alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Hedges *v.*Gray.

The action of covenant will lie on a writing obligatory for the payment of a certain sum in land-office money.

APPEAL from the *Owen*Circuit Court.

Holman, J.

Covenant by *Gray*against *Hedges*on a writing under seal for the payment of 67 dollars in land-office money. Demurrer to the declaration, and judgment for the plaintiff below.

The only point made in this case, is, that covenant will not lie on this writing; it being suggested that it is for the payment of a certain sum of money. If this suggestion were correct, it would not conclusively follow that covenant would not lie. See Selw. N. P. *384, 462.*— Carpenter v. Alexander, 9 Johns. R. 291. But this agreement is not for the payment of a certain sum of money. Land-office money comprises bills on a number of banks in various sections of the union; and the bills of those banks are not all of the same value. Even the bills on the same bank are liable to rise or fall in value by a change of time or place. Add to this, that land-office money is different at the several land-offices in our state; and is moreover subject to be changed at the pleasure of the secretary of the treasury of the *United States.*And it will be plainly seen that the precise value of land-office money, at any particular time, cannot be obtained with absolute certainty, by mere calculation.- It is a question of fact, which should be regularly found by a jury. Covenant was therefore the proper action (1).

*217*Naylor,*for the appellant.

*Dewey,*for the appellee.

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is affirmed, with 5 *per cent,*damages and costs.

(1)

 Vide *Duerson*v. *Bellows; Wilson*v. *Hickson;*and *Osborne*v. *Fulton;*decided at this term; and *Harper*v. *Levy, May*term, 1824; post.
#### Louisa Snapp et al *v.*James H. Johnson.

Personal Judgment — Infants—Guardian Ad Litem — Non-residents.

A personal judgment against infants, without the appointment of a guardian ad litem, is void, and so against non-residents. It is also necessary to allege that an estate had descended or been devised to the infants.

APPEAL FROM BULLITT CIRCUIT COURT.

January 20, 1869.

*R. H. Field, for appellants.*

*A. H.*Field, *for appellee.*

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Peters:

A personal judgment was rendered against infant heirs without the appointment of a guardian *ad litem,*and also against nonresident defendants, and this, too, without any allegations that an estate had descended to them, or that any had been devised to them by their ancestor. Which must be fatal to the judgment. It is a joint judgment, and being erroneous it cannot be sustained as to any of the parties thereto.

Wherefore, the judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded with directions for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
EXHIBIT 32(b)

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

187 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 United Rentals, Inc. and United Rentals (North America),
Inc. (the Companies) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Martin E. Welch III, Chief Financial Officer of the Companies, 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:



|1. | the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78m); and
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



/s/    MARTIN E. WELCH IIIMartin E. Welch III Chief Financial
Officer


August 7, 2006

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 required by Section 906, has been provided to the Companies and will be retained by the Companies and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4797 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4797

  To amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to require that a 
   State having an approved coastal zone management program must be 
  provided a copy of an environmental impact statement to enable its 
review under that Act of any plan for exploration or development of, or 
      production from, any area in the coastal zone of the State.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 10, 1998

   Mr. Goss introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                         Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to require that a 
   State having an approved coastal zone management program must be 
  provided a copy of an environmental impact statement to enable its 
review under that Act of any plan for exploration or development of, or 
      production from, any area in the coastal zone of the State.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``OCS Environmental Consistency Act of 
1998''.

SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT THAT STATE HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT TO 
              REVIEW PLAN FOR EXPLORATION, DEVELOPMENT, OR PRODUCTION 
              IN THE COASTAL ZONE OF THE STATE.

    Section 307(c)(3) of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 
U.S.C. 1456(c)(3)(B)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(C) For purposes of subparagraph (B), a State shall not be 
considered to have received all necessary data and information with 
respect to a plan for exploration, development, or production, before 
the date the State has received a copy of an environmental impact 
statement under section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy 
Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)) that applies to that exploration, 
development, or production.''.
                                 <all>
```
Case 2:15-mj-01809-JFM Document 3 Filed 11/04/15 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01809-JFM Document 3 Filed 11/04/15 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01809-JFM Document 3 Filed 11/04/15 Page 3 of 3
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 6 D0 33 3

. E S T A T E O F M IL D R E D D A V IS , M U R IE L M O NTI A, EXECUTOR

v . D EUTSCHE BANK NATI ONAL TRUST COMPANY, A S TRUSTEE FOR LONG BEACH MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2 0 05 -W L3 et a l

.

M u ri al M o n t ia fi l ed s u i t ag ai n s t Deu ts ch e Ban k Nat i o n al Tru s t Co m p an y as
t ru s t ee fo r Lo n g Beach M o rt g ag e Lo an T r u s t 2 00 5 W L 3 an d Sel ect Po rt fo l io
Serv i ci n g , In c., et al

. al l eg i n g a q u i et t i t l e cl ai m a n d s eek i n g t h e ap p o i n tm en t o f a

s p eci al m as t er. A ft er th e t ri al co u rt d i s m is sed t h e co m p l ai n t , M o nt ia fi l ed a n
ap p li cat io n fo r d i s cret i o n ary ap p eal i n t h i s Co u rt

. Th e Su prem e Co u rt , h o wev er, h a s o ri g i nal ap p el l at e ju ri s d i ct i o n o v er cas es i n v o l v i n g t i t l e t o l an d

. See Ga. Co n s t

. o f 1 98 3
, Art

. VI, Sec. VI, Par. III (1 ). Becau s e
t h i s ap p eal i n vo l v es t it l e to lan d
, ju ri sd i ct i o n ap p ears t o l i e in t h e Su p rem e Co u rt

. See
Th a r p v. Ha r p a g o n Co
., 2 7 8 Ga. 6 5 4, 65 5 (1 ) (6 0 4 SE2 d 1 5 6 ) (2 0 0 4 ). Acco rd i n g l y , t h i s ap p l i cat i o n i s h ereb y TRANSFERRED t o t h e Su p rem e Co urt fo r d i s po s i t i o n

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e is a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d th e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t
h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 04/19/2016 April 19, 2016
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Jahmmal Terrel Brumfield,

Petitioner,

v. 

Charles L. Ryan, et al.,

Respondents.

No. CV-15-01891-PHX-JJT

ORDER

At issue is the Report and Recommendation (R&R) (Doc. 14) entered by United 

States Magistrate Judge Eileen S. Willett in this matter recommending that the Court 

deny and dismiss the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 as 

procedurally defaulted. Petitioner filed no objection to the R&R and the time to do so has 

now passed. As the R&R warned, Petitioner’s failure to object results in the Court 

accepting the R&R without further review, and issuing an order of judgment pursuant to 

those recommendations. United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 

2003). 

Even were the Court to conduct further review, the R&R correctly concluded that 

Petitioner admittedly never raised any of the grounds in his Petition to the state court for 

post-conviction review and they are therefore not exhausted, and now are procedurally 

defaulted. The Court therefore must deny and dismiss the Petition.

IT IS ORDERED denying and dismissing the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

Case 2:15-cv-01891-JJT Document 16 Filed 11/01/16 Page 1 of 2
- 2 -

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying a certificate of appealability and leave to 

proceed in forma pauperis on appeal in this matter because dismissal of the Petition is 

justified by a plain procedural bar and reasonable jurists would not find the ruling 

debatable. The Clerk of Court shall close this matter.

Dated this 31st day of October, 2016.

Honorable John J. Tuchi

United States District Judge

Case 2:15-cv-01891-JJT Document 16 Filed 11/01/16 Page 2 of 2
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Enrique Sandoval Rodriguez, 

Defendant. 

No. CR-15-01501-21-PHX-SRB 

ORDER OF DETENTION 

 

A detention hearing and a preliminary revocation hearing on the Petition on 

Supervised Release were held on February 5, 2018. 

The Court Finds that the Defendant has knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily 

waived his right to a detention hearing and a preliminary revocation hearing and has 

consented to the issue of detention being made based upon the allegations in the Petition. 

 The Court Further Finds that the Defendant has failed to sustain his burden of 

proof by clear and convincing evidence pursuant to Rule 32.1(a)(6), FED.R.CRIM.P., 

that he is not a serious flight risk. United States v. Loya, 23 F.3d 1529 (9th Cir. 1994). 

IT IS ORDERED that the Defendant shall be detained pending further order of the 

court. 

 Dated this 6th day of February, 2018. 

Honorable John Z. Boyle 

United States Magistrate Judge
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Kathleen Grant, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Life Insurance Company of North America, 

et al., 

Defendants. 

NO. CV-15-02665-PHX-ROS

JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL IN A 

CIVIL CASE 

 Decision by Court. This action came for consideration before the Court. The 

issues have been considered and a decision has been rendered. 

 IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that, pursuant to the Court’s Order filed 

May 5, 2016, judgment of dismissal is entered. Plaintiff to take nothing, and the 

complaint and action are dismissed without prejudice.

 Brian D. Karth

 District Court Executive/Clerk of Court

May 16, 2016 

s/ Leann Dixon

 By Deputy Clerk

Case 2:15-cv-02665-ROS Document 18 Filed 05/16/16 Page 1 of 1
Case 2:15-mj-01961-JFM Document 4 Filed 12/30/15 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01961-JFM Document 4 Filed 12/30/15 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01961-JFM Document 4 Filed 12/30/15 Page 3 of 3
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**64 TP 15-01231**  PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, DEJOSEPH, AND SCUDDER, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF DION JOHN, PETITIONER,

V ORDER

ANTHONY ANNUCCI, ACTING COMMISSIONER, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION, RESPONDENT.

WYOMING COUNTY-ATTICA LEGAL AID BUREAU, WARSAW (ADAM W. KOCH OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER.

ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (MARCUS J. MASTRACCO OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department by order of the Supreme Court, Wyoming County [Michael M. Mohun, A.J.], entered July 14, 2015) to review a determination of respondent. The determination found after a tier III hearing that petitioner had violated various inmate rules.
It is hereby ORDERED that the determination is unanimously confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed.

Entered: February 5, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
INDEPENDENT  AUDITORS'  CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of
Track  Data  Corporation  on  Form  S-3 (File No. 333-4780, effective July 11,
1996) and on Form S-8 (File No. 333-4532, effective May 2, 1996) of our report
dated  March  14,  1997, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Track
Data  Corporation  as  to the Financial Statements of Innodata Corporation for
the  years  ended  December  31,  1996,  1995  and  1994.



Margolin,  Winer  &  Evens  LLP
Garden  City,  New  York
March  14,  1997
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Jay Lance,

Plaintiff,

v.

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. and C. R. 

Bard, Inc., et al.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-17-03410-PHX-DGC

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for:

Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.

Date: October 26, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Attorney's signature

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed name and bar number

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6000

Telephone number

(404 322-6050

FAX number

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8471 Filed 10/30/17 Page 1 of 1
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

November 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

133334 Michael F. Cavanagh 

(74) Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 133334 

 COA: 261458 

Oakland CC: 04-197600-FH 

JAMES REDMOND,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court's September 21, 

2007 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously. 

l1119 

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. 

November 29, 2007 

 Clerk
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice 8930]

The Department of State has renewed the Charter of the Overseas Security Advisory Council. This federal advisory committee will continue to interact on overseas security matters of mutual interest between the U.S. Government and the American private sector. The Council's initiatives and security publications provide a unique contribution to protecting American private sector interests abroad. The Under Secretary for Management determined that renewal of the Charter is necessary and in the public interest.

                    The Council consists of representatives from three (3) U.S. Government agencies and thirty-one (31) American private sector companies                           ( print page 63462)                        and organizations. The Council follows the procedures prescribed by the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (Pub. Law 92-463). Meetings will be open to the public unless a determination is made in accordance with Section 10(d) of the FACA and 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4), that a meeting or a portion of the meeting should be closed to the public. Notice of each meeting will be provided in the                     **Federal Register**                     at least 15 days prior to the meeting.                

For more information contact Marsha Thurman, Overseas Security Advisory Council, Bureau of Diplomatic Security, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC 20522-2008, phone: 571-345-2214.

Dated: September 26, 2014.

Bill A. Miller,

Director of the Diplomatic, Security Service.

[FR Doc. 2014-25262 Filed 10-22-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-30-P
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 14

- 00305

- CR

Billie Knoll v. The State of Texas

On a ppeal from the County Court at Law No

. 4 of Nueces County , Texas

Trial Cause No. 13

- CR

- 3008

- 4

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cau se on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED . The Court orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED

. We further order this decision certified below for observance. July 23, 2015.
#### Lewis *v.*Oliver and Others.

A judgment-debtor and his replevin-surety are subject to a joint execution by statute; hence a scire facias, when necessary, may issue against them to have such an execution.

ERROR to the *Franklin*Circuit Court. — Scire facias to revive a judgment. In *September,*1819, the plaintiff obtained a judgment against *Oliver, Jacobs,*and *E. John,*for 1,500 dollars; and, in *December*following, *R. John*entered himself replevinsurety on the record. The scire facias averred these facts, and required the judgment-debtors and their replevin-surety to show cause why execution should not issue against them. Demurrer to the scire facias, and judgment for the defendants.

*Caswell,*for the plaintiff;

*Smith,*for the defendants^

Blackford, J.

This judgment must be reversed. By the statute of 1817, p. 44, under which this debt was replevied, a joint execution may issue within the proper time against the principal and surety. It follows that when, by the lapse of *time,*a presumption has been raised in favour of'the debtors, the scire facias which issues to defeat that presumption, cannot he objected to for praying that execution may issue against the same, parties that were liable before such presumption existed.

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is reversed with costs. Causé, remanded, with directions to permit the defendants to withdraw their demurrer, &c.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Alton Thomas Davis, 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

December 20, 2010 

s1213 

Order 

 

December 20, 2010 

141527 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 141527 

 COA: 289439 

St. Clair CC: 08-001484-FH 

JAMES FREDERICK SANFORD, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 29, 2010 

judgment 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. 

DAVIS, J., not participating. I recuse myself and am not participating because I 

was on the Court of Appeals panel in this case. See MCR 2.003(B).
EXHIBIT 32.1

                               eMagin Corporation
 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 eMagin  Corporation (the Company) on
Form  10-QSB/A for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Gary W. Jones, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss.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; and

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

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to eMagin  Corporation  and will be retained by eMagin  Corporation and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


Dated: November 2, 2005



                                   /s/ Gary W. Jones
                                   ----------------
                                   Name: Gary W. Jones
                                   Title: Chief Executive Officer