alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
214 La. 1023

#### HAND v. HAND.

No. 38941.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 21, 1949.

Edward A. Generelly, of New Orleans, for plaintiff in Rule and appellant.

Richard A. Dowling, of New Orleans, for defendant in Rule and appellee.

FOURNET, Justice.

Peter Hand, from whom Mrs. Eunice Kernan Hand obtained a judgment of divorce on May 26, 1947, granting her custody of their minor child, Kernan Hand, and awarding her alimony for herself and child in the amount of $100 a month, filed a motion in Court on June 18, 1947, asking that this monthly amount be reduced to $50, claiming that his only income is $37.50 a week, less social security deductions. From a judgment reducing the alimony to $85 a month Hand prosecutes this appeal.

.The. evidence in the record reveals that although the appellant did testify that at the time he filed the motion for the reduction of the alimony he was only making $37.50 -a week, less deductions, and that from that date until the trial of the motion, October 10, 1947, his only other income was an advance of $140 made, by. the Charbonnet Realty Company, his employment by that company being on a commission basis only and he having made no sales, he has real estate valued at $22,000, against which there is an outstanding mortgage of $12j000, and his gross income for' 1946 was $9,797.44 with a net to him of $7,604.41, while in Í945 it was $28,000'. While the motion for the reduction of alimony was pending he 'sold a Cadillac automobile for $1,000 cash.

The record also shows that a little over a month after he filed the motion and while action thereon was pending, Hand contracted another marriage, with Miss Josie Albano. She testified that in July of 1947 (about the time of the marriage) she purchased 15 shares of stock in the Charbonnet Realty Company for $1,500 cash (this- is the company that advanced him $140 although he claims to b'e working for it on a commission -basis and admittedly ■had made no- sales) with money accumulated by her from cash gifts from her father which she kept in a bank box at the Whitney National Bank. When questioned about these gifts she was able t'o identify definitely only one such gift, i. e.„ a cash gift of $500 to her at Christmas in 1945, her testimony with respect t'o other cash gifts being rather vague. She also testified that her father gave her the 1947 Ford car she owned at the time. Her father was not called in corroboration of any part of this testimony.

In view of the foregoing, we cannot say ■the trial judge manifestly erred in fixing the alimony at $85 a month.

For the reasons assigned, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

O’NIELL, C. J., takes no part.
### NUMBER 13 - 1 4 - 00 297 - CR 

## COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI

— EDINBURG

A L E J A N DR O B A R R I E NT E S , A p pellant ,

v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, A p pellee

.

On appeal from the 107th District Court of Cameron County, Texas.



## ORDER OF ABATEMENT
Before Justices Benavides, Perkes, and Longoria

Order Per Curiam

A ppe l la n t, A l e ja n d ro B a r r ie n t e s , h a s f i l e d a n o tice o f ap p ea l w ith t h is Co u rt f r o m h is c on v iction in tr i a l c ou rt c au se n u mbe r 2 0 13

- DCR

- 657

- A . On December 12, 2014 , we issued an order determining that appellant’s waiver of the right to appeal was invalid because the consequences of the waiver were uncertain at the time and he received no2

consideration for it. See Ex parte Delaney , 207 S.W.3d 794, 799 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). In the same order, we directed appellant’s counsel to prepare and file an appellate brief within thirty days. The thirty

- day deadline imposed by our previous order expired on January 12, 2015. On January 21, 2015 , counsel called this Co urt and stated that he would file a brief the following day, but n o appellate brief or motion for extension of time
has been received in this case

. Accordingly, we now ABATE this appeal and REMAND the cause to the trial court for further proceedings pursu ant to Rule 38.8(b)(2) and (3) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Upon remand, the trial court shall utilize whatever means necessary to make appropriate findings and recommendations concerning the following: (1) whether appellant desires to pros ecute this appeal; (2) why appellant's counsel has failed to file a brief and whether counsel has effectively abandoned the appeal; (3) whether appellant has been denied effective assistance of counsel; (4) whether appellant's counsel should be removed; an d (5) whether appellant is indigent and entitled to new court

