alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Leroy H. SCOTT v. Frank RAYSON.

No. 3919.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Second Circuit.

Nov. 18, 1931.

R. D. Fuller, of Shreveport, for appellant.

Lyons & Prentiss, of Shreveport, for ap-pellee.

McGREGOR, J.

In this case, the plaintiff sues the defendant for $900 damages growing out of an automobile collision on the Greenwood road in Caddo parish. The lower court rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff for $100, and the defendant has appealed. The defendant has made no appearance in this court to prosecute his appeal, while the plaintiff has appeared, asking that the judgment be sustained. Under these circumstances, and in view of the fact that a careful review of the evidence discloses no error on the part of the trial judge, the judgment must be affirmed.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the judgment of the lower court *749be, and the same is hereby, affirmed; the defendant and appellant to pay all costs of both courts.
#### Schlarb, Exr., et al. *v.*Hartwell, Admr., et al.

(No. 24814

Decided May 22, 1935.)

*Mr. John Schlarb*and *Mr. W. W. Zimmerman,*for plaintiffs in error.

*Mr. James G. Hartwell*and *Mr. Clyde W. Osborne,*for defendants in error.

It is ordered and adjudged by this court, that the judgment of the Court of Appeals be, and the same is hereby, affirmed for the reason that this cause was heard by the Court of Appeals on appeal and no bill of exceptions was presented to and allowed by the Court of Appeals. Section 11566, General Code. *(Hill*v. *Bassett,*27 Ohio St., 597; *Detroit, Toledo & Ironton Rd. Co.*v. *Blaum,*120 Ohio St., 612, 169 N. E., 297; and *Micklethwait*v. *City of Portsmouth,*110 Ohio St., 514, 144 N. E., 274.)

*Judgment affirmed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Stephenson, Williams, Jones, Matthias, Day and Zimmerman, JJ., concur.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge Christine M. Arguello

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02477-CMA-BNB

BRIDGET ESPINOZA,

Plaintiff,

v.

QUEST DIAGNOSTICS PROVIDER NETWORK, LLC,

Defendant.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Pursuant to and in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2) and the Stipulated

Motion To Dismiss (Doc. # 18) signed by the attorneys for the parties hereto, it is

ORDERED that the above-captioned Complaint and cause of action are

DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, each party to pay her or its own attorney fees

and costs.

DATED: April 23 , 2012

BY THE COURT:

_______________________________

CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO

United States District Court Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02477-CMA-BNB Document 19 Filed 04/23/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge John L. Kane

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02428-AP

JAMES KLEINERT,

SPIRIT RIDERS FOUNDATION, a New Mexico nonprofit corporation, and

DAVID GLYNN,

Plaintiffs,

v.

KENNETH SALAZAR, in his official capacity as Secretary, United States Department of

Interior,

ROBERT ABBEY, in his official capacity as Director, Bureau of Land Management,

STEVE BEVERLIN, in his official capacity as Field Manager Dolores Public Lands

Office (BLM/USFS),

SALLY E. WISELY, in her official capacity as BLM Colorado State Director,

CONNIE CLEMENTSON, in her official capacity as Field Officer Dolores Public Lands

Office (BLM/USFS), and

GREG SHOOP, in his official capacity as District Manager Royal Gorge Field Office,

Defendants.

ORDER

Kane, J.

This matter is currently before me on Plaintiffs’ Motion to Reconsider the assignment of

this case to the court’s AP docket. In support of this motion, Plaintiffs state that they intend to

file an amended complaint adding numerous non-administrative claims against Defendants. 

Plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration is premature and unnecessary. Assignment to the

AP docket does not foreclose filing of an amended complaint. Nor does it limit Plaintiffs’ ability

to seek the relief they seek. It is intended to insure the proper and expeditious treatment of

administrative claims — no more, no less. If Plaintiffs file an amended complaint, the

assignment of this case will be revisited, and it will be reassigned as warranted. 

Case 1:11-cv-02428-JLK Document 37 Filed 11/01/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

In the meantime, the parties shall proceed as ordered. Namely, they shall file their Joint

Case Management Plan no later than November 24, 2011. Plaintiffs may include the fact that

they intend to file, or already have filed, an amended complaint containing numerous nonadministrative claims in the Joint Case Management Plan. 

Dated: November 1, 2011 BY THE COURT:

/s/ John L. Kane 

Senior U.S. District Court Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02428-JLK Document 37 Filed 11/01/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Vicente DELGADO-LEON, aka Seal E, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 99-50488.

D.C. No. CR-98-01005-GHK-4.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*721Submitted March 10, 2003.*

Decided March 17, 2003.

Before CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN and T. G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

Vicente Delgado-Leon appeals his conviction and 70-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to one count of being an illegal alien found in the United States following deportation, pursuant to 8 U. S.C. § 1326, and one count of possession of false identification documents, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028(a)(6). We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

Delgado-Leon contends the district court erred by imposing a 16-level enhancement based on its conclusion that his prior conviction qualified as an aggravated felony pursuant to United States Sentencing Guidelines § 2L1.2. The government argues that Delgado-Leon has waived his right to appeal. Based upon our de novo review, *United States v. Martinez,*143 F.3d 1266, 1270 (9th Cir.1998), we agree with the government.

Delgado-Leon contends that the waiver of his right to appeal is not enforceable because the sentence imposed was illegal, and in violation of the plea agreement. Because an appeal waiver extends to a sentencing court’s incorrect application of the sentencing guidelines, Delgado-Leon’s arguments are unavailing. *See Martinez,*143 F.3d at 1271. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.1

DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

1

. We decline to review Delgado-Leon’s ineffective assistance of counsel claims on direct appeal. *See United States*v. *Hanoum,*33 F.3d 1128, 1131-32 (9th Cir.1994) (observing that ineffective assistance claim is more properly raised by collateral attack under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 because it cannot be advanced without development of facts outside the record).
EXHIBIT
23.1

CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We
have issued our report dated October 2, 2000, accompanying the consolidated financial statements included in the Annual Report of SI Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries on Form 10-KSB for
the year ended July 31, 2000. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration Statement of SI Technologies, Inc. in Form S-8 (File
No. 2-92865, effective August 6, 1984) and Form S-3 (File No. 333-60421, effective September 14, 1998).

|/s/GRANT THORNTON LLP |  | 
|--------------------- |  | 
|                      |  | 

Irvine,
California
October 20, 2000

---
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 24Holdings Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Arnold P. Kling, President of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.
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, as amended; and                  
| |     |                                                                                                                                                      
| | (2) | The
 information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
 respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

|                           | 
|-------------------------- | 
|Dated: April
 23, 2010     | 
|                           | 
|/s/ Arnold
 P. Kling       | 
|                           | 
|Arnold P. Kling
 President | 

A signed
original of this certification 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 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02483-RPM

BENJAMIN VALDEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

APOLLO GROUP, INC., an Arizona corporation,

INSIGHT SCHOOLS, INC., an Oregon corporation

d/b/a Insight School of Colorado and Insight School Colorado at Julesburg,

now a subsidiary of Iowa College Acquisition Corp., a Delaware corporation,

in turn a subsidiary of Kaplan Higher Education Corporation, a Delaware corporation,

____________________________________________________________________________________

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO REMAND

____________________________________________________________________________________

On September 21, 2011, defendants Insight Schools, Inc. and Insight School Colorado at

Julesburg filed a notice of removal based on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.§ 1332. The notice 

included a notice of consent by Apollo Group Inc. Thus all defendants have removed this civil action. 

The plaintiff filed a motion to remand on October 7, 2011, asserting that the defendants have failed to

establish the amount in controversy as exceeding $75,000.00 dollars. The defendants filed their

opposition on October 31, 2011. The plaintiff’s motion to remand equivocates and does not explicitly

concede that the plaintiff is not seeking more than $75,000.00 dollars in this case. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that the motion to remand is denied.

DATED: November 1st , 2011

BY THE COURT:

s/Richard P. Matsch

_________________________________

Richard P. Matsch, Senior District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02483-RPM Document 10 Filed 11/01/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

December 27, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 129730 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 129730 

 COA: 264420 

Jackson CC: 02-001772-FH 

BILLIE RAY CLARK,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 14, 2005 

order 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. 

d1219 

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. 

December 27, 2005 

Clerk
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

NO. CAAP-24-0000066

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I

D.R., Plaintiff-Appellant, v.

T.R., Defendant-Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE FAMILY COURT OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT

(CASE NO. 3FDV-22-0000801)

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

(By: Leonard, Acting Chief Judge, Nakasone and McCullen, JJ.)

Upon review of the record, we conclude that the court

lacks appellate jurisdiction over self-represented PlaintiffAppellant D.R.'s appeal from the Family Court of the Third

Circuit's November 22, 2023 "Order from November 16, 2023," as it

is not a final, appealable decree, order, or judgment. See

Hawaii Revised Statutes § 571-54 (2018); Hall v. Hall, 96 Hawai i

105, 111 n.4, 26 P.3d 594, 600 n.4 (App. 2001) (holding that a

post-judgment order is an appealable final order if it finally

determines the post-judgment proceeding), aff'd in part, and

vacated in part on other grounds, 95 Hawai i 318, 22 P.3d 965

(2001). 

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the appeal is

dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction.

Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-24-0000066

07-FEB-2024

07:56 AM

Dkt. 8 ODSLJ
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all pending motions are

dismissed.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai i, February 7, 2024.

