alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Bagley *v.*G. and E. M. Smith.

A notice of the entry of the judgment, given to-foreclose an appeal, is a proceeding in the cause, within the meaning of an order staying proceedings on the judgment; and will be set aside as irregular.

June 20, 1849.

After a trial in this cause and a verdict for the plaintiff, the defendants on the 26th of April last, obtained and served a judge’s order staying the proceedings, and granting them thirty days in which to prepare a case or bill of exceptions. On the 14th of *652May, the order wag modified by the judge, so as to allow the plaintiff to'perfect his judgment, “and all other proceedings on the judgment to be stayed.” On the 18th of May, the plaintiff served on the defendants’ attorney, a notice of the entry of the judgment. On the 23d of June, the defendants filed and served a notice of appeal, and gave the requisite security.

The plaintiff now moves to dismiss the appeal; and the defendant moved for an enlargement of the time, or an amendment of the notice, or that the orders to stay, &c. bo deemed notices of appeal, or for relief in some other mode, if irregular.

*D. P. Hall, F. B. Cutting,*and *D. Lord,*for the defendants.

*J. Slosson,*and *E. Sandford,*for the plaintiff.

Sandford, J.,

after advising with Oakley, Ch. J., and Vanderpoel, J., held the appeal to have been made in time. The notice of the entry of the judgment was a proceeding in the cause, which was prohibited by the stay of proceedings, and was set aside as irregular, on the defendants stipulating to give to the plaintiff ten days in which to except to the defendants sureties on the appeal. Leave given to the plaintiff to serve a new notice of the entry of the judgment, and his motion to dismiss the appeal denied. No costs to either party.
News United States Air Force
 AF Week in PhotosPublished Oct. 6, 2017
                **FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, Md. (AFNS) --**
                This week's photos feature Airmen from around the globe involved in activities supporting expeditionary operations and defending America. This weekly feature showcases the men and women of the Air Force.Dover AFB 



Invictus Games 



Hurricane Relief 



Puerto Rico 



Muniz ANGB 



Keesler AFB 



nellis afb 



B-52 



C-17 



Vegas shooting 



Candleight vigil 



suicide prevention 



Fort Carson 



SFS 



training 



KC-135 



C-130 



humanitarian.
#### LEON & HELEN BACZEWSKI, ON BEHALF OF THEIR DAUGHTER, CONSTANCE BACZEWSKI, AN INCOMPETENT v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, DIVISION OF MENTAL RETARDATION, HUNTERDON STATE SCHOOL.

February 11, 1985.

The parties having stipulated to a dismissal of this matter, it is ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed. (See 97 *N.J.*691)
<PAGE>

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

                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

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

                                    FORM 8-K

                                 CURRENT REPORT
                     PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
                        SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

        Date of report (Date of earliest event reported):   May 22, 2001

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


                                 METASOLV, INC.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
               (EXACT NAME OF REGISTRANT AS SPECIFIED IN CHARTER)

              Delaware                  0-17920               75-2912166
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   (State or other jurisdiction       (Commission           (IRS Employer
        of incorporation)             File Number)      Identification No.)

                   5560 Tennyson Parkway, Plano, Texas     75024
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
             (Address of Principal Executive Offices)   (Zip Code)


      Registrant's telephone number, including area code   (972) 403-8300

                         -----------------------------
<PAGE>

ITEM 5.  OTHER EVENTS.

    At the Company's Annual Meeting of Stockholders held on May 22, 2001,
Lawrence J. Bouman and T. Curtis Holmes, Jr. were elected to the Company's Board
of Directors and the proposal to amend the Certificate of Incorporation of
MetaSolv, Inc., as set forth in the Proxy Statement dated April 11, 2001 (the
"Proxy Statement"), was approved.  The stockholders meeting was adjourned to
June 12, 2001 with respect to the proposal to amend the Certificate of
Incorporation of MetaSolv Software, Inc., as set forth in the Proxy Statement,
so as to permit stockholders additional time to submit proxies.  The
stockholders meeting with respect to this proposal will be reconvened at 10:00
a.m., Dallas, Texas time, on June 12, 2001, at the Company's headquarters in
Plano.

                                       2
<PAGE>

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned hereunto duly authorized.

                             METASOLV, INC.



Date:  May 22, 2001          By:   /s/ Glenn A. Etherington
                                   ---------------------------------
                                   Glenn A. Etherington
                                   Chief Financial Officer
                                   Duly Authorized Officer on behalf
                                   of the Registrant

                                       3
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                            1082
<SECURITIES>                                        44
<RECEIVABLES>                                     4963
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        221
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  6310
<PP&E>                                           10475
<DEPRECIATION>                                    1119
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   15666
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             7268
<BONDS>                                           1583
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             1302
<PREFERRED>                                        305
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                        5207
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     15666
<SALES>                                           3387
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  3387
<CGS>                                             2182
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     2182
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  1096
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  39
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     70
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 70
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        70
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .00
        

</TABLE>
#### MAURICE E. BEVERLY v. PATHMARK OF ARAMINGO.