- appointed counsel. If the trial court determines that appellant does want to continue the appeal, that present counsel should be removed, and that appellant is indigent and entitled to
court

- app ointed counsel, the trial court shall appoint new counsel to represent appellant in this appeal. If new counsel is appointed, the name, address, telephone number, and
state bar number of the new counsel shall be included in an order appointing said counsel. The trial court shall cause its finding s and recommendations, together with any orders it may enter regarding the aforementioned issues, to be included in a supplemental3

clerk's record. Furthermore, the trial court shall cause a supplemental reporter's record of any proceedings to be prepared. The supplemental clerk's record and sup plemental reporter's record, if any, shall be filed with the Clerk of this Court on or before the expiration of twenty days from the date of this order.

It is so ORDERED. PER CURIAM

Do not publish. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b).
D elivered and filed the 4 t h day of F ebruary, 201 5

.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02565-WJM-BNB

SIGNE MARTIN,

Plaintiff,

v.

CANON BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, INC.,

Defendant.

______________________________________________________________________________

ORDER

______________________________________________________________________________

This matter arises on the plaintiff’s Notice of Motion for an Order Compelling

Answers to Interrogatories and Requests for Production, To Extend Discovery Deadlines,

and for Sanctions [Doc. # 24, filed 4/25/2012] (the “Motion”).

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as

follows:

• GRANTED to require the defendant to produce the following materials on or before

May 25, 2012: (i) emails; (ii) policies; (iii) unredacted materials concerning comparators;

• GRANTED to modify the case schedule as follows:

Discovery Cut-Off: August 20, 2012

(All discovery must be completed by the discovery cut-off. All

written discovery must be served so that responses are due on or

before the discovery cut-off.)

Dispositive Motions Deadline: September 20, 2012

 

Case 1:11-cv-02565-WJM-BNB Document 29 Filed 05/18/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

Expert Disclosures:

(a) The parties shall designate all experts and provide

opposing counsel with all information specified in

Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) on or before June 20, 2012

(b) The parties shall designate all rebuttal experts and

provide opposing counsel with all information

specified in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) on or before

July 20, 2012

Final Pretrial Conference: The final pretrial conference set for

August 16, 2012, at 9:00 a.m., is VACATED and RESET to

November 1, 2012, at 8:30 a.m., in Courtroom 401, 4th floor,

Alfred A. Arraj United States Courthouse, 901 19th Street, Denver,

Colorado. A Final Pretrial Order shall be prepared by the parties

and submitted to the court no later than October 25, 2012; and

•DENIED in all other respects.

Dated May 18, 2012.

BY THE COURT:

 s/ Boyd N. Boland 

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02565-WJM-BNB Document 29 Filed 05/18/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

                              



<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF POWER TEST INVESTORS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AS
OF MARCH 31, 1997 AND FOR THE THREE MONTHS THEN ENDED AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           2,081
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                          49,164
<DEPRECIATION>                                  19,861
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  35,364
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                         29,067
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       6,124
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    35,364
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,332
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      217
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 495
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,424
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,424
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,424
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .22
        

</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch

Date: September 12, 2012

Courtroom Deputy: J. Chris Smith

FTR Technician: Kathy Terasaki

____________________________________________________________________________________

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02635-RPM

DEBRA A. TURNER, Dennis P. Walker

Plaintiff,

v.

RODNEY D. JOHNSON, Leslie L. Schluter

in his individual and official capacity as Sheriff of Grand County,

Defendant.

____________________________________________________________________________________

COURTROOM MINUTES

____________________________________________________________________________________

Hearing on Pending Motions

10:00 a.m. Court in session.

Court’s preliminary remarks and its comments regarding a related previously litigated case and plaintiff’s

motion for partial summary judgment.

ORDERED: Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [35], denied.

Counsel answer questions and make their respective argument regarding plaintiff’s discovery motions

[24], [25] and [26].

Court instructs Ms. Schluter to provide information and calculation regarding salary and value of

the benefits as stated on record.

Ms Schluter clarifies that two personnel files were maintained (Sheriff and County Manager) and

acknowledgments to the county manual were kept in the county manager’s file.

