alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
`[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 278 Reported in House (RH)]






                                                 House Calendar No. 117
105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 278

                          [Report No. 105-343]

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the 
 bill (H.R. 1119) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1998 for 
    military activities of the Department of Defense, for military 
 construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, 
  to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year for the Armed 
                    Forces, and for other purposes.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 23, 1997

   Mr. Solomon, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 
resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the 
 bill (H.R. 1119) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1998 for 
    military activities of the Department of Defense, for military 
 construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, 
  to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year for the Armed 
                    Forces, and for other purposes.

    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order to consider the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 
1119) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1998 for military 
activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and 
for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe 
personnel strengths for such fiscal year for the Armed Forces, and for 
other purposes. All points of order against the conference report and 
against its consideration are waived. The conference report shall be 
considered as read.
                                     





                                                 House Calendar No. 117

105th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                              H. RES. 278

                          [Report No. 105-343]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the 
 bill (H.R. 1119) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1998 for 
    military activities of the Department of Defense, for military 
 construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, 
  to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year for the Armed 
                    Forces, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            October 23, 1997

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed`
#### The Commonwealth of Ky., for the use of R. D. Kemper, *v.*W. H. Moore, Jr., etc.

Action on Writing — Petition Must Set Forth Writing.

The petition on its face shall contain a statement of the facts ■constituting a cause of action and the writing, which is the foundation of the action, is required to be filed with the petition, but that does not obviate the necessity of setting forth in the petition so much of the writing as will show by reason of the alleged acts, or omission on the part of the defendant, that the plaintiff is entitled to relief.

APPEAL PROM OWEN CIRCUIT COURT.

September 9, 1872.

Opinion by

Judge Peters :

Tested by the law of pleading as ruled by this court the petition in this case is clearly defective in failing to state either in terms or in substance the writings or bond for a breach of which the action was brought.

It is not sufficient to state that at a particular election appellee was elected marshal of Owenton and on a named day executed a covenant, or bond, in the Owen County Court as required by law, which bond is referred to and filed as a part of the petition, and that afterwards an order for an attachment was placed in his hands in the suit of Davis against Schwartz and that he levied said attachment on the goods or property of appellant of a certain value and that by reason of said levy and the taking said goods they were wasted, destroyed and lost to appellant.

The rule as prescribed by the code of practice required that the petition on its face shall contain a statement of the facts *741constituting a cause of action. And although in another section of the code the writing, which is the foundation of the action, is required to be filed with the petition. But that does not obviate the necessity of setting forth in the petition so much of the writing as will show by reason of the alleged acts or omissions on the part of the defendant that the plaintiff is entitled to relief.

*Lillard, for appellant.*

*Drane, for appellees.*

Hill, for the use of *Wintersmith v. Barrett, etc.,*14 B. M. 67; 6 Bush 533; *Murphy v. Estes.*

It results from the foregoing principles and authorities that the petition was insufficient and the demurrer was properly sustained and the judgment must be affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

DANIEL PENA, )

) Case No. 20 CV 03352

Plaintiff, ) 

v. ) Judge Sara L. Ellis

)

CHICAGO POLICE OFFICER WILFREDO )

ORTIZ, STAR #9748; CHICAGO POLICE )

OFFICER MARIBEL ROSARIO, STAR #13512; )

CHICAGO POLICE OFFICER RUPERT )

COLLINS, STAR #4430; UNKNOWN CHICAGO )

POLICE OFFICERS and CITY OF CHICAGO, )

a municipal corporation, )

Defendants. )

AGREED ORDER OF DISMISSAL

This matter coming before the Court on the Stipulation of the parties, the parties having reached 

agreement to settle this matter, and the respective parties being represented by counsel, Plaintiff, Daniel 

Pena, by one of his attorneys, Jeffrey J. Neslund; and Defendants Wilfredo Ortiz, Maribel Rosario, Rupert 

Collins, by their attorney, Larry S. Kowalczyk, Special Assistant Corporation Counsel; and Defendant, City 

of Chicago, by its attorney, Celia Meza, Corporation Counsel of the City of Chicago, and the parties have 

entered into a Release and Settlement Agreement and Stipulation to Dismiss, the Court being otherwise 

fully advised in the premises, orders as follows:

All of the claims of plaintiff, Daniel Pena, against Defendants, City of Chicago, Wilfredo Ortiz, 

Maribel Rosario and Rupert Collins, are hereby dismissed without prejudice, to be automatically converted 

to dismissal with prejudice 75 days from the entry of this order, unless a party has moved to extend this 

date prior to the expiration of the 75 days. Each side shall bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees.

