alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Jefferson Winn v. Hockley Bryant.

(No. 1318, Op. Book No. 2, p. 582.)

Appeal from Walker County.

Opinion by

Hurt, J.

§ 809. *Limitation; action on account.*The items in the account sued on run back to the 1st day of January, 1876. This suit was instituted on the 1st day of July, *4621S81. The defendant pleaded the statute of limitations to all items to which the right of action accrued prior to two. years; also objected to evidence of any such items. His plea and objections were overruled by the court. This was error. Under the statute of this state upon this subject, an *unbarred item*does not draw after it preceding *barred items*of an account, and take them out of the operation of the statute of limitations. The account in'this case does not concern the trade of merchandise between merchant and merchant, their factors and agents. [Lowe v. Dowbarn. 26 Tex. 507.]

March 11, 1882.

Reversed and remanded.
#### Elison MIRUTIL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D09-3068.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 16, 2011.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender and Howard K. Blumberg, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General and Jill D. Kramer, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

*146Before GERSTEN, SUAREZ, and CORTINAS, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *See Jenkins v. State,*824 So.2d 977, 980 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).
SCWC-12-0000266

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI # I
MARK C. KELLBERG, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellant,

vs. CHRISTOPHER J. YUEN, in his capacity as Planning Director, County of Hawai # i, and COUNTY OF HAWAI # I,

Petitioners/Defendants-Appellees.

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS (CAAP-12-0000266; CIV. NO. 07-1-0157)
ORDER ACCEPTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ., and Circuit Judge Garibaldi, in place of Wilson, J.,

recused, dissenting in part) Petitioners/Defendants-Appellees Christopher J. Yuen and County of Hawaii’s application for writ of certiorari filed on June 27, 2014, is hereby accepted and will be scheduled for oral argument. The parties will be notified by the appellate clerk regarding scheduling.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, August 13, 2014. Laureen L. Martin for petitioners Robert H. Thomas, Mark M. Murakami, and Christopher J.I. Leong for respondent /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-12-0000266 13-AUG-2014 04:12 PM
Exhibit 32.1

Securities and Exchange Commission

100 F. Street, N.E.

Washington, D.C. 20549

Re:  Certification pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350)

Ladies and Gentlemen:

In
connection with the Annual Report of Chesapeake Granite Wash Trust (the Trust) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Annual Report), the
undersigned, not in its individual capacity but solely as the trustee of the Trust, certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to its knowledge:

(1) The Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operation of the Trust.

The above certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350) and is not being filed as part of the Annual Report or as a separate disclosure document.



/S/ MICHAEL J. ULRICHMichael J. UlrichVice PresidentThe Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A.,as Trustee of Chesapeake Granite Wash Trust


March 30, 2012
#### EXXON CORPORATION v. TOWNSHIP OF OLD BRIDGE.

March 27, 1984.

Petition for certification denied. (See 192 *N.J.Super.*329)
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Trans Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John G. Corp, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:





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


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





/S/ John G. Corp


John G. Corp


Chief Executive Officer


June 16, 2011





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED June 22, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-50199 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ALFONSO RIVERA-GODINEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:04-CR-1254-1

-------------------- Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Alfonso RiveraGodinez raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that a prior conviction is a sentencing factor under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
583 A.2d 334

#### MARGARITA ROJAS v. STEWART JAMIESON.

March 7, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
Exhibit 99
                           Forward-Looking Information


<PAGE>


                                   EXHIBIT 99

     Forward-Looking  Information

     "Safe  Harbor" Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act
of  1995:  The  statements contained in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q which
are  not  historical  facts  contain forward looking information with respect to
plans,  projections  or  future  performance of Coastal, the occurrence of which
involve  certain  risks and uncertainties detailed in Coastal's filings with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  ("SEC").

