alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### ASEVEDO v. FIRST NAT. LIFE INS. CO.

No. 19133.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

May 9, 1949.

John R. Perez, Sr., New Orleans, for plaintiff and appellee.

Normann & Jones and Russell J. Schon-ekas, New Orleans, for defendant and appellant.

PER CURIAM.

In a brief in support of an application for rehearing, counsel for defendant indicate that they interpret our opinion as holding that any person who is injured while standing or walking on any part of any shoulder of any road is within the provisions of such a policy as is here sued on.

We were careful to say that it is not our intention to hold that any part of such an adjoining portion of a road must always he considered as a part of the highway for the purpose of determining whether the spot at which the insured is struck is within the contemplation of such a policy.

Asevedo was on a shelled portion of the shoulder which was maintained as a connecting link between the paved portion of the highway, the side road which connects with the highway, and the entrance to a nearby filling station and to a nearby beer parlor.

In Rudd v. Great Eastern Casualty & Indemnity Co., 114 Minn. 512, 131 N.W. 633, 634, 34 L.R.A., N.S., 1205, Ann.Cas. 1912C, 606, there was involved a policy very similar to the one sued on here. It provided coverage to the insured if injured “while walking on a public highway * * *.” It was provided that the policy did not cover injuries sustained while on the roadbed or bridge of any railroad. The insured was killed while using a platform at a railroad depot which was used by the public in travelling between two streets. The Court held that there should be recovery under the policy saying that the provision in the policy which required that the insured be “walking on a public highway” is not limited in its contemplation to legally laid out or dedicated public highways and that it might “reasonably refer to any walk or way where the public are accustomed to travel for certain purposes.” That is all that we say here. The point at which Asevedo was struck was certainly to a limited extent a part of the public highway.

The rehearing is refused.
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2022-2483

_____________________________

ERICA SHANA MCCASTLE,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County.

John F. Simon, Jr., Judge.

March 8, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LEWIS, WINOKUR, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

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

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Jessica J. Yeary, Public Defender, and Lori A. Willner, Assistant 

Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Exhibit 35.1

[LOGO]
Saxon Capital, Inc.


March 15, 2007

Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas
Corporate Trust Office
1761 East St. Andrew Place
Santa Ana, CA 92705-4934

Attn: Ms. Katie Wannenmacher


                             For Calendar Year 2006
                        Annual Statement as to Compliance
                                       For
              Sale & Servicing Agreement, dated as of April 1, 2006
                      Saxon Asset Securities Trust 2006-1
                 Mortgage Loan Asset Backed Notes, Series 2006-1


      I, Ernest G. Bretana, Hereby certify that I am an Authorized Officer of
Saxon Funding Management LLC (formerly Saxon Funding Management, Inc.) and
further certify that:

      (1) I have reviewed the activities of the Master Servicer during the
preceding fiscal year and of the performance of the Master Servicer under this
Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision, and

      (2) To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer
has fulfilled all of its material obligations under this Agreement throughout
such year.


Sincerely,

/s/ Ernest G. Bretana
Ernest G. Bretana
Executive Vice President

                      4860 Cox Road o Glen Allen, VA 23060
<Page>




                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

        Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18
                            of the United States Code

     I, E. James Ferland, Chief Executive Officer of Public Service Enterprise
Group Incorporated, to the best of my knowledge, certify that (i) the Quarterly
Report of Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated on Form 10-Q for the
period ended June 30, 2005 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of Public Service Enterprise
Group Incorporated.

                              /s/ E. James Ferland
                              ------------------------------------------------
                              E. James Ferland
                              Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated
                              Chief Executive Officer
                              August 1, 2005
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6900 

To require the Secretary of the Treasury to prohibit U.S. financial institutions 

from participating in the secondary market for certain Russian bonds. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 2, 2022 

Mr. HUIZENGA introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To require the Secretary of the Treasury to prohibit U.S. 

financial institutions from participating in the secondary 

market for certain Russian bonds. 

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 ‘‘Russian Sovereign 

5 Debt Prohibition Act of 2022’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON SECONDARY MARKET PARTICIPA7 TION FOR RUSSIAN BONDS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after the 

9 date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the 

10 Treasury shall prohibit U.S. financial institutions from 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6900 IH

1 participating in the secondary market for ruble or non2 ruble denominated bonds issued by the Central Bank of 

3 the Russian Federation, the National Wealth Fund of the 

4 Russian Federation, or the Ministry of Finance of the 

5 Russian Federation, regardless of the date on which such 

6 bonds were issued. 

7 (b) TERMINATION.—Subsection (a) shall have no 

8 force or effect on the earlier of— 

9 (1) the date that is 5 years after the date of en10 actment of this Act; or 

11 (2) 30 days after the date that the President 

12 reports to Congress that the government of Russia 

13 has ceased its destabilizing activities with respect to 

14 the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. 

15 (c) U.S. FINANCIAL INSTITUTION DEFINED.—The 

16 term ‘‘U.S. financial institution’’ has the meaning given 

17 that term under section 561.309 of title 31, Code of Fed18 eral Regulations. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A21A1138. JACQUELINE THOMPSON-BRAGG v. C. DANE PERKINS et al.

This appeal involves an ongoing dispute between the heirs of Hodge and Hattie

King concerning four tracts of land that the Kings jointly owned as tenants in

common during Hodge’s lifetime. In Thompson v. Blackwell, 296 Ga. 443, 447 (1)

(769 SE2d 46) (2015), the Supreme Court held that under Hodge’s will, his interest

in the property went to Hattie as a life estate with the remainder to Hodge’s son and

grandchildren, including Jacqueline Thompson-Bragg (collectively referred to asthe

“Thompson Group”). 

Following the trial court’s rulings on the subsequent partition actions, this

Court vacated and remanded the trial court’s partition rulings with instructions to

follow the mandatory provisions of the Uniform Partition of Heirs Property Act

(“UPHPA”). Myles et al. v. Blackwell et al., Case No. A19A2492 (decided March 13,

2020). This Court also vacated and remanded the trial court’s award of attorney fees

against the Thompson Group and reversed the trial court’s rulings on the Thompson

Group’s counterclaims. On January 27, 2021, the trial court entered a new order.

Dissatisfied with the new order, Thompson-Bragg has filed an original

mandamus petition in this Court against the Turner County Superior Court and Judge

C. Dane Perkins to compel the respondents to (1) issue an order declaring all orders

in this case void, vacate the trial court’s January 27, 2021 order, and issue a partition

order that follows the mandatory procedures of the UPHPA; (2) issue an order

awarding her no less than $1,000,000 in damages on her counterclaims or hold a

hearing on the amended counterclaims; and (3) reassign the case to another judge.

This case is not, however, subject to original mandamus relief by our Court. 

June 08, 2021
Appellate courts have mandamus authority in aid of their jurisdiction, see Ga.

Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. I, Par. IV, but the need to resort to the appellate courts

for such relief is “extremely rare” because “the superior courts of this state have the

power, in proper cases, to issue process in the nature of mandamus, prohibition,

specific performance, quo warranto, and injunction[.]” Brown v. Johnson, 251 Ga.

436, 436 (306 SE2d 655) (1983). This is not one of the extremely rare instances in

which thisCourt will exercise originalmandamusjurisdiction. See Gay v. Owens, 292

Ga. 480, 482-483 (2) (738 SE2d 614) (2013). Until Thompson-Bragg has pursued

relief in superior court and obtained a ruling thereon, there is no basis for this Court

to exercise jurisdiction. See Brown, 251 Ga. at 436-437. Accordingly, this petition for

writ of mandamus is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office,

Atlanta,____________________

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.

06/08/2021
| **Commitments and Contingent Liabilities (Narrative) (Details) (Maximum, USD $)** | 3 Months Ended |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------|
||
| Maximum                                                                           |           |
| **Loss Contingencies [Line Items]**                                               |           |
| Estimate for which the risk of loss is more than remote                           | $ 500,000      |

| X                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Definition
Estimate for which the risk of loss is more than remote
+ References
No definition available.
+ Details**Name:**cinf_EstimateForWhichRiskOfLossIsMoreThanRemote**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 |
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

This certification is furnished pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and accompanies this annual report on Form
10-K (the Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2010 of Affinion Group, Inc. (the Issuer).

In connection with the Form 10-K, each of the undersigned, Nathaniel J. Lipman and Todd H. Siegel, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that to the best of their knowledge:



| | (i) | the Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer as of the dates
and for the periods indicated in the Form 10-K.
| | ---- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                        |  |  |  |                        
|----------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|/s/ Nathaniel J. Lipman |  |  |  | /s/ Todd H. Siegel     
|Nathaniel J. Lipman     |  |  |  | Todd H. Siegel         
|Chief Executive Officer |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer
|March 3, 2011           |  |  |  | March 3, 2011
#### John W. MARTIN, as Trustee of the Property of Florida East Coast Railway Company, a Corporation, Appellant, v. Norman J. ROSEN, a Minor, and Richard I. Rosen, a Minor, by Their Next Friend, B. H. Meyer, Appellees.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division A.

Oct. 12, 1954.

See .also Fla., 68 So.2d 597.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6631 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6631

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 4770 Eureka Ave in Yorba Linda, California, as the ``Cottle Centanni 
                        Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 7, 2022

    Mrs. Kim of California introduced the following bill; which was 
           referred to the Committee on Oversight and Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 4770 Eureka Ave in Yorba Linda, California, as the ``Cottle Centanni 
                        Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. COTTLE CENTANNI POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 4770 Eureka Ave in Yorba Linda, California, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Cottle Centanni 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 ``Cottle 
Centanni Post Office Building''.
                                 <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 this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Maxco, Inc. (the
“Company”) for the period ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Lawrence O.
      Fields, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant
      to 18
      U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that:




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




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




Date:February 14, 2006
                  
                  
                  /s/ Lawrence
                    O. FieldsLawrence
                    O. FieldsChief
                    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.
IA

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 29

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States regarding

the right of citizens of the United States to health care of equal high

quality.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 6, 2001

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois introduced the following joint resolution; which was

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United

States regarding the right of citizens of the United

States to health care of equal high quality.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two3 thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con5 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all

6 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when

7 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several

8 States:
2

•HJ 29 IH

1 ‘‘ARTICLE—

2 ‘‘SECTION 1. All citizens of the United States shall

3 enjoy the right to health care of equal high quality.

4 ‘‘SECTION 2. The Congress shall have power to imple5 ment this article by appropriate legislation.’’.

Æ
Exhibit 11

                        National Presto Industries, Inc.


The following presents the computation of per share earnings reflecting the
assumption that the granted shares under the 1988 Stock Option Plan will be
exercised.

(IN THOUSANDS EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                     Third Quarter     First Nine Months
                                                                   -----------------   ------------------
                                                                     2003      2002      2003       2002
                                                                   -------   -------   -------    -------
<S>                                                                <C>       <C>       <C>        <C>
Net Earnings (loss) (1)                                            $ 2,078   $   893   $ 6,049    $  (384)
                                                                   =======   =======   =======    =======

Weighted average common shares outstanding (2)                       6,817     6,841     6,821      6,839

Common share equivalents relating to stock options when dilutive         1          1         1        --

Adjusted common and common equivalent                              -------   -------   -------    -------
   shares for computation (3)                                        6,818     6,842     6,822      6,839
                                                                   =======   =======   =======    =======

Net earnings (loss) per share:
     Basic  (1 divided by 2)                                       $  0.30   $  0.13   $  0.88    $ (0.06)
                                                                   =======   =======   =======    =======
     Diluted  (1 divided by 3)                                     $  0.30   $  0.13   $  0.88    $ (0.06)
                                                                   =======   =======   =======    =======
</TABLE>
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 20, 2019

No. 04

- 19

- 00661

- CV

STATE FARM COUNTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF TEXAS

, Appellant

v.

Andrew Wayne BOCK

, Appellee

From the 288th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Tri al Court No. 2017CI19802 Honorable Cynthia Marie Chapa, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

On September 26, 2019 , appellant filed its notice of appeal. On October 31, 2019 , the court reporter responsible for preparing the reporter ’ s record in this appeal filed a notification of late record, stating that the appellant has failed to pay or make arrangements to pay the fee for preparing the reporter ’ s record.

We, therefore, ORDER appellant to provide written proof to this court on or before December 3, 2019

, that either (1) the reporter ’ s fee has been paid or arrangements have been made to pay the reporter ’ s fee; or (2) appellant is entitled to appeal without paying the reporter ’ s fee. If appellant fails to respond within the time prov ided, appellant ’ s brief will be due within thirty days from the date of this order, and the court will only consider those issues or points raised in appellant ’ s brief that do not require a reporter ’ s record for a decision. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 37.3(c).

_________________________________ Irene Rios , Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 20th day of November, 2019

.___________________________________ M ichael A. C ruz
, Clerk of Court