alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
226 La. 625

#### Cliff PROBST v. Mr. and Mrs. Anthony DI GIOVANNI and A. L. Dammerau.

No. 42003.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 13, 1954.

, McDonald & Buchler, Metairie, and Patrick E. Carr, New Orleans, for plaintiff-appellant.

Frederic C. Qúerens and Hyman Mithoff, New Orleans, for defendant-appellee.

PONDER, Justice.

Counsel- for the appellees has moved'to dismiss the appeal in this case on the ground that the citation of appeal was not timely served upon the appellees and the further ground that the suspensive appeal was not' timely perfected.

In this case the judgment of the low.er court was rendered and signed -on June 30, 1954. The plaintiff-appellant petitioned the lower court for a suspensive and devol-, utive appeal on July 14,. 1954, asking for *910citation of the defendants. Citation was not served on the defendants until August 2, 1954. The return day of the appeal was fixed for August 3, 1954, but it was extended by this Court to September 3, 1954. The transcript originally filed in this Court did not contain an appeal bond but it was later supplemented on September 24, 1954, so as to contain the bond. It appears that the appeal bond was not filed in the lower court until the 19th day of July, 1954, nineteen days after the judgment was rendered and signed.

Under the provisions of Article 575 of the Code of Practice, it is essential in perfecting a suspensive appeal to file a bond within 10 days from the date of the judgment. Under the provisions of LSA-R.S. 13:4212 and 13:4213, a judgment becomes executory ten days, exclusive of Sundays, after the expiration of three days, the delay allowed for applying for a new trial or a rehearing. Excluding the Sundays, the bond would have had to have been posted within fifteen days in order to perfect a suspensive appeal. Therefore, the bond having been filed nineteen days after the judgment was rendered, it was not timely filed to suspend the judgment. However, the appeal must be sustained as devolutive because the bond was filed within the year. Graziani v. Elder & Walters Equipment Co., 208 La. 80, 22 So.2d 841, wherein a list of authorities are cited to the effect that it is well settled that this Court will not dismiss an appeal when the bond is not filed within the time prescribed for a suspensive appeal but is filed within the year.

The appellees contend that under the provisions of Article 583 of the Code of Practice the appeal should be dismissed because the citation was not served at least fifteen days before the return day of the appeal. Whenever an appellant asks for citation of appeal to be issued and served, the appeal must be sustained even when the citation is not issued or served, unless the record affirmatively discloses that it was the fault of appellant or his counsel. Nunez v. Serpas, 198 La. 415, 3 So.2d 673. The record in this case does not affirmatively show that the delay in serving the citation resulted from the fault of the appellant or his counsel.

For the reasons assigned, the motion is denied as to the devolutive appeal but maintained as to the suspensive appeal at appel-lees’ cost.
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 17

- 00172

- CR

JAMES STANTON RUDOLP H , Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

From the 54th District Court McLennan County, Texas Trial Court No. 2015

- 706

- C2

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

James Stanton Rudolph filed a notice of appeal for his convictions for aggravated

sexual assault of a child and indecency with a child. On February 15, 2018, the State filed

a motion to dismiss the appeal as moot. The State informed this Court that the parties

agreed to modify the terms of Rudo l ph’s community supervision and that the trial court

entered an order modifying the terms of community supervision on February 8, 2018.

This Court requested a response from Appellant on the motion. Appellant filed aR udolph v. State Page 2

response on February 22, 2018 agreeing that the trial court modified the conditions of his

communit y supervision and thereby eliminating the error complained of on appeal.

Appellant agreed that the modification rendered the appeal moot. Because the sole issue

on appeal is moot, the motion to dismiss the appeal is grante d, and the appeal is

dismissed. Dismissal of the appeals would not prevent a party from seeking relief to

which i t would otherwise be entitled.

AL SCOGGINS Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins Motion granted; appeal dismissed Opinion delivere d and filed March 7, 2018 Do not publish [CR25]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02644-BNB

RODNEY CURTIS HAMRICK, a.k.a. Zechariah Antonios Al-Magsoon

Petitioner,

v.

NO DEFENDANT NAMED,

Defendant.

 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

 

Plaintiff, Rodney Curtis Hamrick, a Colorado Department of Corrections inmate,

is incarcerated at the ADX in Florence, Colorado. He initiated this action by filing pro

se an “Ex Parte Petition for Change of Name” and a Letter. 