Larry S. Kowalczyk 

Special Assistant Corporation Counsel

Querrey & Harrow, Ltd. 

120 N. LaSalle, Ste. 2600 

Chicago, Illinois 60602

(312) 540-7000

Attorney No. 6225367

Date:__________________

 

 ENTER:_____________________________

 The Honorable Sara L. Ellis 

 United States District Judge

 DATED:___September 21, 2022___________

Case: 1:20-cv-03352 Document #: 96 Filed: 09/21/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:592
DISMISS; and Opinion Filed July 5, 2016. 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 16

- 00493

- CV

MELANIE GRIMES , Appellant V. MYCHELE LORD , Appellee

On Appeal from the 330th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF

- 15

- 18118



### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Lang

- Miers, Evans, and Brown Opinion by Justice Lang

- Miers Before the Court is appellant’s June 28, 2016 voluntary motion to di smiss this appeal.
We grant appellant’s motion and dismiss this appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a).

160493F.P05 /Elizabeth Lang

- Miers/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE– 2

– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

MELANIE GRIMES, Appellant

No. 05

- 16

- 00493

- CV V.

MYCHELE LORD, Appellee On Appeal from the 330th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF

- 15

- 18118. Opinion delivered by Justice Lang

- Miers. Justices Evans and Brown particip ating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED

. Pursuant to the parties’ agreement, it is ORDERED that each party bear its own costs of this appeal.

Judgment entered this 5th day of July, 2016.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"Habitation With Gateway","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"xhWWa8Hs4e\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/stem-content\/habitation-with-gateway\/\">Habitation With Gateway<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/stem-content\/habitation-with-gateway\/embed\/#?secret=xhWWa8Hs4e\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Habitation With Gateway” — NASA\" data-secret=\"xhWWa8Hs4e\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/gateway-orion-earth.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":338}
IV

House Calendar No. 65

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 192

[Report No. 105–195]

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2003) to reform the budget

process and enforce the bipartisan balanced budget agreement of 1997.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 22, 1997

Mr. GOSS, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution;

which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2003) to reform

the budget process and enforce the bipartisan balanced

budget agreement of 1997.

1 Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution

2 it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R.

3 2003) to reform the budget process and enforce the bipar4 tisan balanced budget agreement of 1997. The bill shall

5 be considered as read for amendment. The previous ques6 tion shall be considered as ordered on the bill to final pas7 sage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of
2

HRES 192 RH

1 debate equally divided and controlled by Representative

2 Barton of Texas or his designee and a Member opposed

3 to the bill; and (2) one motion to recommit.

House Calendar No. 65

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 192

[Report No. 105–195]

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2003)

partisan balanced budget agreement of 1997.to reform the budget process and enforce the biJULY 22, 1997

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
#### William French *v.*W. H. French's Heirs.

Ejectment — Notice to Quit — Proof of.

The petition alleges that possession had been frequently demanded and refused, and it appears that appellant disowned his tenancy and claims against the appellees before the institution of this suit. This hostile claim upon his part exonerated the appellees from the necessity of giving him notice.

•APPEAL FROM FRANKLIN CIRCUIT COURT.

September 8, 1871.

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

The verdict and judgment in this case are certainly not so palpably against the weight of the evidence as to authorize the interference of this court.

We do not perceive that the court erred to the prejudice of appellant in giving the instructions asked for by appellees.

The second instruction is, in our opinion, more favorable to appellant than it should have been. " The facts that appellant lived upon the land in controversy and received the rents and profits are given undue prominence of being selected out as strong evidence of ownership to be rebutted only by the further fact that during all that time he held the same under his son, and not adverse and hostile to the latter’s title.

The fifth instruction asked for by appellant was properly refused. It was not necessary to prove notice to quit.

The petition alleges that possession had been frequently demanded and refused, and it clearly appears that appellant disowned his tenancy, and claimed 'against the appellees before the institution of this suit.

This hostile claim upon his part exonerated the appellees from the necessity of giving him such notice. The Revised *667Statutes, in our opinion, do not change the old rule upon this subject. The appellant could not have been prejudiced by the admission as evidence the deed from Dudley to the ancestor of the appellees.

*James, for appellant.*

*Craddock, for appellee.*

Judgment affirmed.
**Exhibit 31.1****Certification**I, William V. Humphreys, President and Chief Executive Officer of Citizens Bancorp, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Citizens Bancorp; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter(the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.Date: August 10, 2007                                                                /s/ William V. Humphreys   William V. Humphreys   President and Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 344 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                      February 4, 1998.
    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule XXIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 2625) to redesignate Washington National Airport as ``Ronald Reagan 
Washington National Airport''. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed 
with. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour 
equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of 
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. After general debate the 
bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule for a period 
not to exceed two hours. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill 
for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the 
nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure now printed in the bill. The committee amendment in the nature of 
a substitute shall be considered as read. During consideration of the bill for 
amendment, the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may accord priority in 
recognition on the basis of whether the Member offering an amendment has caused 
it to be printed in the portion of the Congressional Record designated for that 
purpose in clause 6 of rule XXIII. Amendments so printed shall be considered as 
read. The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may: (1) postpone until a time 
during further consideration in the Committee of the Whole a request for a 
recorded vote on any amendment; and (2) reduce to five minutes the minimum time 
for electronic voting on any postponed question that follows another electronic 
vote without intervening business, provided that the minimum time for electronic 
voting on the first in any series of questions shall be fifteen minutes. At the 
conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise 
and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted. 
Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted in 
the Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee amendment in the 
nature of a substitute. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on 
the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion 
except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

May 15, 2019

No. 04

- 19

- 00125

- CV

EX PARTE A.X.L. J R

. , a Child

From the 406th Judicial District Court

, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019FLK00214D4 Honorable Oscar J. Hale, Jr. , Judge Presiding

ORDER

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. Appellant is unable to afford payment of court costs; no costs of court are taxed in this appeal.

It is so ORDERED on May 15, 2019

.

_____________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez , Justice

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

court on this 15th day of May, 2019

.

_____________________________ Keith E. Hottle, Clerk of Court
9440.

#### Pitts *v.*The State.

Decided May 1, 1918.

Indictment for bigamy; from Douglas superior court—Judge Bartlett. November 17, 1917.

*W. A. James,*for plaintiff in error.

*J. B. Hutcheson, solicitor-general,*contra.

Broyles, P. J.

1. An indictment for bigamy, under the Penal Code, § 367 et seq., is barred by the lapse of four years from the date of the bigamous marriage, unless such offense or the offender is unknown, or unless such offender shall abscond from this State or so conceal himself that he can -not be arrested, in which event the time during which he has been absent from the State or concealed shall not be computed or. constitute any part of the aforesaid limitation. ■

2. It is marrying or going through the form of marriage which the law lias enjoined as requisite to the creation of the marital relation, by a person who has a husband or wife living, with knowledge of such fact, that- constitutes the offense of bigamy under our statute; and the offense is completed upon the second marriagé. Subsequent cohabitation is not a necessary element in the offense; nor will subsequent cohabitation render it a" continuing offense, so as to fix the time of cessation of the cohabitation as the point from which the statute of limitations will begin to run.

3. In answer to certified questions by this court, the Supreme Court made the rulings just stated. 147 *Ga.*801 (95 S. E. 706). Under those rulings and the facts of this case, the conviction of the accused was unauthorized, and the court erred in overruling his motion for a new trial-.

*Judgment reversed.*

*Bloodworth and Harwell,*JJ., *concur.*