alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: In the Interest of M.R.H.

Appellate case number: 0 1

- 1 8

- 00 933

- CV

Trial court case number: 1 6

- 1905

- CV

Trial court: 25t h Distri c t C ourt of Gu a dalupe C oun t y

Th is Court’s January 10, 201 9 Order had directed appellant, Christopher Pat Hildebrand, incar cerated and proceeding pro se, to comply with Chapter 14 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code by filing an affidavit or unsworn declaration of previous lawsuits and a certified copy of his inmate trust account statement

. On February 11 , 201 9

, appellant timely filed an unsworn application to proceed in forma pauperis in this Court attach ing a certified copy of his inmate trust account statement and a sepa rate notice of change of address attaching his unsworn declaration of his previous lawsuit s

. Because appellant’s inmate trust a ccount statement and declaration of lawsuits c omply with Chapter 14, appellant is not required to pay appellate costs in advance

. See T EX

. C IV

. P RAC

. & R EM

. C ODE A NN

. §§ 14.004(a), (c), 14.006(f) (West 2012); T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 20.1(c). Accordingly, the Clerk of this Court is directed to m ark appellant indigent in this Court’s records an d mark him as allowed to proceed without advance payment of the appellate filing, clerk’s, and reporter’s record fees. On September 21 , 201 8

, the clerk’s record was filed and on November 6, 2018, the reporter ’s record was filed. Thus, b ecause appellant is incarcerated and proceeding pro se, the Court ORDERS the district clerk to mail the clerk’s and reporter’s record s t o the appellant at his current address under his TDCJ# 02230753

, within 1 0 days of the date of th i s Order, at no cost to appellant, and shall certify the delivery date within 15 days

. Because appellant filed his appellant’s brief on January 2, 2019, without the records,

a ppellant is ORDERED to file an amended appellant’s brief within 3 0 days from the date of this Order. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 2, 38.6(a)( 1 ) , 38.7

. It is so ORDERED. Judge’s signature:

___

/s/ Evelyn V. Keyes

_____ x Acting individually Acting for the Court Date: __ February 21, 2019

___
#### WEDGEWORTH et ux. v. STREUN et al.

No. 6187.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Second Circuit.

*Feb.*4, 1941.

E. W. & P. N. Browne and G. M. Boden-heimer, all of Shreveport, for appellants.

Coleman & Morgan and Booth & Lock-ard, all of Shreveport, for appellees.

HAMITER, Judge.

Charlene Wedgeworth, for whose benefit this suit was brought, received injuries an.d incurred medical expense as a result of the accident involved in Stevens v. Streun, La.App., 200 So. 182. Judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiffs in her behalf for $267. This amount seems to be proper. Hence, for the reasons given in the opinion of the mentioned cause, the judgment is affirmed.
Order entered October 30, 2018

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-18-00566-CV

JOHN GARDNER, Appellant

V.

MELISSA PATT GARDNER, Appellee

On Appeal from the 303rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DF-17-25055

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this appeal is past due. By postcard dated June 21, 2018, we 

notified Donna Kindle, Official Court Reporter for the 303rd Judicial District Court, that the 

reporter’s record was overdue and directed her to file the reporter’s record within thirty days. By 

order dated August 1, 2018, we again notified Ms. Kindle the reporter’s record was overdue and 

ordered her to, within fifteen days, file either (1) the reporter’s record; (2) written verification no 

hearings were recorded; or (3) written verification that appellant had not paid for or made 

arrangements to pay for the reporter’s record. To date, Ms. Kindle has failed to comply with the 

Court’s order. 

Accordingly, we ORDER Donna Kindle to file, within TEN DAYS of the date of this 

order, either (1) the reporter’s record; (2) written verification no hearings were recorded; or (3) 
written verification that appellant has not paid for or made arrangements to pay for the reporter’s 

record. We notify appellant that if we receive verification he has not requested the reporter’s 

record or paid for or made arrangements to pay for the reporter’s record, we will order the 

appeal submitted without the reporter’s record. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(c). 

We expressly CAUTION Ms. Kindle that failure to comply with this order WILL result in 

the Court taking such action as is necessary to have Ms. Kindle comply with the Court’s orders, 

including an order that she not sit as a court reporter until she does comply.

We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order to:

Honorable Denise Garcia 

Presiding Judge

303rd Judicial District Court 

Donna Kindle

Official Court Reporter

303rd Judicial District Court

All parties

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT

CHIEF JUSTICE
#### Terry W. STEWART, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael THOMAS; Martha Williams, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 02-1466.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Sept. 20, 2002.

Decided Nov. 19, 2002.

Terry W. Stewart, Appellant Pro Se.