/s/ Katherine G. Leonard

Acting Chief Judge

/s/ Karen T. Nakasone

Associate Judge

/s/ Sonja M.P. McCullen

Associate Judge

2
II 

Calendar No. 560 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 1189 

To designate the Federal building and United States Courthouse located 

at 100 East 8th Avenue in Pine Bluff, Arkansas, as the ‘‘George Howard, Jr. Federal Building and United States Courthouse’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 23, 2007 

Mr. PRYOR (for himself and Mrs. LINCOLN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works 

JANUARY 22 (legislative day, JANUARY 3), 2008 

Reported by Mrs. BOXER, without amendment 

A BILL 

To designate the Federal building and United States Courthouse located at 100 East 8th Avenue in Pine Bluff, 

Arkansas, as the ‘‘George Howard, Jr. Federal Building 

and United States Courthouse’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•S 1189 RS

1 SECTION 1. GEORGE HOWARD, JR. FEDERAL BUILDING 

2 AND UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The Federal building and United 

4 States Courthouse, located at 100 East 8th Avenue in 

5 Pine Bluff, Arkansas, shall be known and designated as 

6 the ‘‘George Howard, Jr. Federal Building and United 

7 States Courthouse’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

10 States to the Federal building and United States Court11 house referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be 

12 a reference to the ‘‘George Howard, Jr. Federal Building 

13 and United States Courthouse’’. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
Calendar No. 560 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 1189 

A BILL 

To designate the Federal building and United 

Courthouse’’. Howard, Jr. Federal Building and United States nue in Pine Bluff, Arkansas, as the ‘‘George States Courthouse located at 100 East 8th AveJANUARY 22 (legislative day, JANUARY 3), 2008 

Reported without amendment 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
EXHIBIT
32.1





Certification
Pursuant To


Section
906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





I, Steven
Strasser, Chief Executive Officer of Power Efficiency Corporation, certify,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, that:





1.
            the
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June
      30, 2010 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
      13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (U.S.C. 78m or
      78o(d)); and





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





Date:  August
16, 2010





BY:
              /s/ Steven StrasserSteven
      StrasserChief
      Executive Officer




The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63
of title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of a separate
disclosure document.
Case 1:11-cv-02519-WYD-MJW Document 5 Filed 10/06/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
Case 1:11-cv-02519-WYD-MJW Document 5 Filed 10/06/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge Christine M. Arguello

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02547-CMA-KLM

BOND SAFEGUARD INSURANCE COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

v.

JIMMY CAMP DEVELOPMENT, INC.,

a/k/a JIMMY CAMP DEV., INC., a/k/a JIMMY CAMP, LLC,

ALLEN D. VAN WHYHE,

CARY L. CARPENTER, and

GEORGE KRAMER,

Defendants.

_____________________________________________________________________

ORDER VACATING HEARING AND GRANTING STIPULATED MOTION

_____________________________________________________________________

THE COURT hereby vacates the hearing set in this case for 1:30 PM on

 December 17, 2013, and grants the Stipulated Motion to Resolve and Vacate 

December 17, 2013 Traverse Hearing (“Stipulated Motion”) filed by Bond Safeguard

 Insurance Company (“BSIC”) and Cumberland Green Metropolitan District (“District”).

 Regarding the writs of garnishment served by BSIC upon the District in the captioned 

action, BSIC and the District shall have the rights and obligations set forth in the

Stipulated Motion.

Dated this 23rd day of December , 2013.

BY THE COURT:

 _________________________________

 Christine M. Arguello

 United States District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02547-CMA-KLM Document 101 Filed 12/23/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Consolidated
Captial Institutional Properties/2 1995 Year-End 10-K and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such 10-K filing.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000719184
<NAME> CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL INSTITUTIONAL PROPERTIES/2
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                           9,276
<SECURITIES>                                        11
<RECEIVABLES>                                   91,771
<ALLOWANCES>                                    48,405
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                           6,156
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,138
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  55,494
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      55,045
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    55,494
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,065
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,681
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,616)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.85)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>The Registrant has an unclassified balance sheet.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit32.1**

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

Inconnection with the annual report of Photonic Products Group, Inc. (the “Company”)on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2006 filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Daniel Lehrfeld, Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

(2) The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, theconsolidated financial condition of the Company as of the dates presented andconsolidated results of operations of the Company for the periods presented.
| Dated: November 21, 2007 |
|--------------------------|
|                     |
|                     |
|                     | /s/ Daniel  Lehrfeld |   |
|                     | Daniel Lehrfeld |
|                     | Chief Executive Officer |

 

Thiscertification has been furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Sections 906 has been provided to the Company andwill be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission, or its staff, upon request.

 

----
EXHIBIT 32.1

SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002, SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

As
an accompaniment to the Annual Report of MainSource Financial Group, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2007 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert E. Hoptry, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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:

This
certification is based on inquiries that I have made, or have caused to be made, in a good faith effort on my part to be a responsible and competent chief executive officer serving
the Company and its many constituencies.

This
certification merely accompanies and is not part of the Report, shall not be deemed filed for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and may not be used for any purpose
other than compliance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

Date:
March 14, 2008

|Robert E. Hoptry | 
|---------------- | 

56

---



QuickLinks