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



## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 14

- 00006

- CR

Bernardo Torres , J r

. , Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee Appealed from the 232nd District Court of Harris County. (Tr. Ct. No. 1377519). Opinion delivered by Justice Jamison.
Justices Busby and Brown also participating.

TO THE 232ND DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before our Court of Appeals on May 12, 2015 , the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment was determined. Our Court of Appeals made its
order in th ese words:

This cause was heard on the record of the court below. Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED

.

We further order this decision certified below for observance. WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court in this behalf and in all things have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS , the Hon. Kem Thompson Frost , Chief Justice of our Fourteenth Court of Appeals, with the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of Houston

, August 21,
2015

.
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 23-60053

Summary Calendar

____________

John Howard Overstreet, 

Plaintiff—Appellant,

versus

Doug Miller, Assistant Prosecutor; Chip Lewis, County Public 

Defender; Prentiss Harrell, 15th Judicial Circuit Court Judge, 

Defendants—Appellees.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 2:20-CV-124

______________________________

Before Jones, Haynes, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

In June 2020, John Howard Overstreet pled guilty to being a sex 

offender living within 3,000 feet of a school. See Miss. Code Ann.

§ 45-33-25(4)(a) (West 2023). Judge Prentiss Harrell of Mississippi’s 

Fifteenth Judicial District sentenced Overstreet to a five-year term of 

probation. Then in July 2020—proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis—

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 21, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 23-60053 Document: 00516794148 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/21/2023
No. 23-60053

2

Overstreet filed a Section 1983 suit against prosecutor Doug Miller, public 

defender Chip Lewis, and Judge Harrell. Overstreet alleges the defendants

violated his constitutional rights by not informing Overstreet that he would 

have to wear an ankle monitor as a condition of probation.

The district court dismissed Overstreet’s complaint for failure to state 

a claim, see 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), and levied a strike under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(g). Specifically, the district court accepted the magistrate judge’s 

report and recommendation that Overstreet had failed to state any basis why 

Harrell and Miller are not entitled to immunity, why Lewis had acted under 

color of state law, or why all of Overstreet’s claims are not barred by Heck v. 

Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). On appeal, Overstreet still fails to brief any 

of the issues the district court ruled upon. He has therefore “forfeited any 

challenge to the district court’s primary holding that the allegations failed to 

state a plausible claim.” Stevens v. St. Tammany Par. Gov’t, 17 F.4th 563, 574

(5th Cir. 2021); see also Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8); Jaco v. Garland, 24 F.4th 

395, 401 n.1 (5th Cir. 2021) (“Although we liberally construe pro se [filings], 

pro se litigants must still comply with the civil rules of appellate procedure.”).

AFFIRMED.

Case: 23-60053 Document: 00516794148 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/21/2023
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation by reference inRegistration Statement Nos. 333-143676 and 333-143678 on Form S-8 and Registration Statement No. 333-156281 on Form S-3 of Porter Bancorp, Inc. of our report dated March 25, 2009 with respect to the consolidated financial statements ofPorter Bancorp, Inc., which report appears in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Porter Bancorp, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2008. 

                Crowe Horwath LLP 

Louisville, Kentucky 

March 25, 2009
#### SECARI v. UCHELLO.

No. 19401.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

Oct. 4, 1949.

George E. Konrad, Howell Carter, Jr., New Orleans, for plaintiff-appellee.

James G. Schillin, New Orleans, for defendant-appellant.

PER CURIAM.

Appellee has moved to dismiss this appeal because of alleged insufficiency in the amount of the appeal bond. No effort was made by appellee in the trial court to call upon appellant to supplement the bond.

Since Act 112 of 1916 was adopted, an appeal may not be dismissed in the appellate court for the reason urged, unless *101the procedure prescribed in that statute was followed in the trial court. See Succession of Lissa, 194 La. 328, 193 So. 663; Durel v. Buchanan, 147 La. 804, 86 So. 189; Garland v. Keen, 18 La.App. 312, 137 So. 343.

The motion to dismiss the appeal is overruled.

Motion overruled.
#### Edward Leber, Respondent, v. Leopold Brand, Defendant, and Theodore Roche, Appellant.