Court instructs Ms. Schluter to provide information regarding discipline and dismissal of others

and for counsel to prepare and submit a proposed protective order as stated on record.

Ms. Schluter agrees to stipulate that the unemployment hearing transcript is not contested and exhibits

admitted at the hearing were the ones used.

Case 1:11-cv-02635-RPM Document 38 Filed 09/12/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

September 12, 2012

11-cv-02635-RPM

Court states it will permit the deposition of Anthony J. DiCola but limits its scope to the interaction

between DiCola and Ms. Turner concerning Mr. DiCola’s request for a jail visit with his client.

ORDERED: Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Scheduling Order to Permit the Deposition of Anthony

J. DiCola [24], is resolved as stated on record.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Determine the Sufficiency of Defendant’s Answer to Requests

for Admissions, [25], is resolved as stated on record.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Written Discovery Responses [26], is resolved as

stated on record.

Time for plaintiff’s response to defendant’s [37] motion for summary judgment

is suspended until disclosures of information and materials are completed as

instructed in today’s hearing and a motion for extension of time will be granted

upon its filing. 

10:55 a.m. Court in recess.

Hearing concluded. Total time: 55 min.

Case 1:11-cv-02635-RPM Document 38 Filed 09/12/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 95-30173 Conference Calendar

__________________ ALAN CLEMENTS, Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus DAVID DILLON, Sergeant, RICHARD L. STALDER, Warden; EDGAR C. DAY, Warden, Defendants-Appellants.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. CA-93-3463-F
- - - - - - - - - - February 29, 1996 Before GARWOOD, JONES, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * This is an appeal from the magistrate judge's judgment awarding costs to the nonprevailing party. The appellants argue that, as the prevailing parties, they are entitled to the awarding of costs. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment awarding costs to the nonprevailing party for essentially the reasons given by the magistrate judge. Clements v. Dillon et al. , No. CA-93-3463-F (E.D. La. Nov. 23, 1995). AFFIRMED.
#### FIMACOR PRODUCTS CORPORATION, as Owner of the Cargo on the Barge THE C. R. SHEFFER, Libelant-Appellee, v. ATLANTIC OVERSEAS CORPORATION, Respondent-Appellee, Schoonmaker Transportation Company, Respondent-Impleaded-Appellant.

No. 92.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Dec. 6, 1937.

Courtland Palmer, of New York City (Francis J. Ryan, Jr., of New York City, of counsel), for impleaded appellant.

Hatch & Wolfe, of New York City (Carver W. Wolfe and J. Newton Nash, both of New York City, of counsel), for respondent Atlantic Overseas Corporation.

Macklin, Brown, Lenahan & Speer, of New York City (Richard F. Lenahan, Leo F. Hanan, and Horace L. Cheyney, all of New York City, of counsel), for appellee Fimacor Products Corporation.

Before MANTON, L. HAND, and SWAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Decree affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-40867

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOSE ALBERTO GONZALEZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:15-CR-42-1

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Jose Alberto Gonzalez raises 

an argument that is foreclosed by United States v. Betancourt, 586 F.3d 303, 

308-09 (5th Cir. 2009), which held that knowledge of drug type and quantity is 

not an element of a 21 U.S.C. § 841 offense. The motion for summary

disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 17, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-40867 Document: 00513383890 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/17/2016
**EXHIBIT 99.1**

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of North Pittsburgh Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31,2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, H. R. Brown, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)          The Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)          The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

|                                                                           |   | /s/ H. R. BROWN                                       |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------|
| Date:           May 14, 2003 |   |                                                       |
|                                                                           |   | **H. R. Brown President and Chief Executive Officer** |

A signed original of this written statementrequired by Section 906 has been provided to North Pittsburgh Systems, Inc. and will be retained by North Pittsburgh Systems, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

JUDGE R. BROOKE JACKSON

Courtroom Deputy: Laura Galera

Court Reporter: Kara Spitler

Date: November 28, 2012

Probation: Michelle Means

Criminal Action No. 11-cr-00392-RBJ 

Parties:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

WENDELL DAVIS, 

Defendant.

Counsel:

David Conner

Bradley Lozow

SENTENCING MINUTES

Court in session: 8:29 a.m.

Appearances of counsel.

Defendant is present in custody.

Defendant’s counsel makes a statement on behalf of the defendant, offers information in

mitigation of punishment, and comments on matters relating to the appropriate sentence.

Defendant, counsel for the government and the Probation Officer address the Court regarding

sentencing.

Statement by the Court regarding defendant's offense level, criminal history level and sentencing
2

guidelines range.

Court states its findings and conclusions.

Defendant entered his plea on September 10, 2012 to Count Two of the Indictment. 

ORDERED: Government’s Motion Pursuant to §5K.1 of the United States Sentencing

Guidelines [18] is GRANTED.

ORDERED: Motion to Dismiss [19] is GRANTED.

ORDERED: Defendant shall be placed on probation for a period of five (5) years.

ORDERED: Conditions of Probation that:

(X) Defendant shall not commit another federal, state or local crime.

(X) Defendant shall not illegally possess controlled substances.

(X) Defendant shall maintain continual employment.

(X) Defendant shall refrain from the unlawful use of a controlled substance.

(X) Defendant shall cooperate in the collection of a DNA sample from the defendant

as directed by the probation officer. 

ORDERED: Special Condition of Probation that:

(X) Defendant shall participate in and successfully complete a program of testing and

treatment for drug/alcohol abuse as directed by the probation officer until such

time as defendant is released from the program by the probation officer. 

Defendant shall abstain from the use of alcohol or other intoxicants during the

course of treatment. Defendant will be required to pay the cost of treatment as

directed by the probation officer.

ORDERED: Defendant shall pay $100.00 to Crime Victim Fund (Special Assessment), to be

paid immediately. 

ORDERED: No fine is imposed because defendant has no ability to pay a fine.

ORDERED: Defendant advised of right to appeal. Any notice of appeal must be filed within 14

days.

Court in recess: 9:03 a.m.

Hearing concluded.

Total time: 00:34
Missouri Court of Appeals

Southern District 

OCTOBER 16, 2014 

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 84.16(b). 

1. Case No. SD33000 

 Re: HSBC MORTGAGE SERVICES, INC., 

 Plaintiff-Respondent, 

 v. 

 RICHARD A. CARDEN and 

 ROSALIE P. CARDEN, 

 Defendants-Appellants.
```

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 4 (Monday, January 7, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 1131]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-24]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

26 CFR Part 1

[REG-143326-05]
RIN 1545-BE95

S Corporation Guidance Under AJCA of 2004 and GOZA of 2005; 
Hearing Cancellation

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Cancellation of notice of public hearing on proposed 
rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This document cancels a public hearing on proposed regulations 
that provide guidance regarding certain changes made to the rules 
governing S corporations under the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 
and the Gulf Opportunity Zone Act of 2005.

DATES: The public hearing, originally scheduled for January 16, 2008, 
at 10 a.m. is cancelled.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Banks of the Publications and 
Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel 
(Procedure and Administration) at (202) 622-0392 (not a toll-free 
number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice of proposed rulemaking and notice 
of public hearing that appeared in the Federal Register on Friday, 
September 28, 2007 (72 FR 55132), announced that a public hearing was 
scheduled for January 16, 2008, at 10 a.m. in the IRS Auditorium, 
Internal Revenue Building, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 
DC. The subject of the public hearing is under section 361 of the 
Internal Revenue Code.
    The public comments and outlines of oral testimony were due on 
December 27, 2007. The notice of proposed rulemaking and notice of 
public hearing instructed those interested in testifying at the public 
hearing to submit an outline of the topics to be addressed. As of 
Wednesday, January 2, 2008, no one has requested to speak. Therefore, 
the public hearing scheduled for January 16, 2008, is cancelled.

Cynthia E. Grigsby,
Senior Federal Register Liaison Officer, Publications and Regulations 
Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure 
and Administration).
[FR Doc. E8-24 Filed 1-4-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
```