February 11, 1985.

Petition for certification denied.
Exhibit 12.1



CERTIFICATION



I, James E. Sinclair, certify that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No.3 to the annual report on Form 20-F of Tanzanian Royalty Exploration Corporation (the “Company”);
and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | Based on my knowledge, this 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Date: August 17, 2018



/s/ James Sinclair



James Sinclair,

President and Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer)
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. ROBERT BROWN.

May 24, 1985.

Petition for certification denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          41,311
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                52,568
<PP&E>                                         139,434
<DEPRECIATION>                               (101,368)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  90,634
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,615,989
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      1,844
<COMMON>                                        23,775
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    90,634
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  611,978
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             218,401
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (610,757)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (610,757)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (610,757)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.03)




</TABLE>
#### DEPARTMENT OF LABOR v. SAMUEL BERLANTI AND SUFFOLK COUNTY CONTRACTORS, INC.

October 17, 1985.

This matter having been duly considered by the Court and the debarment of respondent Samuel Berlanti having been rendered moot by his death, and good cause otherwise appearing;

it is ORDERED that the appeal in this matter is dismissed as moot (see *Department of Labor v. Titan Construction Company,*102 *N.J.*1 (1985).
EXHIBIT
99.4





CONSENT OF EXPERT








Reference is made to the feasibility study entitled
“Feasibility Study and Technical Report Update on the
Brucejack Project, Stewart, BC” with an effective date of
June 19, 2014 (the “Report”).





I, Herbert A. Smith, on behalf ofAMC Mining Consultants (Canada) Ltd.
(the
“Company”), consent to the use of the Company’s
name and references to the Report, and to the inclusion or
incorporation by reference of information derived from the Report,
in (i) Pretium Resources
Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 40-F for the year ended December
31, 2016 and (ii) Pretium Resources Inc.’s Registration
Statements on Form F-10 (File No. 333-211073) and Form S-8 (File
Nos. 333-203409 and 333-213450) filed with the United States
Securities and Exchange Commission.








Very truly yours,








/s/
Herbert A. Smith





March
30, 2017
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.3
                                                                    ------------

                      Consent of Independent Accountants
                      ----------------------------------


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration
Statement on Form S-3 of NTELOS Inc. ("NTELOS"), formerly known as CFW
Communications Company ("CFW"), of our report dated February 14, 2000 relating
to the financial statements of PrimeCo Personal Communications, L.P. Richmond
Major Trading Area as of December 31, 1999 and 1998 and for each of the three
years in the period ended December 31, 1999, which appears in the Prospectus of
CFW filed pursuant to Rule 424(b) on November 9, 2000. We also consent to the
reference to us under the heading "Experts" in such Registration Statement and
Prospectus.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


Dallas, Texas
April 24, 2001
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 5.1

                 [LETTERHEAD OF VINSON & ELKINS APPEARS HERE]


                              June 16, 2000


Miller Exploration Company
3104 Logan Valley Road
Traverse City, Michigan 49685

Ladies and Gentlemen:

     We have acted as counsel to Miller Exploration Company, a Delaware
corporation (the "Company"), in connection with the preparation of the Company's
Registration Statement on Form S-3 (the "Registration Statement"), relating to
the proposed offer and sale by certain stockholders of the Company of up to
454,950 shares of the Company's common stock, par value $.01 per share (the
"Shares") issuable upon exercise of warrants held by such stockholders (the
"Warrants"). In such capacity, we are passing on certain legal matters in
connection with the registration of the sale of the Shares. At your request,
this opinion is being furnished to you for filing as an exhibit to the
Registration Statement.

     In connection with rendering this opinion, we have examined such
certificates, instruments and documents and reviewed such questions of law as we
have considered necessary or appropriate for the purposes of this opinion.

     Based upon the foregoing examination and review, we are of the opinion that
the Shares are duly authorized and, when issued upon valid exercise of the
Warrants as contemplated by the Registration Statement, will be legally issued,
fully paid and nonassessable.

     The foregoing opinion is limited to the laws of the United States of
America and to the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.  For
purposes of this opinion, we assume that the Shares will be issued in compliance
with all applicable state securities or blue sky laws.

     We hereby consent to the filing of this opinion as an exhibit to the
Registration Statement. In giving this consent, however, we do not hereby admit
that we are within the category of persons whose consent is required under
Section 7 of the Securities Act of 1933 and the rules and regulations of the
Securities and Exchange Commission thereunder.


                              Very truly yours,

                              /s/ VINSON & ELKINS L.L.P.

