Mahoning River. 
The plan shall include a schedule for implementing recommended actions.

SEC. 3. DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Army is authorized to carry 
out a 5-year demonstration program to determine the effectiveness of 
promising technologies to remedy contaminated sediments in river beds.
    (b) Selection of Location.--In selecting the location for 
conducting the demonstration program under this section, priority 
consideration shall be given to the areas of northeast Ohio and western 
Pennsylvania.

SEC. 4. FUNDING.

    There is authorized to be appropriated $10,000,000 for each of the 
fiscal years 1995 through 1999 to carry out the demonstration program 
authorized by section 3.
                                 <all>
```
**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 of BLS Media, Inc. a Nevada corporation
        (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"),
        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
                May
                  11, 2007
```

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 155 (Monday, August 11, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46586-46587]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18478]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

A-570-933

Postponement of Preliminary Determination of Antidumping Duty 
Investigation: Frontseating Service Valves from the People's Republic 
of China

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 11, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eugene Degnan or Robert Bolling, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 8, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
0414 or (202) 482-3434, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Postponement of Preliminary Determination

    On April 8, 2008, the Department of Commerce (``the Department'') 
initiated an antidumping duty investigation on frontseating service 
valves from the People's Republic of China. See Notice of Initiation of 
Antidumping Duty Investigation: Frontseating Service Valves from the 
People's Republic of China, 73 FR 20250 (April 15, 2008).\1\ The notice 
of initiation stated that the Department would issue its preliminary 
determination no later than 140 days after the date of issuance of the 
initiation, in accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act 
of 1930, as amended (``the Act''). The preliminary determination is 
currently due no later than August 26, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Department issued the initiation notice on April 8, 
2008, and the initiation was published in the Federal Register on 
April 15, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 30, 2008, the petitioner, Parker-Hannifin Corporation, made 
a timely request, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.205(b)(2) and (e), for a 50-
day postponement of the preliminary determination. Because there are no 
compelling reasons to deny the request, in accordance with section 
733(c)(1)(A) of the Act, the Department is postponing the deadline for 
the preliminary determination under by 50 days to no later than October 
15, 2008. The deadline for the final determination will continue to be 
75 days after the date of the preliminary determination, unless 
extended.
    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 733(c)(2) 
of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1).

[[Page 46587]]

    Dated: August 5, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E8-18478 Filed 8-8-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
```
**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 Quarterly Report of Mondo Acquisition II, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending September 30, 2007 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      the undersigned, in his capacity and on the date indicated below, hereby
      certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
      906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his 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.





Dated:  November
                14, 2007
            By:
                /s/ Darrin M. OcasioDarrin
                M. OcasioPresident
## In T he Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 21 - 00131 - CV GINGER LIGHT AND JAMES JUSTIN LIGHT , A PPELLANT S V. MIKE THOMA , APPELLEE On Appeal from the 99th District Court Lubbock County , Texas Trial Court No . 2021 - 543 , 251 , Honorable J. Phillip Hays , Presiding



### June 30 , 2021 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN , C.J. , and PARKER and DOSS , JJ . 1 Appellant s Ginger Light and James Justin Light filed a notice of appeal from the trial court ’ s “ A greed J udgment in G arnishment ” without paying the requisite filing fee. By letter of June 8 , 2021 , the clerk of this court notified appellants that the filing fee was overdue and that unless they were excused from paying court costs under Rule of Appellate Procedure 20.1 , f ailure to pay the filing fee by June 18 would result in dismissal

1 Justice Law rence M. Doss , not participating
.of the appeal. To date , appellants have not paid the filing fee or sought leave to proceed

without payment of court costs. Because appellants ha ve failed to comply with a requirement of th e appellate rules and a notice from the clerk requiring action within a specified time , we dismiss the appeal. See T EX . R. A PP . P
. 25.1(b) , 42.3(c).
Per Curiam
Exhibit 32.01   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 Anoteros, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, George G. Chachas, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief:  (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.      /s/ George G. Chachas By: George G. Chachas Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer  Dated: October 8, 2010  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement 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.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

March 29, 2011 

d0321 

Order 

 

March 29, 2011 

141889 & (11) 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 141889 

 COA: 299064 

Chippewa CC: 07-008602-FH 

ADAM SHANE EARL, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 23, 2010 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). The 

motion to remand is DENIED.
#### Peter MANSUR v. Joseph ABRAHAM et al.

No. 1396.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

Jan. 21, 1935.

Taylor, Porter & Brooks, of Baton Rouge, for appellant.

Robert Ainsworth, Jr., and Sam Monk Zel-den, both of New Orleans, for appellees.

MOUTON, Judge.

In this case, for the reasons stated in opinion rendered by this court in the consolidated cases of Mrs. Thomas E. Merey and Peter Mansur v. Joseph Abraham et al., 159 So. 146, it is ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the judgment rendered below in favor of Peter Mansur v. Joseph Abraham and the Amsterdam Casualty Company be, and is hereby, annulled, avoided, and reversed; and that the demand of plaintiff be rejected at his cost in both courts.

LE BLANC, J., dissenting on the question of prescription.

ELLIOTT, J., dissenting on the merits.
The Unknown Heirs of



# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

March 17, 2015

N o. 04

- 14

- 00667

- CV

R amiro and Edna RAMOS , and Federico Salazar, Jr., Appellant s

v.

The Unknown Heirs of Tomasa GONZALEZ and Narciso Gonzalez, Appellee s

From the 381st Judicial District Court, Starr County, Texas

Trial Court No. DC

- 09

- 559 Honorable J. Manuel Banales, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

On February 26, 2015, this court issued an order directing Ms. Gay Richey to appear before this court on March 19, 2015, to show cause why she should not be held in contempt of court of failing to file the reporter’s record in this appea l. On March 13, 2015, this court received notice that Ms. Richey had been served with notice of the order by the Sheriff of Starr County, Texas.

On March 16, 2015, this court received an email correspondence from Ms. Richey explaining her actions with regard to the reporter’s record. In the email correspondence, Ms. Richey represents to this court that she has completed the record; however, she has not been paid the remaining balance due for the record. Ms. Richey states that she informed the attorne ys that payment was due “about a week ago” and the record will be filed upon receipt of payment.

It is therefore ORDERED that this court’s order of February 26, 2015 is WITHDRAWN, and the hearing scheduled for March 19, 2015 is CANCELLED. It is FURTHER ORDERED that appellant’s attorney provide this court with written proof by March 23, 2015, that the remaining balance due for the record has been paid. Immediately upon receipt of payment

, Ms. Richey is ORDERED to electronically file the reporter’s record in this appeal.

_________________________________ Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief JusticeIN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 17th day of March, 2015

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
**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**





The
      undersigned, Asher Zwebner, the Interim Chief Executive Officer and Chief
      Financial Officer of PCMT Corporation (the “Company”), certifies, under the
      standards set forth and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his
      knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter
      ended September 30, 2008, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
      or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in
      that Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
      condition and results of operations of the Company.




Date:
      November 10, 2008





By:
            /s/ Asher
                ZwebnerName:
            Asher
                ZwebnerTitle:
            Interim
                Chief Executive Officerand
                Chief Financial Officer




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.
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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #11328]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 1.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Kansas (FEMA-1776-DR), dated 07/09/2008.

*Incident:*                         Severe Storms, Flooding, and Tornadoes.                    

*Incident Period:*                         05/22/2008 through 06/16/2008.                    

*Effective Date:*                         08/05/2008.                    

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         09/08/2008.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

M. Mitravich, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of Kansas, dated 07/09/2008, is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster.

*Primary Counties:*

Elk, Haskell, Reno, Wilson.

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Herbert L. Mitchell,

Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.

[FR Doc. E8-18566 Filed 8-11-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF 4/30/97 AND THE STATEMENT OF CONSOLIDATED
EARNINGS FOR THE YEAR ENDED APRIL 30, 1997, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1997
<CASH>                                         323,223
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                8,770,457
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 17,665,600
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            28,719,612
<PP&E>                                      13,716,752
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,373,692
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              42,088,439
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,070,627
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        28,752
<OTHER-SE>                                  16,985,892
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                42,088,439
<SALES>                                     87,216,343
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            87,216,343
<CGS>                                       74,577,261
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,961,184
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,517,256
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              5,160,642
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,905,584
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,255,058
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.08
        

</TABLE>