In an Order entered on October 14, 2011, Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland

directed Mr. Hamrick to cure certain enumerated deficiencies in this case within thirty

days. Specifically, Mr. Hamrick was ordered to file a Motion and Affidavit for Leave to

Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 on the court-approved form along with a certified

copy of his prisoner’s trust fund account statement showing the balance in his account

for the six months preceding his filing, or to pay the $350.00 filing fee. Plaintiff was also

directed to submit a Prisoner Complaint on the court-approved form. The October 14

Order warned Mr. Hamrick that if he failed to cure the designated deficiencies within the

time allowed, the action would be dismissed without further notice. 

Mr. Hamrick has not submitted a Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 or a Prisoner Complaint on the court-approved forms. He

Case 1:11-cv-02644-LTB Document 4 Filed 11/22/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
has also failed to pay the $350.00 filing fee. Mr. Hamrick has not filed any documents

with the Court to attempt to comply with the October 14 Order. Therefore, Mr. Hamrick

has failed to cure the designated deficiencies within the time allowed. Accordingly, it is

 ORDERED that the action be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b)

of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for the failure of Plaintiff, Rodney Curtis

Hamrick, to comply with the order to cure dated October 14, 2011. 

 DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 22nd day of November , 2011.

 BY THE COURT: 

 s/Lewis T. Babcock 

LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Senior Judge

United States District Court 

Case 1:11-cv-02644-LTB Document 4 Filed 11/22/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, 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

July 26, 2010 

d0719 

Order 

 

July 26, 2010 

140419 & (26)(27) 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 140419 

 COA: 294052 

Oakland CC: 2006-207430-FC 

RONDO JUERONIMORE SMITH-BEY, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 6, 2010 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). The 

motion for appointment of counsel and motion to remand are DENIED.
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 151 

To permanently prohibit oil and gas leasing off the coast of the State 

of California, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 4, 2007 

Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mrs. FEINSTEIN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To permanently prohibit oil and gas leasing off the coast 

of the State of California, 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 ‘‘California Ocean and 

5 Coastal Protection Act’’. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
2 

•S 151 IS

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF OIL AND GAS LEASING IN CER2 TAIN AREAS OF THE OUTER CONTINENTAL 

3 SHELF. 

4 Section 8 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act 

5 (43 U.S.C. 1337) is amended by adding at the end the 

6 following: 

7 ‘‘(q) PROHIBITION OF OIL AND GAS LEASING IN

8 CERTAIN AREAS OF THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF.— 

9 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other 

10 provision of this Act or any other law and except as 

11 provided in paragraph (2), beginning on the date of 

12 enactment of this subsection, the conduct of oil and 

13 gas preleasing, leasing, and related activities is pro14 hibited in areas of the outer Continental Shelf lo15 cated off the coast of the State of California. 

16 ‘‘(2) EFFECT.—Nothing in this subsection af17 fects any rights under leases issued under this Act 

18 before the date of enactment of this subsection.’’. 

19 SEC. 3. COMPREHENSIVE INVENTORY OF OUTER CONTI20 NENTAL SHELF OIL AND NATURAL GAS RE21 SOURCES. 

22 Section 357(a) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 

23 U.S.C. 15912(a)) is amended by inserting after ‘‘Conti24 nental Shelf’’ the following: ‘‘(other than the areas of the 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
3 

•S 151 IS

1 outer Continental Shelf off the coast of the State of Cali2 fornia)’’. 

Æ 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 4, 2020

No. 04-20-00227-CV

THE CITY OF MASON, TEXAS,

Appellant

v.

BLUE OAK ENGINEERING, LLC,

Appellee

From the 452nd District Court, Mason County, Texas

Trial Court No. 195900

Honorable Robert Rey Hofmann, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellant’s motion for an extension of time to file its brief is GRANTED.

_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

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

court on this 4th day of May, 2020.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ,

Clerk of Court
```

                                EXHIBIT 10.14(i)

                                                              February 13, 2006

Stuart P. Litt
Northport Systems, Inc.
215 Scudder Avenue
Northport, NY  11768

Dear Stuart:

American Technical Ceramics Corp. would like to extend the January 1, 2004
Consulting Agreement between American Technical Ceramics Corp. and Northport
Systems, Inc. for a period of one year. The extended Agreement would expire on
December 31, 2006. This would be the second one-year extension of this
agreement. Other than the extension of the Agreement, all terms of the Agreement
would remain the same.

If you agree to extend the Consulting Agreement until December 31, 2006, please
sign this letter and return it to my attention at the address below.

                                        Yours truly,

                                        /S/Kathleen M. Kelly

                                        Kathleen M. Kelly
                                        Vice President, Administration
KMK

Agreed to:

         /S/Stuart P. Litt
-----------------------------------------
Stuart P. Litt              Date
```
<PAGE>   1

                                   EXHIBIT 21

                          SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY

     The following bank subsidiary is a national bank and is organized under the
laws of the United States:

        First National Bank in Manitowoc

     The following non-bank subsidiary is organized under the laws of the State
of Wisconsin and is a subsidiary of First National Bank in Manitowoc:

        United Financial Services, Inc. (data center subsidiary)

     The following non-bank subsidiary is organized under the laws of the State
of Nevada and is a subsidiary of First National Bank in Manitowoc:

        FNBM Investment Corp. (investment subsidiary)
Exhibit 31.1
                                 CERTIFICATIONS



     I, William D. Cox, certify that:

1.   I have  reviewed  this  annual  report  on Form  10-K/A  of  TransFinancial
     Holdings, Inc.;

2.   Based on my  knowledge,  this  annual  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.   Not Applicable

4.   I am responsible for establishing and maintaining  disclosure  controls and
     procedures  (as  defined in Exchange  Act Rules  13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
     registrant and we have:

     a)   designed  such  disclosure  controls  and  procedures  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 annual report
          is being prepared;

     b)   evaluated the  effectiveness of the registrant's  disclosure  controls
          and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
          this annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

     c)   presented   in  this   annual   report  our   conclusions   about  the
          effectiveness  of the disclosure  controls and procedures based on our
          evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5.   I have disclosed,  based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's
     auditors and the audit  committee of  registrant's  board of directors  (or
     persons performing the equivalent function):

     a)   all  significant  deficiencies  in the design or operation of internal
          controls  which could  adversely  affect the  registrant's  ability to
          record,  process,   summarize  and  report  financial  data  and  have
          identified for the  registrant's  auditors any material  weaknesses in
          internal controls; and

     b)   any fraud, whether or not material,  that involves management or other
          employees who have a  significant  role in the  registrant's  internal
          controls; and

6.   I  have  indicated  in  this  annual  report  whether  or  not  there  were
     significant  changes in internal  controls or in other  factors  that could
     significantly  affect internal controls  subsequent to the date of our most
     recent  evaluation,   including  any  corrective  actions  with  regard  to
     significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.


Date: October 27, 2003
                                      /s/ William D. Cox
                                    --------------------------
                                    William D. Cox
                                    Chief Executive Officer and
                                    Chief Financial Officer
#### John ROBINSON v. STATE.

7 Div. 81.

Court of Appeals of Alabama.

June 4, 1935.

EICE, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02607-RBJ-BNB

TUTORING CLUB, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

RMA, LLC and KATHLEEN DEMATTEO,

Defendants.

ORDER FOR DISMISSAL OF CLAIMS AND COUNTERCLAIMS, WITH PREJUDICE

THE COURT, having reviewed Plaintiff’s and Defendants’ Joint Motion for Entry of 

Consent Injunction and for Dismissal of Claims and Counterclaims With Prejudice [Docket 

#20],, and, being fully advised in the premises, hereby

ORDERS that all claims that plaintiff, Tutoring Club, LLC, and all counterclaims that 

defendants, RMC, LLC and Kathleen DeMatteo, asserted or could have asserted in this action 

are dismissed, with prejudice; and

FURTHER ORDERS that each party to this civil action shall be responsible for her or its 

own respective attorneys’ fees, costs, and other expenses incurred in connection with this civil 

action.

Case 1:11-cv-02607-RBJ Document 21 Filed 01/18/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED this 18th day of January, 2012.

BY THE COURT: 

___________________________________

R. Brooke Jackson

United States District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02607-RBJ Document 21 Filed 01/18/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 13

- 00 117

- CR

ALONSO ANTONIO MACIAS APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

------------

FROM THE 372ND DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

------------



### ME MORANDUM OPINION 1

------------

Appellant Alonso Antonio Macias attempts to appeal from the trial court’s

judgment convicting him of possession of a controlled substance of less than one

gram (cocaine) and sentencing him to 150 days’ confinement in the Tar rant

County jail pursua nt to a plea agreement. T he trial court’s certification of his right

to appeal states that this “is a plea

- bargain case

, and the defendant has NO right

of appeal

. ”

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2

On March 27 , 201 3

, this court notified appellant about the statement on the

trial court’s certification and informed him that unless he or any party desiring to

c ontinue t he appeal filed with the court

, on or before April 5, 201 3 , a response

showing grounds for continuing the appeal, the appeal may be dismissed. See

Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 44.3. We have received no response. Therefore, we

dismiss the appeal. See Te x. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 43.2(f).

BOB MCCOY

JUSTICE

PANEL: MCCOY

, MEIER, and GABRIEL

, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERE D: May 16, 2013
Case 1:11-cv-02560-MSK-MEH Document 66 Filed 04/13/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
Case 1:11-cv-02560-MSK-MEH Document 66 Filed 04/13/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02594-RPM

DALE GROSS,

Plaintiff,

v.

GUILLERMO SAMUDIO, Community Parole Officer; 

IAN SWEENEY, Community Parole Officer; 

JENNIFER DUNCAN, Community Parole Officer; 

ANTHONY YOUNG, Chairman of the Colorado Parole Board; 

ED THOMAS, Member of the Parole Board; 

DENISE BALAZIC, Member of the Parole Board; 

PATRICIA BAN WAAK, Member of the Parole Board; 

JOHN O’DELL, Member of the Parole Board; 

MICHAEL ANDERSON, Member of the Parole Board; 

REBECCA OAKES, Member of the Parole Board; 

FREDERICK E. TOLSON, President Sexual Offense Resource Services, LLC; 

JOHN DOES, Number 5-6, unknown officers of Sexual Offense Resource Services, LLC; 

GREIG VEEDER, President and Director, Teaching Humane Existence Treatment Program,

Inc.; and 

JOHN DOES, Number 7-8, unknown officers of Teaching Humane Existence Treatment

Program, Inc., 

Defendants.

____________________________________________________________________________

JUDGMENT 

_____________________________________________________________________

Pursuant to the Order of Dismissal entered by Senior District Judge Richard P.

Matsch on May 22, 2014, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this civil action is dismissed.

DATED: May 22, 2014.

FOR THE COURT:

JEFFREY P. COLWELL, Clerk

s/M. V. Wentz

By__________________________

Deputy

Case 1:11-cv-02594-RPM Document 74 Filed 05/22/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF COLORADO

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA JUDGMENT IN A CRIMINAL CASE

(For Revocation for Supervised Release)

v. Case Number: 11-cr-00402-DW-01 

SHANE FRENCH

USM Number: 37885-013

Steve Wells, Appointed and 

 Edward R. Harris, AFPD

 (Defendant's Attorney)

THE DEFENDANT: Admitted guilt to violations 1 and 2, as alleged in the probation officer's petition.

The defendant is adjudicated guilty of these violations:

Violation Number Nature of Violation

Violation

Ended

1 Possession and Use of a Controlled Substance 02/29/12 

2 Failure to Participate in and Successfully Compete the Short

Term, Inpatient, Residential Program for Substance Abuse

and/or Mental Health Treatment at Arapahoe House, Thornton,

Colorado

03/02/12 

The defendant is sentenced as provided in page 2 of this judgment. The sentence is imposed

pursuant to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984.

It is ordered that the defendant must notify the United States Attorney for this district within 30

days of any change of name, residence, or mailing address until all fines, restitution, costs, and special

assessments imposed by this judgment are fully paid. If ordered to pay restitution, the defendant must

notify the court and United States Attorney of material changes in economic circumstances.

It is further ordered that the Addendum to this judgment, which contains the defendant’s social

security number, residence address and mailing address, shall be withheld from the court file and

retained by the United States Probation Department.

May 21, 2012

Date of Imposition of Judgment

 s/David L. West 

Signature of Judge

David L. West, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Name & Title of Judge

 05/24/12

Date

Case 1:11-cr-00402-DW Document 59 Filed 05/24/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
DEFENDANT: SHANE FRENCH

CASE NUMBER: 11-cr-00402-DW-01 Judgment-Page 2 of 2

 

IMPRISONMENT

The defendant is hereby committed to the custody of the United States Bureau of Prisons to be

imprisoned for a total term of one hundred and forty-five (145) days.

The court recommends that the Bureau of Prisons designate the defendant to a facility so he

can participate in the Non-Residential Drug Abuse Program (NRDAP) and receive mental health

treatment. The Court also recommends the defendant receive no credit for time served.

The defendant is remanded to the custody of the United States Marshal.

RETURN

I have executed this judgment as follows:

 

 

 

 

Defendant delivered on to 

at , with a certified copy of this judgment.

 UNITED STATES MARSHAL 

By 

 Deputy United States Marshal

Case 1:11-cr-00402-DW Document 59 Filed 05/24/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2