alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Thomas Elder, etc., *v.*Daniel Procise.

Improvements — Good Faith — Value—Enhancement—Rent.

Appellee having made the improvements in good faith was entitled to he paid for them, just the amount the land was enhanced in value at the time the suit was brought, he being liable for rent beginning at the same time.

APPEAL PROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT.

February 29, 1872.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Peters :

There can be no question that Hiram Tucker took, under the will of his father, the fee in the land sued1 for subject to be defeated 'by his dying without issue, and upon the happening of that event the title to .the 132 acres of land vested in his surviving brothers and sister.

But appellee, the vendee of Hiram Tucker, paid the full value of the land, and doubtless put the improvements on it in good faith, believing at the time that the land was his, he had the deed of his vendor with a covenant of general warranty. And having made the improvements in good faith appellee was entitled to be paid for them, just the amount the land was enhanced in value at the time the .suit was brought, he being liable for rent beginning at the same time.

Appellants are to be charged with the value of the estate each received as 'heirs of Hiram Tucker, that value to be estimated at the time of his death, which is $4,400 in all, but in estimating the value of that inheritance the value of the dower right of the widow of decedent should be deducted. Certainly their inheritance from their brother of the 51 acres and odd poles of land was the worth of each one’s portion subject to the dower inter*45est of the widow of their 'brother therein — and they should not be charged more than the land they inherited was actually worth at the time — and its cash value to be ascertained by means of annuity tables, taking into consideration the age and health of the widow, and that should be deducted.

*Jas. Harrison, for appellants.*

*Barnett, for appellee.*

Appellants are not entitled to any allowance for the stable that was burned on the 132 acres of land — as it was not burned by any fault of appellee.

It does not appear from the report of the master that the improvements. put on the land1 were charged to appellant at their original cost, or whether he estimated them at the time he made his report — but neither aspect presents the case according to the rights of the parties. Appellee is only entitled to be allowed for the improvements made by him just the amount they enhanced, or added to the value of the land at the time the suit was brought.

Wherefore the judgment is *reversed*and the cause is remanded with directions that further proceedings be had not inconsistent herewith. And it maybe proper to add that.the judgment for the sale of appellant’s interests in the land is also reversed and the sale is set aside.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 192 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                         July 23, 1997.
    Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to 
consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2003) to reform the budget process and 
enforce the bipartisan balanced budget agreement of 1997. The bill shall be 
considered as read for amendment. The previous question shall be considered as 
ordered on the bill to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one 
hour of debate equally divided and controlled by Representative Barton of Texas 
or his designee and a Member opposed to the bill; and (2) one motion to 
recommit.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
**Exhibit32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Annual Report of River Rock Entertainment Authority (the “Authority”)on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Norman Runyan,acting Chief Executive Officer of the Authority, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

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

 
| By:                             | /s/  Norman Runyan |   |   |
|---------------------------------|--------------------|--------|--------|
| Norman  Runyan                  |               |
| Acting  Chief Executive Officer |               |
| March  30, 2006                 |               |

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to the River Rock Entertainment Authority and will be retained by theRiver Rock Entertainment Authority and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

----
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 6.3.3

Eastern Division

Deborah Laufer

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:20−cv−03527

Honorable Gary Feinerman

M.J.L.S.T., LLC

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Monday, November 23, 2020:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Gary Feinerman:The 11/4/2020 order [33]

gave the parties until 11/18/2020 to show cause why this case should not be transferred to

the Western Division. Neither party responded to the show cause order. The status hearing

set for 12/1/2020 [35] is stricken. Accordingly, this case is transferred to the Western

Division of this District. The Clerk shall effectuate the transfer forthwith. Civil case

transferred.Mailed notice.(jlj, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:20-cv-03527 Document #: 36 Filed: 11/23/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:119
Motion Granted, Appeal Dismissed, and Memorandum Opinion filed 

December 5, 2019.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-19-00668-CV

BURCKHARDT COMPRESSION NORTH AMERICA SERVICES LLC, 

BURCKHARDT COMPRESSION AG, AND BURCKHARDT 

COMPRESSION (US) INC., Appellants

V.

DANIEL B. CANNON AND ARKOS FIELD SERVICES, LP, Appellees

On Appeal from the 55th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2018-87696

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an interlocutory appeal from an order signed August 14, 2019, denying 

a motion to compel arbitration and stay trial court proceedings. On November 25, 

2019, appellants filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1. The 

motion is granted, and the appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Christopher and Bourliot.
* 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 October 5, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-40469 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JOSE LUIS ALVAREZ-ROSAS, also known as Jose Guadalupe Alvarez-Rosas, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:05-CR-948-ALL

-------------------- Before JONES, Chief Judge, and SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jose Luis Alvarez-Rosas raises arguments that are foreclosed by AlmendarezTorres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 214 (Wednesday, November 5, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 65703]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-26334]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium, 
Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on October 14, 2014, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Network Centric Operations 
Industry Consortium, Inc. (``NCOIC'') has filed written notifications 
simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade 
Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were 
filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the 
recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified 
circumstances. Specifically, Secutor US, LLC, Clifton, VA; TeraLogics, 
LLC, Ashburn, VA; Private Digital Network Services, LLC, Silver Spring, 
MD; and Paula Moss (individual member), Fort Wayne, IN, have been added 
as parties to this venture.
    In addition, Raytheon Company, Dallas, TX; and Australian 
Department of Defence Capability Development Group, Canberra, 
AUSTRALIA, have withdrawn as parties to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and NCOIC intends to file additional 
written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
    On November 19, 2004, NCOIC filed its original notification 
pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice 
published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of 
the Act on February 2, 2005 (70 FR 5486).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on April 30, 
2014. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
Section 6(b) of the Act on May 30, 2014 (79 FR 31142).

Patricia A. Brink,
Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 2014-26334 Filed 11-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

AJAY K. GOYAL, M.D., P.A. a/a/o GREGORY BOWEN,

Appellant,

v.

GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY,

Appellee.

No. 4D21-80

[June 30, 2021]

Appeal from the County Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, 

Martin County; Jennifer Waters, Judge; L.T. Case No. 19-403-SC, 19-16-

AP.

Michelle J. Kane of Kane Lawyers, PLLC, Delray Beach, for appellant.

Rebecca O'Dell Townsend, Andrew Steadman, and Scott W. Dutton of 

Dutton Law Group, PA, Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Alliance Spine & Joint, III, LLC a/a/o Audrey Belmonte v. 

GEICO Gen. Ins. Co., 4D21-134, 2021 WL 2010300, 46 Fla. L. Weekly 

D1149a (Fla. 4th DCA May 19, 2021).

KLINGENSMITH, KUNTZ, and ARTAU, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
IV

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 381

Expressing the sense of the Congress that the President should renegotiate

the extradition treaty with Mexico so that the possibility of capital

punishment will not interfere with the timely extradition of criminal

suspects from Mexico to the United States.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 5, 1998

Mr. MILLER of Florida (for himself, Mrs. THURMAN, Mr. TRAFICANT, Mr.

BLILEY, Mr. CANADY of Florida, Mr. SCHIFF, Mr. FROST, Mr. BURTON

of Indiana, Mr. CALVERT, Mr. SOLOMON, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN, Mr.

ENGLISH of Pennsylvania, Mrs. FOWLER, Mr. WELDON of Florida, Mr.

ROHRABACHER, Mr. BILIRAKIS, Mr. MICA, Mr. HASTINGS of Florida, Mr.

ROYCE, and Mrs. MYRICK) submitted the following resolution; which was

referred to the Committee on International Relations

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Congress that the President

should renegotiate the extradition treaty with Mexico

so that the possibility of capital punishment will not

interfere with the timely extradition of criminal suspects

from Mexico to the United States.