Motion to dismiss appeal granted, with costs. Present — Hirschherg, P. J., Jenks, Gaynor, Rich and Miller, JJ.
##### 



PHELPS DODGE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
  COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
 Nine Months EndedThird Quarter
    
    
    September 30,2005
    
    
    2004
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2004Net income
    
    $
    366.1
    
    
    
    292.9
    
    
    
    1,435.1
    
    
    
    705.2Preferred stock dividends
    
    
    
    
    
    
    (3.3
    )
    
    
    (6.8
    )
    
    
    (10.1
    )Net income applicable to common shares
    
    $
    366.1
    
    
    
    289.6
    
    
    
    1,428.3
    
    
    
    695.1Basic:Average number of common shares outstanding
    
    
    98.6
    
    
    
    93.8
    
    
    
    96.8
    
    
    
    92.8Diluted:Average number of common shares outstanding
    
    
    98.6
    
    
    
    93.8
    
    
    
    96.8
    
    
    
    92.8Common stock equivalents  stock options
    
    
    0.3
    
    
    
    1.1
    
    
    
    0.4
    
    
    
    1.2Common stock equivalents  restricted stock
    
    
    0.4
    
    
    
    0.3
    
    
    
    0.4
    
    
    
    0.4Conversion of mandatory convertible preferred stock
    
    
    2.1
    
    
    
    4.2
    
    
    
    3.5
    
    
    
    4.2Diluted average number of common shares outstanding
    
    
    101.4
    
    
    
    99.4
    
    
    
    101.1
    
    
    
    98.6Basic earnings per share
    
    $
    3.71
    
    
    
    3.09
    
    
    
    14.75
    
    
    
    7.49Diluted earnings per share
    
    $
    3.61
    
    
    
    2.95
    
    
    
    14.19
    
    
    
    7.15
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.                  

###### Nuclear Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. 52-011] 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Mark Notich, Environmental Projects Branch 1, Division of Site and Environmental Reviews, Office of New Reactors, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Mr. Notich may be contacted by telephone at 301-415-3053, or by e-mail at                         *mark.notich@nrc.gov*.                     

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of August 2008.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Nilesh Chokshi, 

Deputy Director, Division of Site and Environmental Reviews, Office of New Reactors.

[FR Doc. E8-19371 Filed 8-20-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
#### Angelo De Tomaso, Administrator, etc., of Tomaso De Tomaso, Deceased, Appellant, v. John C. Orr Company, Respondent.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. No opinion. (Houghton, J., dissenting.)
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 24.2

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOWN ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENT, that the undersigned, Kenneth T. Friedman
constitutes and appoints Yehoram Uziel and Robert E. Kassel, or either of them,
his true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, each with full power of
substitution and resubstitution, for him and in his name, place and stead, in
any and all capacities, to sign the Form 10-KSB, Annual Report of Soligen
Technologies, Inc., a Wyoming Corporation, for the fiscal year ended March 31,
2000, and any amendments or supplements thereto, and to file this Power of
Attorney and the Form 10-KSB, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in
connection therewith with the Securities and Exchange Commission granting unto
each of said attorney-in-fact and agent full power and authority to do and
perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and
about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could do
in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that each of said
attorney-in-fact and agent may do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

             Dated this      26th       day of June 2000
                         --------------


Signature


/s/ Kenneth T. Friedman
---------------------------------------------
Kenneth T. Friedman, Director
Exhibit 32.3



Statement of Chief Executive Officer



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of Southern California Gas Company (the "Company") certifies that:



(i)

the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 (the "Quarterly Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and



(ii)

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







August 7, 2008



/S/  Debra L. ReedDebra L. ReedChief Executive Officer
|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1. | The Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended June 30, 2013 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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/ Gary G. Rich                                 |
|                                             |
| Gary G. Rich                                     |
| President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director |
EXHIBIT 31(a)

I, Thomas M. Patrick, certify that:

1.	I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of North Shore Gas Company;

2.	Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.	Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.	The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)	Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)	Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c)	Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.	The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)	All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b)	Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

 

Date:  February 9, 2005

  /s/  Thomas M. Patrick
EXHIBIT
32.2





P&F
INDUSTRIES, INC.


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 P&F Industries, Inc.
(the “Company”) for the period ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
undersigned, Joseph A. Molino, Jr., Principal Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, 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.





/s/
      JOSEPH A. MOLINO, JR.Joseph
      A. Molino, Jr.Date
      November 12, 2010
            Principal
      Financial Officer
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


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





In
connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2009 of BreitBurn Energy Partners L.P (the “Partnership”), as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Halbert
S. Washburn, Co-Chief Executive Officer of BreitBurn GP, LLC, the general
partner of the Partnership, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to
my knowledge:





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





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





/s/ HALBERT S. WASHBURNHalbert
      S. WashburnCo-Chief
      Executive Officer of BreitBurn GP, LLCDated:
      March 11, 2010
#### J. J. CLARKE COMPANY, Limited, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Herman J. ESTRADE, Defendant and Appellant. ***

No. 16063.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

Oct. 7, 1935.

Harold J. Moore, of New Orleans, for appellant.

Dart & Dart and Leo L. Dubourg,' all of New Orleans, for appellee.

*

Rehearing denied Nov. 4, 1935.

LECHE, Judge.

Plaintiff, as the owner and holder of a certain promissory note, filed this suit against defendant, as the indorser. The note in question is dated at New Orleans, July 16, 1929, and recites that on the 16th day of each month, after date, the maker promises to pay to the order of himself the sum of $12, until he shall have paid the sum of $235, with interest at the rate of 8 per cent, per annum from date. The note is paraphed for identification with an act of mortgage passed July 16, 1929, before Martin H. Manion, notary public. On November 27, 1929, defendant, who was the dwner and holder of said note, transferred it to plaintiff for a consideration of $199, which appears to have been the balance due on the note at that time. Of this amount, $100 was applied on an open account due plaintiff by defendant, and the balance of $99 plaintiff paid defendant by check. On November 27, 1929, the date of this transaction, the note was in default and the remaining installments had matured under the terms of the chattel mortgage. The first installment was paid on August 17, 1929, no installment was paid for September, and on October 19, 1929, two installments were paid. Therefore, on November 27th, the installment for November due November 16th was due and unpaid and the note was in default. Plaintiff had previously foreclosed under the chattel mortgage, realizing the sum of $50.-60 from the sale of the mortgaged property. Defendant did not indorse the note at the time it was made, but placed his in-dorsement thereon on November 27, 1929, at the time the note was transferred to plaintiff and while the same was past due and in default.

Defendant resists payment, claiming that he was entitled to notice of dishonor and notice of the foreclosure under the chattel mortgage.

From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant has appealed.

The questions involved were passed upon by this court when this case came before us on the exception of no cause of action, and the reasoning set forth there is applicable here. J. J. Clarke Co., Inc., v. Ford et al., 145 So. 557.

For the reasons assigned in that case, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Affirmed.
#### NUSS et ux. v. CITY OF NEW ORLEANS.*

No. 14203.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

April 10, 1933.

Nat W. Bond and Henry B. Curtis, both óf New Orleans, for appellant.

Guión & Upton and K. *C.*Barranger, all of New Orleans, for appellees.

*

Rehearing denied May 22, 1933.

JANVIER, Judge.

This case arises out of the same accident for which in Kernstock v. City of New Orleans, 147 So. 371, decided by us today, we held liability should be placed against the city of New Orleans.

While Kernstoek was leaning with his back against the top rail and with his elbows resting upon it and with the heel of one shoe resting upon the lower rail, young Nuss approached and leaned with his hands upon the top rail which then broke with the result that both Kernstoek and Nuss fell to the bottom of the canal below the bridge.

We said in the Kernstoek Case that the bridge rail was apparently safe and that there was no negligence in Kernstoek in having *375leaned his back and elbows upon such a rail. We feel now, as we did when we considered that case, and, therefore, hold that for such injuries as young Nuss sustained the city of New Orleans is responsible, since the evidence shows that Nuss placed no great weight upon the rail, since he merely put his two hands upon it.

In the court below plaintiffs, mother and father of young Nuss who was a minor, were awarded, on his behalf, the sum of $1,500.

He was left-handed and unfortunately it was his left arm which was broken. He was incapacitated for about two months and his arm is now from % to 3⁄8 of an inch shorter than it should be. The evidence with reference to his injuries is very meager but, nevertheless, we feel that the amount awarded is somewhat in excess pf other awards in similar cases.

The judgment appealed from is amended by reducing the amount awarded to $1,000 and as thus amended it is affirmed.

Amended and affirmed.
Exhibit 10.3



The People's Republic of China

National-owned Land Use Rights Certificate

[Unofficial Translation]



Certificate No.: 010842359

Date: March 10, 2003

Made by PRC Minister of Land and Resources

(Seal)





Land User
        Hebei Baoding Orient Paper Milling Co., Ltd.
(Seal)Land Address
        South Nanhuan Road, Xushui CountyPurpose
        For industryType of Use Right
        TransferredExpire Date
        March 10, 2053Land Size
        58.06 muIssuing Authority
        The Peoples Government of Xushui County
(Seal)
Date: March 10, 2003




---
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markm an 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 December 26, 2012

s1217 

# Order

December 26, 2012

145852

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 145852

COA: 300775

Saginaw CC: 09

- 033077

- FC

JASON THOMAS TARVER,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 7, 2012

judgment 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.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, February 14, 2018. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, February 14, 2018 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A18A1176. TURNSTONE GROUP, LLC et al. v. GARY J. JESCHKE et al..
Upon consideration of the APPELLANT'S motion FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THE APPEAL in the above styled case, it is ordered that the motion is hereby GRANTED.