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed in'part and vacated and remanded in part by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Terry Stewart appeals the dismissal of his civil complaint and the imposition of sanctions. We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand for further proceedings on the issue of sanctions.

We have reviewed the record and the judgment of the district court finding that Stewart’s complaint is frivolous, and we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the rejection of Stewart’s claims on the reasoning of the district court. *See Stewart v. Thomas,*No. CA-02-57-3-WLO (W.D.N.C. filed Mar. 28, 2002; entered Mar. 29, 2002).

Stewart also asserts that the district court improperly imposed sanctions. While we express no opinion on the propriety of the imposition of sanctions, the court should have given Stewart proper notice that sanctions were under consideration and allowed him an opportunity to respond. In this case, the show cause order did not specifically inform Stewart that he might be subjected to sanctions if the court found that he filed his complaint without factual or legal basis. Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that the court provide a party “notice and a reasonable opportunity to respond” before it imposes sanctions. While the hearing established that Stewart’s complaint was frivolous, the court should have notified Stewart that it was considering the pre-filing review order that it imposed. *See Autry v. Woods,*106 F.3d 61, 63 (4th Cir.1997) (noting that this Court issued show cause order before entering pre-filing review injunction). This would have given Stewart a chance to respond to the propriety of sanctions rather than sim*185ply opposing the dismissal of his complaint. Because the court did not provide Stewart adequate notice and an opportunity to respond before imposing sanctions, we vacate the sanctions order and remand for the court to do so. We express no opinion as to whether Stewart’s conduct merits sanctions or whether the chosen sanctions are appropriate.

In sum, we vacate the sanctions order and remand for further proceedings as to sanctions after Stewart is given proper notice and affirm the court’s orders in all other respects. 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 IN PART; VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART.*
#### In the Matter of the Application of Francis J. Del Rosso. (Melloney J. Del Rosso, an Infant.)

Supreme Court, Special Term, Nassau County,

November 28, 1956.

*Michael M. Coon*for petitioner.

*Harold M. Sichel*for respondents.

Marcus G. Christ, J.

This is a proceeding by writ of habeas corpus in which the father of Melloney June Del Rosso seeks custody. This two-year-old child is now living with her maternal grandfather and grandmother, the mother having died. The child is in a good home where there appears to be affection and interest. However, despite this, a parent has a paramount right to custody over anyone else unless there are “ special and *850weighty circumstances ” to negative this rule *(People ex rel. Kropp*v. Shepsky, 305 N . Y. 465, 468-469). Such circumstances exist here. The father has not remarried. He lives with his father and mother and proposes to take the baby there. The paternal grandmother now works but states that if they get the custody of the baby she will give up her position and devote the time to the child. The father has a record of instability. He was in an asylum as a marijuana addict but he was released. His life with the child’s mother was stormy and there was testimony in the case to justify a finding that he had been abusive to her on occasions. During the hearing proof was adduced by certified copies of conviction that in February of this year the petitioner pleaded guilty to a charge of violating subdivision 5-a of section 70 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law and received a 30-day jail sentence, execution suspended, and was ordered to pay a $100 fine or serve a jail sentence of 100 days. At the same time the petitioner pleaded guilty to a charge of violating subdivision 6 of section 70 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law and on such plea received a 30-day jail sentence, execution suspended, and was ordered to pay a fine of $25 or serve a jail sentence of 25 days. Later, on March 22, 1956, on his plea of guilty, the petitioner was sentenced to 30 days in the Nassau County jail for a violation of section 58 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law (reckless driving). Since the hearing in this matter was closed and while the court had the matter under consideration for decision, the petitioner has again been in trouble. A transcript of proceedings held in the District Court of the County of Nassau has been brought to the court’s notice showing that on November 1, 1956, the petitioner pleaded guilty to a charge of assault (Penal Law, § 244, subd. 1) committed against a police officer in a tavern under circumstances which demonstrate that the petitioner is not a stable person. On November 20, 1956, the petitioner was sentenced to six months in the Nassau County jail with credit for time already served. Upon all the facts in this matter the petition is denied and the writ dismissed.

Submit order.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-01-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-03-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-02-1997
<CASH>                                       3,936,773
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               13,378,639
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,611,292
<INVENTORY>                                  6,847,147
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            31,939,648
<PP&E>                                     118,853,887
<DEPRECIATION>                              61,075,533
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             153,272,673
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       58,209,522
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,572,626
<OTHER-SE>                                  35,339,254
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               153,272,673
<SALES>                                    167,064,104
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           167,064,104
<CGS>                                      131,700,918
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              131,700,918
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           4,989,876
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,749,148
<INCOME-TAX>                                   825,598
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            923,550
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   923,550
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.11
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OFINDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

Weconsent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement333-133184 on Form S-1 and the Registration Statement 333-136297****on Form S-1 of Neiman Marcus, Inc. and subsidiariesand in the related Prospectus Supplements filed pursuant to Rule 424(b) ofour reports dated September 22, 2008, with respect to the consolidatedfinancial statements and schedule of Neiman Marcus, Inc. and subsidiariesand the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of NeimanMarcus, Inc. and subsidiaries included in this Annual Report on Form 10-Kfor the year ended August 2, 2008.

 

 
| /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP |   |
|--------------------------------|--------|
|                           |   |
| Dallas, Texas                  |   |
| September 22, 2008        |   |

 

1

----
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6572 

To amend the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019 

to provide for the addition of certain equipment and services produced 

or provided by DJI Technologies to the list of covered communications 

equipment or services published under such Act, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 2, 2022 

Ms. STEFANIK (for herself, Mr. GALLAGHER, and Ms. TENNEY) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce 

A BILL 

To amend the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks 

Act of 2019 to provide for the addition of certain equipment and services produced or provided by DJI Technologies to the list of covered communications equipment 

or services published under such Act, and for other 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 ‘‘Countering CCP 

5 Drones Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6572 IH

1 SEC. 2. ADDITION OF CERTAIN EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES 

2 OF DJI TECHNOLOGIES TO COVERED LIST. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 2(c) of the Secure and 

4 Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019 (47 

5 U.S.C. 1601(c)) is amended by adding at the end the fol6 lowing: 

7 ‘‘(5) The communications equipment or service 

8 being— 

9 ‘‘(A) telecommunications or video surveil10 lance equipment produced by Shenzhen Da11 Jiang Innovations Sciences and Technologies 

12 Company Limited (commonly known as ‘DJI 

13 Technologies’) (or any subsidiary or affiliate 

14 thereof); or 

15 ‘‘(B) telecommunications or video surveil16 lance services provided by an entity described in 

17 subparagraph (A) or using equipment described 

18 in such subparagraph.’’. 

19 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—Section 2 of the 

20 Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 

21 2019 (47 U.S.C. 1601) is amended by striking ‘‘para22 graphs (1) through (4)’’ each place it appears and insert23 ing ‘‘paragraphs (1) through (5)’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Penn-Pacific  Corp., on Form
10-QSB for the period  ending  June 30,  2002 as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "REPORT"),  the  undersigned,  Rose
Fischer,  Chief  Executive  Officer  and  Principal  Accounting  Officer  of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.
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.


Date: May 10, 2005


/s/ Rose Fischer
Rose Fischer
President
(Principal Executive & Accounting Officer)


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.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

FRANK ADAMS,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 325 EAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 12th day of March, 2024

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.

Justice McCaffery did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         481,660
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  365,930
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  4,862,295
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,725,185
<PP&E>                                       5,272,567
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,716,376
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,758,242
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          884,750
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       128,333
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,039,130
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,758,242
<SALES>                                      2,108,592
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,108,592
<CGS>                                        1,583,380
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,583,380
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               608,944
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (83,732)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (83,732)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (83,732)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.05)



</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6725 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6725

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To change the address of the Marilyn Monroe Post Office, 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. CHANGE OF ADDRESS FOR MARILYN MONROE POST OFFICE.

    Section 1 of Public Law 116-80 is amended to read as follows:

``SECTION 1. MARILYN MONROE POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    ``(a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal 
Service located at 15701 Sherman Way in Van Nuys, California, shall be 
known and designated as the `Marilyn Monroe Post Office Building'.
    ``(b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 
document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 
referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the 
`Marilyn Monroe Post Office Building'.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 14, 2022.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
117th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 6725

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To change the address of the Marilyn Monroe Post Office, and for other 
                               purposes.
```
| **Commitments and Contingent Liabilities (Narrative) (Details) (USD $)In Millions, unless otherwise specified** | 9 Months Ended |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------|
||
| **Loss Contingencies [Line Items]**                                                                             |           |
| Estimate for which the risk of loss is more than remote but not probable                                        | $ 1            |

| X                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Definition
Estimate for which the risk of loss is more than remote but not probable
+ References
No definition available.
+ Details**Name:**cinf_EstimateforWhichTheRiskofLossisMorethanRemoteButNotProbable**Namespace Prefix:**cinf_**Data Type:**xbrli:monetaryItemType**Balance Type:**debit**Period Type:**duration |
| X                                                                                                                                                              |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Details**Name:**us-gaap_LossContingenciesLineItems**Namespace Prefix:**us-gaap_**Data Type:**xbrli:stringItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |