alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

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

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

_______________________________________ __ Clerk June 1, 2012

h0529 

# Order

June 1, 2012

145093

___________________ _________________

SC: 145093 In re P.M. WILSON, Minor. COA: 304689 Branch CC Family Division:

___________________ _________________ 10-004457-NA

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Appellee,

v

DONALD FRICK, Respondent-Appellant.

___________________ _________________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal th e February 21, 2012 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

   Certification of the Chief Executive Office and Chief Financial officer of
                Navidec, Inc. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

We certify that, to the best of our knowledge and belief, the Quarterly report
on form 10Q of Navidec, Inc. for the period ended June 30, 2003:

1)       complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
         Securities and 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
         Navidec, Inc.

By  /S/John McKowen
John McKowen
President and CEO

Date: August 14, 2003


By  /S/ PAT MAWHINNEY
Pat Mawhinney
Chief Financial Officer

Date: August 14, 2003
15

A.10. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- Small and Mid-sized Farm Lenders, by Size of LoaPercent except as noted

$1,000 to $10,000 to $25,000 to $50,000 to $100,000 t

Loan characteristic All sizes $9,999 $24,999 $49,999 $99,999 $249,999 Volume of loans (thousands of dollars) 235,637 19,854 33,416 31,628 40,011 62,47Number of loans 9,171 4,879 2,163 963 600 43Weighted average maturity (months)1 31.36 10.99 12.34 11.47 28.97 25.2

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 16.93 7.07 9.68 4.99 24.31 20.9

Weighted average risk rating3 2.40 2.36 2.28 2.79 2.28 2.3

Weighted average interest rate4 8.05 8.32 8.19 7.74 8.31 7.7

 Standard error5 .16 .15 .07 .31 .28 .2

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 8.50 8.77 8.85 8.57 9.20 8.2 25th percentile 7.64 7.73 7.64 7.25 7.75 7.1 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 7.90 8.73 7.84 7.26 8.12 7.8 Other livestock 8.44 8.57 8.50 8.33 8.56 8.4 Other current operating expenses7 8.15 8.19 8.09 7.67 8.49 8.0

 Farm machinery and equipment 8.23 8.55 8.68 7.99 8.15 7.7 Farm real estate 7.69 8.24 8.37 7.95 n.a. 7.2 Other8 7.48 8.31 8.35 8.20 8.27 5.5

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 56.30 55.02 38.26 49.33 40.46 46.2 Under commitment 52.70 54.63 54.58 49.04 43.06 46.1 Callable 23.81 17.57 17.38 11.48 26.52 6.3 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 26.95 6.38 13.43 24.13 29.74 47.6 Other livestock 14.96 12.69 15.39 16.48 21.01 12.9 Other current operating expenses7 37.62 61.26 55.21 42.18 17.67 20.0

 Farm machinery and equipment 6.10 10.45 9.36 9.59 10.18 3.3 Farm real estate 7.43 3.58 2.53 5.84 n.a. 8.4 Other8 6.95 5.64 4.08 1.78 21.40 7.6

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 23.31 6.88 7.36 7.32 20.81 18.9 Other 75.17 89.61 92.64 86.89 76.52 81.0 Note. Most small and mid-sized farm lenders that reported loans to farmers had less than $25 million in farm loans. For explanation of footnotes, see table A.8. n.a. Not available.
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 National Holdings Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Mark Goldwasser, Chief Executive 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 my knowledge:





(1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/ Mark Goldwasser

Mark Goldwasser

Chief Executive Officer

February 14, 2011
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

# DATES:

Written comments should be received on or before October 27, 2008 to be assured of consideration. 

## Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) 

*OMB Number:*                     1513-0119.                 

*Type of Review:*                     Extension.                 

*Title:*                     Certification of Proper Cellar Treatment for Imported Natural Wine.                 

*Description:*                     TTB is requiring importers of natural wine to certify compliance with proper cellar treatment standards. This certification is necessary to comply with statutory requirements.                 

*Respondents:*                     Businesses or other for-profit institutions.                 

*Estimated Total Burden Hours:*                     6,600 hours.                 

*OMB Number:*                     1513-0092.                 

*Type of Review:*                     Extension.                 

*Title:*                     Marks on Wine Containers, TTB REC 5120/3.                 

*Description:*                     TTB requires that wine on wine premises be identified by statements of information on labels or contained in marks. TTB uses this information to validate the receipts of excise tax revenue by the Federal government.                 

*Respondents:*                     Businesses or other for-profit institutions.                 

*Estimated Total Burden Hours:*                     1 hour.                 

*Clearance Officer:*                     Frank Foote (202) 927-9347, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Room 200 East, 1310 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005.                 

*OMB Reviewer:*                     Alexander T. Hunt (202) 395-7316, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.                 

Robert Dahl, 

Treasury PRA Clearance Officer.

 [FR Doc. E8-22647 Filed 9-25-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810-31-P
Exhibit 99.2



   Written Statement of the Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
                          Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, I, the undersigned
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Avenue Entertainment Group
(the "Company"), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Quarterly
Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2002
(the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.




                                                    Sheri Halfon


November 14, 2002
#### GORE v. VEITH.

No. 14843.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

Oct. 15, 1934.

Fred G. Veith, of New Orleans, for appellant.

Gerald Netter, of New Orleans, for appel-lee.

WESTERFIELD, Judge.

This is a suit for $112.50, the amount alleged to be due Dr. Samuel Davis Gore, under an agreement for the performance of dental work for the daughter of the defendant. The defense is, in effect, a plea of payment, and, in the alternative, the prescription of three years is pleaded.

From a judgment in plaintiff’s favor, as prayed for, defendant has appealed.

The contention of defendant is that the prescription of three years established by article 3538, Rev. Civ. Code, applies to dentists, who may properly be included within the class of “physicians, surgeons and apothecaries” expressly mentioned. A dentist, it is said, is a physician or surgeon within the meaning of the article.

 Without discussing whether the codal provision applies to dentists, except to say that it is at least doubtful because “prescription cannot be extended by analogy from one subject to another” (Derbes, Caballero & Miller v. Checker Cab Co., 12 La. App. 549, 120 So. 261), we find that in this ease there was an oral contract between the parties and the prescription applicable is ten yeais under article 3544, Rev. Civ. Code. Derbes, Caballero & Miller v. Checker Cab Co., supra.

 Dr. Gore specializes in orthodontia, which is a branch of the dental profession concerned with the straightening and adjustment of teeth. He agreed to furnish all necessary appliances and treat plaintiff’s daughter, Miriam Veith, for a period of two years for the sum of $425, of which $125 was to be *824paid in cash and the remainder in eight quarterly installments of $37.50 each. According to plaintiff’s evidence, a total of $312.50 was paid, leaving a balance of $112.50 due under the contract.

Defendant contends that Dr. Gore’s accounts wére carelessly kept, and that at the time that he now claims that $112.50 was due, or at the conclusion of his contract, a letter, was written to defendant in which it was stated that a balance of $75 was due, and that just after receipt of this letter plaintiff telephoned to defendant’s residence and stated that the bill for $75 was in error, and that, as a matter of fact, Mr. Veith’s account had been overpaid. Plaintiff denies the sending of the bill for $75, as well as the statement concerning the overpayment of the account, and the defendant is unable to produce the bill which he* claims he received, and did not show that any greater amount was paid on account 'than that for which he is credited by the plaintiff. The burden of proving payment is upon him who alleges it. Tung v. Gassagne, 18 La. App. 301, 137 So. 342, and authorities there cited.

We are of opinion that the judgment of the trial court was correct, and, for the reasons assigned, it is affirmed.

Affirmed.
No. 72-1220.

#### Richardson *v.*Hamilton International Corp. et al.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas would grant certiorari.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND 

EXCHANGE COMMISSION, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

PIYUSH G. PATEL, DAVID J. KIRKPATRICK, 

ERIC JAEGER, BRUCE D. KAY, ROBERT J. 

GAGALIS, ROBERT G. BARBER, JR., 

LAWRENCE COLLINS, MICHAEL A. 

SKUBISZ, JERRY A. SHANAHAN, 

HOR CHONG (DAVID) BOEY, 

Defendants. 

No. 01:07-00039-SM 

DEFENDANT ERIC JAEGER’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO 

FILE A REPLY MEMORANDUM IN EXCESS OF TEN PAGES

NOW COMES Defendant Eric Jaeger, by his undersigned counsel, pursuant to Local 

Rule 7.1(e)(1), and hereby moves for leave to file a reply memorandum in excess of ten pages. 

In support of said motion, Defendant Jaeger states the following: 

1. Defendant Jaeger seeks to file a reply memorandum to the SEC’s Response to 

Defendant Jaeger’s Motion for Summary Judgment. 

2. The proposed reply memorandum is 16 pages long. The additional pages are 

necessary to fully discuss the many factual and legal arguments raised in the SEC’s Response to 

Mr. Jaeger’s potentially dispositive motion, and the discussion will aid the Court in decision the 

motion. 

Case 1:07-cv-00039-SM Document 247 Filed 07/27/11 Page 1 of 3
2 

3. Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(c), counsel for the Defendant Jaeger made a good faith 

effort to obtain the SEC’s concurrence in this motion, however counsel for the SEC did not 

respond to Mr. Jaeger’s request. 

4. Due to the nature of this motion, no memorandum of law is submitted herewith. 

WHEREFORE, Defendant Jaeger moves for leave to file the Defendant Jaeger’s Reply in 

Support of his Motion for Summary Judgment, which exceeds the ten page limit of Local Rule 

7.1(e)(1). 

July 27, 2011 Respectfully Submitted, 

ERIC JAEGER, 

By his attorney, 

/s/ Jonathan A. Shapiro 

Jonathan A. Shapiro 

WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE 

AND DORR LLP 

950 Page Mill Road 

Palo Alto, CA 94304 

(650) 858-6000 

Case 1:07-cv-00039-SM Document 247 Filed 07/27/11 Page 2 of 3
3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I, Jonathan Shapiro, hereby certify that this motion filed through the ECF system will be 

sent electronically to the registered participants as identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing 

(NEF) on the 27th day of July, 2011. 

 /s/ Jonathan Shapiro 

 Jonathan Shapiro 

Case 1:07-cv-00039-SM Document 247 Filed 07/27/11 Page 3 of 3
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 11.0

                                 ErgoBilt, Inc.
                         Earnings per Share Calculation
                          Second Quarter Ended 6/30/97



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                      1997             1996
                                                    13 WEEKS         13 WEEKS
                                                   ----------       ----------- 
<S>                                                <C>              <C>         
WEIGHTED AVERAGE SHARES AND EQUIVALENT
SHARES OUTSTANDING

           COMMON STOCK OUTSTANDING                 6,056,000         2,770,285
           COMMON STOCK EQUIVALENTS                    12,885                --

                                                   ----------       ----------- 
           SHARES OUTSTANDING                       6,068,885         2,770,285
                                                   ==========       =========== 

           NET PROFIT (LOSS)                       $  664,239       $   (60,621)

           NET PROFIT (LOSS) PER SHARE             $     0.11       $     (0.02)
</TABLE>
36

C.4. Average Fixed Interest Rates on Farm Loans

Percent

Feeder cattle Other operating Intermediate non-real- Long-term real

Quarter loans loans1estate loans estate loans

Seventh (Chicago) Federal Reserve District (IL*, IN*, IA, MI*, WI*)

2003: Q2... 6.5 6.4 n.a. 6.0

 Q3... 6.5 6.4 n.a. 6.1

 Q4... 6.3 6.3 n.a. 6.1

2004: Q1... 6.3 6.2 n.a. 5.9

 Q2... 6.5 6.4 n.a. 6.2

 Q3... 6.6 6.6 n.a. 6.3

 Q4... 6.8 6.8 n.a. 6.4

2005: Q1... 7.1 7.1 n.a. 6.6

 Q2... 7.3 7.3 n.a. 6.7

Eleventh (Dallas) Federal Reserve District (LA*, NM*, TX)

2003: Q2... 7.6 7.5 7.6 7.2

 Q3... 7.4 7.5 7.4 7.6

 Q4... 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.2

2004: Q1... 7.4 7.4 7.3 7.0

 Q2... 7.2 7.2 7.3 7.1

 Q3... 7.4 7.4 7.5 6.9

 Q4... 7.6 7.6 7.7 7.0

2005: Q1... 7.8 8.0 7.9 7.4

 Q2... 8.1 8.3 8.2 7.6

Fifth (Richmond) Federal Reserve District (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) 

2003: Q2... 6.8 6.4 6.4 6.4

 Q3... 6.3 6.1 6.3 6.5

 Q4... 6.5 6.5 6.9 6.7

2004: Q1... 6.6 6.4 6.7 6.3

 Q2... 6.9 6.4 6.5 6.5

 Q3... 7.2 7.0 7.0 6.7

 Q4... 7.4 7.0 7.1 6.9

2005: Q1... 7.6 7.4 7.4 7.2

 Q2... 7.7 7.5 7.5 7.7
37

C.4. Average Fixed Interest Rates on Farm Loans (continued)

Percent

Feeder cattle Other operating Intermediate non-real Long-term real

Quarter loans loans1-estate loans estate loans

 Tenth (Kansas City) Federal Reserve District (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY)

2003: Q2... n.a. 7.3 7.3 6.9

 Q3... n.a. 7.2 7.3 6.8

 Q4... n.a. 7.1 7.2 6.8

2004: Q1... n.a. 7.0 7.1 6.7

 Q2... n.a. 7.1 7.1 6.8

 Q3... n.a. 7.3 7.4 7.0

 Q4... n.a. 7.6 7.6 7.2

2005: Q1... n.a. 7.7 7.7 7.3

 Q2... n.a. 7.9 7.9 7.4

Ninth (Minneapolis) Federal Reserve District (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*)

2003: Q2... n.a. 6.7 6.8 6.5

 Q3... n.a. 6.7 6.8 6.5

 Q4... n.a. 6.7 6.8 6.5

2004: Q1... n.a. 6.6 6.7 6.4

 Q2... n.a. 6.7 6.8 6.5

 Q3... n.a. 6.9 7.0 6.7

 Q4... n.a. 7.2 7.3 6.9

2005: Q1... n.a. 7.4 7.4 7.1

 Q2... n.a. 7.7 7.7 7.3

Twelfth (San Francisco) Federal Reserve District (AL, AZ, CA, HI, ID, NV, OR, UT, WA) 

2003: Q2... n.a. 6.5 7.1 7.0

 Q3... n.a. 6.5 7.0 7.2

 Q4... n.a. 6.5 6.9 7.3

2004: Q1... n.a. 6.4 7.1 7.2

 Q2... n.a. 6.8 7.2 7.1

 Q3... n.a. 6.7 7.2 7.4

 Q4... n.a. 7.4 7.8 7.7

2005: Q1... n.a. 7.7 7.9 7.8

 Q2... n.a. 7.5 7.9 7.9

 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of

livestock (including poultry).

 * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District.

 n.a. Not available.

 Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks.
Exhibit 32(b)



TXU CORP.

Certificate Pursuant to Section 906

of Sarbanes  Oxley Act of 2002

CERTIFICATION OF CFO



The undersigned, Kirk R. Oliver, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of TXU Corp. (the Company), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:



| | 1. | The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the year ended March 31, 2005 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has caused this instrument to be executed
this 9th day of May, 2005.



| |  |  |  |                                                            
| |  |  |  | -----------------------------------------------------------
| |  | 
| |  |  |  | /s/ Kirk R. Oliver                                         
| |  |  |  | Name: Kirk R. Oliver                                       
| |  |  |  | Title: Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer



A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to TXU Corp. and will be retained by TXU Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10
- 21
- 00145
- CR
TURNER PERRY TAYLOR , Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

From the County Court at Law No
. 1 McLennan County, Texas Trial Court No. 20171417CR1

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Turner Perry Taylor was convicted of Driving While Intoxicate d and sentenced to 180 days in jail. That sentence was suspended and Ta ylor was placed on community supervision

- probation for 15 months . After a motion to revoke was filed by the State and heard by the trial court, Taylor’s community supervision

- probation was extended six
months from the date of the order. After another mot ion to revoke was filed by the State and heard by the trial court, Taylor’s community supervision

- probation was revoked , and he was sentenced to 170 days in jail with a $1,000 fine. We affirm the trial court’s judgment.Taylor v. State Page 2 Taylor’s appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief in support of the motion asserting that he has diligently reviewed the appellate record and that, in his opinion, the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967) . Counsel's brief evidences a professional evaluation of the record for error and compliance with the other duties of appointed counsel. We conclude that counsel has performed the duties required of appointed counsel. See Anders , 386 U.S. at 744; High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); s ee also Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313, 319

- 320 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman , 252 S.W.3d 403, 407 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). In reviewing an Anders appeal, we must, "after a full examinatio n of all the proceedings, ... decide whether the case is wholly frivolous." Anders , 386 U.S. at 744; see Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S. Ct. 346, 102 L. Ed. 2d 300 (1988) ; accord Stafford v.
State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 509

- 11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). An appeal is "wholly frivolous" or "without merit" when it "lacks any basis in law or fact." McCoy v. Court of Appeals , 486 U.S. 429, 439 n. 10, 108 S. Ct. 1895, 100 L. Ed. 2d 440 (1988) . After a review of the entire record in this appeal, we have deter mined the appeal to be wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe
v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 826

- 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's judgment. Counsel's motion to withdraw from representation of Taylor is granted.

TOM GRAY Chief JusticeTaylor v. State Page 3 Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Johnson , and Justice Smith Affirmed; motion granted Opinion delivered and filed February 23, 2022 Do not publish [CR25]