     The Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of  Operations set forth in the Form 10-Q should be read in conjunction with the
information  contained  in  the  Consolidated Financial Statements and the Notes
thereto.  Such  discussion  contains  "forward-looking  statements"  within  the
meaning  of  the  Private  Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the "Reform
Act"),  and is subject to the safe harbor created by that Reform Act.  The words
"estimate," "project," "anticipate," "expect," "intend," "believe," "plans," and
similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Because
such  forward-looking  statements  involve  risks  and  uncertainties, there are
important  factors  that  could  cause  actual results to differ materially from
those  expressed  or implied by such forward-looking statements. Factors, all of
which  are  difficult  to  predict  and  many of which are beyond the control of
Coastal,  that  could cause actual results to differ materially include, but are
not  limited  to:  risks  related  to  Coastal's acquisition strategy, including
risks  of  adversely  changing  results  of  operations  and  factors  affecting
Coastal's  ability  to  consummate  further  acquisitions;  risks  involved  in
Coastal's  ability  to  quickly  and  efficiently  integrate  the  operations of
acquired  entities  with  those  of  Coastal;  changes  in  general economic and
business  conditions;  changes  in market rates of interest; changes in the laws
and  regulations  applicable  to  Coastal;  the risks associated with the Bank's
non-traditional  lending  (loans  other  than single-family residential mortgage
loans  such  as multifamily, real estate acquisition and development, commercial
real  estate,  commercial  business,  warehouse  and  mortgage  servicing rights
loans);  and  changes  in  business strategies and other factors as discussed in
Coastal's  Annual  Report  on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1998, as
filed  with  the  SEC  on  March  23,  1999.
583 A.2d 312

#### DATACOM SYSTEMS CORPORATION v. KENNETH A. KLEMM.

January 23, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 Certification by the Chief Executive Officer
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 on Form 10-Q for the period ended
August 9, 2004, of CKE Restaurants, Inc. (the Company) as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Andrew
F. Puzder, 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:  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
Section 78m(a) or Section 780(d)); and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company. In witness whereof, the undersigned has executed and delivered this
certificate as of the date set forth opposite his signature below. Date:
    
    September 13, 2004
    
    /s/ Andrew F. PuzderAndrew F. Puzder
Chief Executive Officer
070416-F-JZ503-686.JPG
            BRIGADIER GENERAL STEPHEN B. MACKStephen B. Mack was born in Flora, Ill., in 1909, a graduate of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. General Mack completed his initial flight training at Kelly Field, Texas in 1934. He flew more than 90 combat missions over Italy during World War II, piloting A-36, P-40, and P-47 aircraft. 
His combat service merited him the Air Medal with three oak leaf clusters, the Legion of Merit, the Distinguished Flying Cross and the French Croix de Guerre. 
In October 1949 he was assigned to Scott Air Force Base, Ill., as director of technical training, Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, Headquarters Air Training Command. Following a year's study at the National War College at Fort McNair, D.C., General Mack was named in July 1951, assistant deputy chief of staff for operations at Headquarters Alaskan Air Command at Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska. 
A year later he became deputy chief of staff for operations. In September of 1952 he was named commander of the 160th Aircraft Control and Warning Group at Ladd Air Force Base, Alaska. In February 1953, he became commander of the 548th AC&W Group at Ladd, a post he held until May of that year when he was reassigned to command a fighter bomber wing at Clovis Air Force Base, N.M.
In August of 1953 he was named chief of staff at Ninth Air Force headquarters, then at Pope Air Force Base, N.C. He held this post through Ninth's move to Shaw, until June 1955, when he was reassigned as commander of Shaw Air Force Base and the 363d Tactical Reconnaissance Wing. General Mack took command of Shaw's 637th Air Division in February 1958, until July of that year when he moved to Tactical Air Command headquarters at Langley Air Force Base, Va., as Inspector General. 
He returned to Shaw in July 1961 to serve as deputy commander for Ninth Air Force. 
(Current as of July 1962)
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2022-2072

_____________________________

RUSSELL NAKIA MASON,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County.

Coleman Lee Robinson, Judge.

January 3, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

OSTERHAUS, C.J., and B.L. THOMAS and WINOKUR, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Russell Nakia Mason, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
583 A.2d 328

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. DEBBIE FAISON.

February 26, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
News United States Air Force
 SAF/US(M) becomes SAF/MGPublished Dec. 4, 2015
                        
                        By Senior Airman Hailey Haux
                        
                        
                        Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs Command Information
                **WASHINGTON (AFNS) --**
                The Office of Business Transformation and Air Force Deputy Chief Management Officer function, Office of the Under Secretary of the Air Force SAF/US(M) was re-designated as the Deputy Under Secretary of the Air Force, Management (SAF/MG) effective Nov. 1.SAF/MG has overall responsibility for all Deputy Chief Management Officer and Office of Business Transformation functions and exercises other assigned duties from the under secretary of the Air Force and authorities relating to the management of business operations for the Department of the Air Force.“The formal establishment of the Deputy Under Secretary of the Air Force, Management as a two-letter organization reporting to the under secretary of the Air Force was needed to more accurately align the responsibilities and authorities already assigned to SAF/US(M) as the Office of Business Transformation and Air Force Deputy Chief Management Officer, and recognize the growing responsibilities and duties being assigned to the new SAF/MG,” said Marilyn Thomas, the deputy under secretary of the Air Force for management.The SAF/MG office reports to the under secretary of the Air Force and has responsibility developing and implementing Air Force business transformation initiatives. This includes, but is not limited to, ensuring accountability of Air Force defense business systems, facilitating continuous process improvement across the Air Force and certifying Air Force manpower standards were developed in accordance with process re-engineering initiatives. Additionally, SAF/MG chairs the Enterprise Senior Working Group, Enterprise Process Improvement Council and Headquarters Air Force Support Services Review Boards. All of these efforts contribute to improvements to the efficiency and effectiveness of the Air Force mission, core competencies and functional areas.management 



transformation 



FM 



SecAF
Exhibit 32.2

                            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 Trans  Energy,  Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period  ending March 31, 2004,  as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
William F.  Woodburn , Principal  Accounting  Officer of the  Company,  certify,
pursuant  to 18  U.S.C.  Sec.  1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to Sec.  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

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

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


/s/   WILLIAM F. WOODBURN
-----------------------------
William F. Woodburn
Principal Accounting Officer
May 21, 2004

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
         other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
         signature that appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of
         this  written  statement  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. The foregoing  certifications are
         accompanying  the Company's Form 10-QSB 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 the Form 10-QSB or as a separate disclosure document.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                            16,848
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                         181
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                  20,970
<CASH>                                              88
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                               5,765
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                           3,361
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 100,980
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                  4,939
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                  0
<POLICY-OTHER>                                  21,139
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                           69,362
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                    700
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,143
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   100,980
<PREMIUMS>                                       3,163
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                              1,536
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                   0
<OTHER-INCOME>                                       0
<BENEFITS>                                       2,671
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                        345
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                             1,118
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    480
<INCOME-TAX>                                       174
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                306
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       306
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.28
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0
        

</TABLE>
#### East Texas Fire Ins. Co. v. W. F. Brantley.

(No. 2074.)

Appeal from Rusk County.

Whittaker & Bonner, counsel for appellant.

W. O. Buford and G-. H. Gould, counsel for appellee.

Opinion by

Willson, J.

§ 64. *Petition on fire insurance policy must allege proof of loss; office of supplemental petition; original cannot be amended by supplemental petition.*This is a suit upon a fire insurance policy wherein the plaintiff’s original petition is defective because it does not allege and show that the proofs of loss required by the terms of the contract had been furnished appellant within a reasonable time. Exceptions to the petition because of this defect were sustained, and thereupon the plaintiff filed a supplemental petition in which the proofs of loss were sufficiently alleged, and under such allegation, the court, over the objections of the defendant, permitted the plaintiff to introduce evidence that such proofs had been furnished,. to which ruling of the court the plaintiff excepted. *Held:*The court erred in admitting such evidence. A defect in an original petition cannot be cured *89by an allegation in a supplemental petition. Such is not the office of a supplemental petition. [Crescent Ins. Co. v. Camp, 5 Tex. Law Review, p. 695.]

December 16, 1885.

Reversed and remanded.
EXHIBIT 99.14

                           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  Annual  Report of Sonic  Jet  Performance,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-KSB for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"). I, Madhava
Rao Mankal,  President, CEO, and CFO of the company, certify, pursuant to 18 USC
Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief.

        (1)     The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
                or 15(d) of the Securities 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 the Company.


                                         /s/ Madhava Rao Mankal
                                         --------------------------------
                                         Madhava Rao Mankal, President/CEO/CFO

Dated:  4/16/03
News United States Air Force
 BLUE: Air Force TV premiers new showPublished Oct. 21, 2014
                        
                        
                        Air Force News Service
                
                **FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, Md. (AFNS) --** Air Force TV here released its all-new premier broadcast show BLUE.
The 30-minute show replaces the former Today's Air Force. Blue will be released quarterly in order to provide a more exclusive and in-depth look into what is happening around the Air Force.**This episode includes:**The road to recovery is never-ending. Faced with a new normal, wounded warriors find out what it takes to push beyond their limits. BLUE met up with several Air Force veterans and followed them on their journey to the 2014 Warrior Games.Today's Air Force 



Air Force Broadcasting 



Air Force TV 



BLUE