Whereas under the Extradition Treaty Between the United

States of America and the United Mexican States, Mexico refused to extradite murder suspect and U.S. citizen

Jose Luis Del Toro to the United States until the State

of Florida agreed not to exercise its right to seek capital

punishment in its criminal prosecution of him;
2

•HRES 381 IH

Whereas under the Extradition Treaty Mexico has refused to

extradite other suspects of capital crimes; and

Whereas the Extradition Treaty interferes with the justice

system of the United States and encourages criminals to

flee to Mexico: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that the President should renegotiate the Ex3 tradition Treaty Between the United States of America

4 and the United Mexican States, signed in Mexico City in

5 1978 (31 U.S.T. 5059), so that the possibility of capital

6 punishment will not interfere with the timely extradition

7 of criminal suspects from Mexico to the United States.

Æ
IV

House Calendar No. 190

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 436

[Report No. 105–536]

Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 432) expressing the

sense of the House of Representatives concerning the President’s assertions of executive privilege, and for consideration of the resolution (H.

Res. 433) calling upon the President of the United States to urge

full cooperation by his former political appointees and friends and their

associates with congressional investigations.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 14, 1998

Mr. SOLOMON, 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 resolution (H. Res. 432)

expressing the sense of the House of Representatives

concerning the President’s assertions of executive privilege, and for consideration of the resolution (H. Res.

433) calling upon the President of the United States

to urge full cooperation by his former political appointees

and friends and their associates with congressional investigations.
2

HRES 436 RH

1 Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution

2 it shall be in order to consider in the House the resolution

3 (H. Res. 432) expressing the sense of the House of Rep4 resentatives concerning the President’s assertions of exec5 utive privilege. The resolution shall be considered as read

6 for amendment. The resolution shall be debatable for one

7 hour equally divided and controlled by the Majority Leader

8 or his designee and a Member opposed to the resolution.

9 The previous question shall be considered as ordered on

10 the resolution to final adoption without intervening mo11 tion.

12 SEC. 2. After disposition of or postponement of fur13 ther proceedings on House Resolution 432, it shall be in

14 order to consider in the House the resolution (H. Res.

15 433) calling upon the President of the United States to

16 urge full cooperation by his former political appointees

17 and friends and their associates with congressional inves18 tigations. The resolution shall be considered as read for

19 amendment. The resolution shall be debatable for one hour

20 equally divided and controlled by the Majority Leader or

21 his designee and a Member opposed to the resolution. The

22 previous question shall be considered as ordered on the

23 resolution to final adoption without intervening motion.

House Calendar No. 190

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 436

[Report No. 105–536]

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the resolution (H.

investigations.friends and their associates with congressionaloperation by his former political appointees andPresident of the United States to urge full coof the resolution (H. Res. 433) calling upon thetions of executive privilege, and for considerationRepresentatives concerning the President’s asserRes. 432) expressing the sense of the House of

MAY 14, 1998

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
**EXHIBIT      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. §1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | 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/ Donna                Goral |
|----------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|
|                                         | Donna                  GoralChairman                      of the Board and President |
|                                         |                                                                                 |
|  Date: May                12, 2006 |                                                                                 |

----
Exhibit 31.2CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, COLOR KINETICS INCORPORATEDI, David K. Johnson, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Color KineticsIncorporated;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;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 of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer 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, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;   b) [omitted]   c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;and   d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):   a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and   b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.   December 30, 2005 /s/ David K. Johnson   Date David K. Johnson  Chief Financial Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

TIMOT}TY O'DONNELL

/r ILED rY

JUN r 0 2020

THOMAS q BHUTON

C[ERK U.S. DISTRICT COUffi

Case No: 20 CR 260

Violation: Title 18, United

States Code, Section 844(l)

JUBGE WOOD

MAGISTRATE JI,IDGE FUENTES

The SPECIAL JANUARY 2019 GRAND JURY charges:

On or about May 30, 202A, at Chicago, in the Northern District of Illinois,

Eastern Division, and elsewhere,

TIMOTHY O'DONNELL,

defendant herein, maliciously damaged and destroyed and attempted to damage and

destroy, by means of fire, a Chicago Police Department vehicle numbered" gll},used

in interstate commerce and in an activity affecting interstate commerce;

In violation of Tit1e 18, United States Code, Section 844G).

A TRUE BILL:

FOREPERSON

UMTED STATES ATTORNEY

Case: 1:20-cr-00260 Document #: 16 Filed: 06/10/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:63