                              VINSON & ELKINS L.L.P.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

April 24, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
132924 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 132924 COA: 262289 St. Joseph CC: 04-012377-FC ALVIN COLLINS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the November 21, 2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

t0416 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.

April 24, 2007

Clerk
#### STATE v. PARKER

No. 518P00

Case below: 140 N.C. App. 169

Motion by the Attorney General to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 1 February 2001. Petition by defendant for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 1 February 2001.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.2

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

     As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the use of our
report (and to all references to our Firm) included in or made a part of this
Registration Statement.

/s/ Harper & Pearson Company


Houston, Texas
December 22, 2000
News United States Air Force
 Around the Air Force: May 26Published May 26, 2017
                        
                        By Airman 1st Class Jasmine Vanderheyden
                        
                        
                        Air Force TV
                
                
FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, Md. (AFNS) -- On this look around the Air Force, AF leadership presented its fiscal year 2018 president’s budget, the Pentagon hosted the Defense Department Lab Day and the Air Force Research Laboratory is working towards a mobile weather challenge solution. Hosted by Airman 1st Class Jasmine Vanderheyden.
For previous episodes, click **here**.
Related stories:
- AF presents fiscal year 2018 budget
- DOD Lab Day to showcase advanced technologies
- AFRL seeks public input for a state of the art mobile weather platformATAF 



Around the Air Force 



Featured Videos 



A1C Jasmine Vanderheyden 



lab 



weather 



Lab Day 



Pentagon 



2018 Budget 



Weather Platform
Exhibit 32.02

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Kirk Blosch, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report of OCIS Corp. on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004,
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form
10-KSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results of operations of OCIS Corp.

By: /s/
   -----------------------------
Name: Kirk Blosch
Title:   Chief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the registrant and will be
retained by the registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
BELINDA HILL

FIRST ASSISTANT CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER

1201 FRANKLIN, SUITE 600

HOUSTON, TEXAS 77002

- 1901

DEVON ANDERSON

DISTRICT ATTORNEY

HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

November 2 , 2015

Christopher A. Prine, Clerk

F ourteenth Court of Appeals

301 Fannin Street

Houston, TX 77002

- 2066

RE: Ex parte Larry Flores

Court of Appeals Number s: 14

- 15

- 00619

- CR & 14

- 15

- 00620 -CR

T rial Court Case Number s: 1473497 & 1473498

D ear Mr. Prine:

This case is an appeal from the denial of relief on the appellant’s pre

- trial writ of

habeas corpus seeking a reduction in the amount of his bail. I write to apprise the

Court of a status change in the appellant’s trial date

.

The record in this case indicated that it was set for trial on September 1 6 , 2015. In

the State’s brief, I advised this Court that that date had been reset and the case was

set for trial on October 9 , 2015. On October 8, I wrote this Court to advise that the

trial had been rescheduled for October 23.

Somehow th at date was pushed off until October 26, at which point the appellant

requested that the trial judge recuse her self based on her connection , when she was

a prosecutor, to a charge that w as filed against him in the early 90s. The trial cou rt

has now granted that motion, and the case is in the process of being transferred to

another judge.

The State has been attempting to go to trial on this case since mid

- September.

Because a trial would render this appeal moot, I have attempted to keep this Court

of apprised of proceedings in the trial court. As of now, it is anyone’s guess when a

trial will occur, and I do not anticipate filing further updates on this matter. ACCEPTED

14-15-00619-CR

FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

11/2/2015 10:27:44 AM

CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERKSincerely,

/s/ C.A. Morgan

C LINTON A. M ORGAN

Assistant District Attorney

Harris County, Texas

m organ_ clinton@dao.hctx.net

713 .274. 5826

cc: Clint Davidson
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2467 

To prohibit the Secretary of Veterans Affairs from altering available health 

care and wait times for appointments for health care for certain veterans, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 12, 2014 

Mr. PRYOR introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To prohibit the Secretary of Veterans Affairs from altering 

available health care and wait times for appointments 

for health care for certain veterans, 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 ‘‘Continuing Care for 

5 Veterans Act of 2014’’. 


jbell on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2467 IS

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON ALTERING AVAILABLE HEALTH 

2 CARE AND WAIT TIMES FOR APPOINTMENTS 

3 FOR HEALTH CARE FOR CERTAIN VETERANS. 

4 The Secretary of Veterans Affairs may not alter the 

5 hospital care, medical services, or other health care avail6 able to a veteran who is enrolled in the patient enrollment 

7 system of the Department of Veterans Affairs under sec8 tion 1705 of title 38, United States Code, or the amount 

9 of time such veteran is required to wait for an appoint10 ment for such care or services based solely on the length 

11 of time since such veteran has last received such care or 

12 services from the Department. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS