alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Isaac Chandler *v.*Henry Chandler, etc.

Vendor and Purchaser — Small Deficit.

The deficit of one-half or three-quarters of an acre, in a tract of twenty-five acres, sold at $2.00 per acre is too small a matter to authorize a reversal as it might have resulted from the smallest mistake in the work, or of a variation in the instruments.

APPEAL FROM JOHNSON CIRCUIT COURT.

February 15, 1872.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Peters :

Isaac Chandler who stands on the record as appellant, having been adjudged as the record shows a bankrupt, has no direct interest in -the case, and his assignee has neither sought to be nor has he been made a party to this controversy. But if he had, as appellee was seeking to enforce a specific lien- on land which he 'had sold and for which appellant was indebted, and the judgment is merely for an enforcement of the lien, and it is not suggested that the assignee could have made any other de*20fense than that which was made by appellant, it does' not appear how either of them has been prejudiced by the judgment.

*Roe, for appellant-.*

*Brown, for appellees.*

The deficit of one-half or three-quarters of ah acre in a tract of 25 acres sold at $2 per acre is too small a matter to authorize an interference by this court as it might have resulted from the smallest mistake in the work, or of a variation in the instruments. Even regarding the case as properly before us by appeal, no error is perceived for which a reversal could be had. Wherefore the judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1

        Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
                 Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley act of 2001.

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Delek Resources, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Leonard Sternheim,
President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2001, that:

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

Dated: May 22, 2006

                                /s/ Leonard Sternheim
                                ----------------------------------
                                Leonard Sternheim,
                                President, Chief Executive Officer
#### Salwa Zinhoum Mohamed ELBASLLI, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-60064.

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Jan. 6, 2005.

Robert H. Etnyre, Jr., Royston, Rayzor, Vickery & Williams, Houston, TX, for Petitioner.

Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, Sergio Arturo O’Cadiz, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Hipólito Acosta, U.S. Immigration *&*Naturalization Service, Houston, TX, Caryl G. Thompson, U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service, New Orleans, LA, for Respondent.

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

*375PER CURIAM: *

Salwa Zinhoum Mohamed Elbashlli petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the immigration judge’s (IJ’s) decision to deny her application for asylum and withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) as well as the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Elbashlli argues that the BIA erred in determining that she had not established entitlement to asylum and withholding of removal under both the INA and the CAT.

This court will uphold the factual findings that an alien is not eligible for asylum or withholding of removal if those findings are supported by substantial evidence. *Chun v. INS,*40 F.3d 76, 78-79 (5th Cir. 1994). The substantial evidence standard requires that the decision be based on the evidence presented and that the decision be substantially reasonable. *Carbajal-Gonzalez v. INS,*78 F.3d 194, 197 (5th Cir.1996). The BIA’s decision is supported by substantial evidence, and the record does not compel a contrary conclusion as to either Elbashlli’s INA claims or her CAT claim. *See id.*Accordingly, Elbashlli’s petition for review is DENIED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. 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 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 569 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 569

    Concerning the extradition to the United States of Salvadorans.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 2, 1998

  Mr. Moran of Virginia submitted the following resolution; which was 
          referred to the Committee on International Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Concerning the extradition to the United States of Salvadorans.

Whereas 24 Salvadorans who have been accused of murder in the District of 
        Columbia have fled to El Salvador to avoid prosecution in the United 
        States;
Whereas these 24 individuals represent approximately two-thirds of the 
        outstanding homicide warrants in the District of Columbia;
Whereas other jurisdictions, such as Arlington, Virginia, seek Salvadorans who 
        have fled to El Salvador for serious crimes, including homicide;
Whereas since 1911, El Salvador has maintained a treaty with the United States 
        that provides for the extradition of suspects charged with certain 
        criminal offenses;
Whereas the United States-El Salvador extradition treaty does not compel the 
        extradition of either nation's citizens;
Whereas the United States has no constitutional prohibition against extraditing 
        its own citizens;
Whereas El Salvador's constitution prohibits the extradition of Salvadoran 
        citizens;
Whereas the El Salvadoran legislature, in April 1997, voted to amend its 
        constitution to allow extradition of its citizens;
Whereas the constitutional amendment permitting extradition of Salvadoran 
        nationals requires approval by two-thirds of El Salvador's unicameral 
        legislature in a second vote before it can be enacted; and
Whereas the vast majority of Salvadoran immigrants to the United States have 
        contributed much to the communities in which they live: Now, therefore, 
        be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives 
that--
            (1) the return to the United States of all individuals who 
        have fled the United States to avoid prosecution or confinement 
        for criminal offenses and who are currently living in El 
        Salvador should be a top priority for the United States 
        Government;
            (2) the legislature of El Salvador is to be commended for 
        its April 1997, passage of legislation which may lead to 
        enactment of a constitutional amendment permitting extradition 
        of Salvadoran nationals; and
            (3) the Government of El Salvador is urged to take all 
        steps necessary to ensure enactment of a constitutional 
        amendment permitting extradition of Salvadoran nationals during 
        its current legislative session.
                                 <all>
```
IN T.'HT UNITED S'~'ATI~S DI5'I'I21C;'I' COUI2'I' 

I'OR'I'NI NU~2'I"HT!,ItN UISTItiC7' QI+" ILLINOIS 

~AST~Rt~( E)tV.(StO1V 

YASMINE HICKS 

Ease No. 20 CV 4379 

1'lainCi~'f, 

v. Jt~tlg~Fla~ine ~. ~Gicklo 

CITY Q~` CHICt1.G0, a ~~a~~~~icipal ca~~~o~~atioz~, 

JQS~P~I SIMP~ON and nARRYL, BAF~'.i'Y, 

Defe~~dants. 

STIYULA'1'ION 1'U DISMISS 

I7' S H~TtEBY ST.IPUI.,A`I'~D AND AGR~~D by and bet~~een tl~e px~ties hereto, by their ~~espective 

attai~neys of ~'CCOl'a, that this matter leas been settled !~y the parties anti, fliet~efo~•e, this cause should tie 

disco issed without }prejudice, ~uifl~ the court l~avin~ the ai~ility to retain jw~'tsdiciio~t to adjudicate any filed lien 

sl~auld is so choose, to be autoinaticalty con~~e~•ted to clistnissal wikh ~»~ejudice 75 days fraan entry of the 

Court's order, unless ~ party has moved to extend this date prior to the expiratioa~ of the 75 clays. Each side 

shall bear• its aw~a cos#s and attc~cncys' fees. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04379 Document #: 21 Filed: 10/09/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:95
Itespectfally submitted, 

f~ —"" 

Zft►

~ o

itt~ 

—,.._ _ —. ... 

~tk~r~ie~ for plaintiff, Yasia~iri~ I-licks 

7a~~e D. Smith &Associates, :Ltd 

111 W. VJasl~ir~~;ton, Ste. 17Sd 

Cluaago, I.I., 60602 

Phone: (312) 2~ -00 1. /// 

Aft~r~tey No. _ ~ ~ ~/ _. "7 

DATE: ~~~~C'~....... 

~~E~ 

oa•is Sac~~ovalov ..—_ -. 

Attorney fa~~ plaitrtiff, Y`asrnir~e Hacks 

lane D. Smith & tlssociates, Ltd 

11.1 W. Wasllingtoa~, Ste. 1750 

Chicago, TL 64(02 

Phone: (3129215-003.1. 

Aitoi•ney No. ~~~f .~~' '~ ....~ 

:CITY OIL CHfCAGO 

n M~rnici~al Corporation 

MARK A. T' ~SSNEIt. 

Comp r tiot~ otu 

Atto~ f a• 

13Y: 

Victor er on, ]e qty orporati~n. C unse) 

3Q North La al.Je Stye t, S it:c 900 

Chic~go,lllinois b0602 

(31:2) 744-4A y,~~tto'n Nn. G282SU8 

DATE: I E ~~' I I'~I~~ 

Nat] ~~ Siii~~e, E1 nt CoX~p~ration Counsel .tII. 

Atiorney for befenda~its, Joseph S mason and Darryl B~ety 

30 Noi•kl~ LaSalle Street, Suite 900 

Ch.ic~tgo, Illinois 60602 

(312) 744-4030 

Attorney No, b3167S3 

I~ATC: October 9, 2020 

Case: 1:20-cv-04379 Document #: 21 Filed: 10/09/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:96
**EXHIBIT 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, David S. Kay, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Capital AutomotiveREIT; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantwe have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared; b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand 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’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’sboard of trustees (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses inthe design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.       Date: November 5, 2004 BY: /s/ David S. Kay           David S. Kay      Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
IV

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 6

Providing for the designation of certain minority employees.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 7, 1997

Mr. GEPHARDT submitted the following resolution; which was considered and

agreed to

RESOLUTION

Providing for the designation of certain minority employees.

1 Resolved, That pursuant to the Legislative Pay Act

2 of 1929, as amended, the six minority employees author3 ized therein shall be the following named persons, effective

4 January 3, 1997, until otherwise ordered by the House,

5 to wit: Steve Elmendorf, George Kundanis, Marti Thomas,

6 Sharon Daniels, Dan Turton, and Laura Nichols, each to

7 receive gross compensation pursuant to the provisions of

8 House Resolution 119, Ninety-fifth Congress, as enacted

9 into permanent law by section 115 of Public Law 95–94.

10 In addition, the Minority Leader may appoint and set the
2

HRES 6 ATH

1 annual rate of pay for up to three further minority em2 ployees.

Æ
**Exhibit 10.141**

 

 

 

Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group, Inc.

Director Compensation

Effective 2007 Until Modified

 

Directors who are not officers or employees of Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group, Inc. (“DTAG”) will be paid an annual retainer of $35,000 payable in shares of DTAG stock. Committee chairmen will also be paid an additional retainer in shares of DTAG stock, with the Governance Committee chairman receiving $5,000, and the Human Resources and Compensation Committee chairman receiving $7,500. An attendance fee of $1,000 payable in DTAG stock or cash will be paid for each meeting of the Board of Directors and Committee meeting.  In addition, the Chairman of the Board of Directors is paid an additional $150,000 annually.  For the calendar year 2007 only, the Chairman of the Board of Directors will be paid additional, non-recurring compensation of $50,000 for extraordinary services.

 

All Audit Committee members receive $18,000 annually instead of meeting attendance fees, in each case payable in either cash or DTAG stock.  In addition to the $18,000 annual fee, the Audit Committee chairman will also receive a $10,000 retainer annually in shares of DTAG stock.

 

Each calendar year, non-employee directors will be provided a grant of 2,930 shares of DTAG restricted stock.

 

The non-employee directors will also receive the use of two vehicles while serving as a director, together with routine maintenance, tags, and insurance coverage.

 

Rental cars will be provided to directors without charge for product and service evaluation.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONFURNISHED PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

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

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Pliant Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2005, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, JosephJ. Kwederis, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

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

 

(2)           The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company for and as of the end of the periodscovered by this Report.

 
| /s/  Joseph J. Kwederis  |   |
|--------------------------|--------|
| Joseph  J. Kwederis      |
| Chief  Financial Officer |
| November 21,  2005  |

 

----
#### R. P. Hollowell *v.*J. & W. Hodges.

Bills and Notes — Notice by Surety to Sue — Waiver—Estoppel.

In this case the surety offered to give the payee a written notice to sue the principal but be waived it saying that he did not require it and accepted a verbal notice as sufficient. This amounted to an *495express waiver of his statutory right to require the notice to be in writing, and he is thereby estopped from claiming that the notice there given was not legal and sufficient.

APPEAL FROM LYON CIRCUIT COURT.

January 12, 1871.

*Hewlett, for appellant.*

Wake, *for appellee.*

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

The defense relied upon by the appellant by his answer in this case falls very far short of that set up by Hamblin in the case of *Hamblin v. McCallister,*4 Bush 418. In that case the surety offered to give the payee of the note a written notice to sue, but he expressly waived it, saying that he did not require it. That he waived a written and accepted the verbal notice as sufficient. This amounted to an express and unmistákable waiver of his statutory right to require the notice to be in writing, and as the law then stood he was estopped from claiming that the notice there given was not legal and sufficient. The answer in this case sets up no such express waiver — nothing seems to have been waived relative to either a written or verbal notice, and to imply a waiver upon the part of the appellee of his statutory right from his mere assurance that he would sue at once, would be in effect to abrogate the statute. The court properly sustained the demurrer to the appellant’s answer.

Judgment affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(B) OR RULE 15D-14(B)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Annual Report of El Pollo Loco,
Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 29, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joseph Stein, Vice President of Finance, Chief Financial Officer
and Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 3. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 4. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                
|----------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/    JOSEPH STEIN                                             
|Joseph Stein                                                    
|Vice President of Finance, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|El Pollo Loco, Inc.                                             
|March 28, 2005                                                  



This certification is made solely for
the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and not for any other purpose. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to El Pollo Loco, Inc. and will be retained by El Pollo Loco, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Dicey Whitesides *v.*James Brien's Executor, etc.

Judgments — Modification—Vacation—Jurisdiction.

Unless one or more of the grounds embraced in Sections 579-373 of the Civil Code of Practice are set forth in the petition to vacate the judgment the court has no jurisdiction of the case.

Trusts — Beneficial Interests Not Subject to Execution.

Where land is held in trust for another their beneficial interests are not subject to execution, and the trustee can not sell under execution to pay his own debt.

APPEAL PROM MARSHALL CIRCUIT COURT.

March 19, 1872.

Opinion by

Judge Peters :

The cause set forth in the petition to vacate the judgment of the 11th of June, 1868, is not embraced in *Sections*579 nor 373 of the *Code of Practice.*And unless one or more of the grounds therein enumerated existed for modifying, or vacating the judgment, the court below had no jurisdiction of the case.

But we do not perceive how appellants were prejudiced by the judgment. They certainly had no legal title to the land, either in fee, for life, or for a term of years, if the same was held under the wills of Whitesides and McCracken, as appears to be the case from the record before us. The" legal title passed by the will of Whitesides to McCracken — and by his will Brien *12was constituted trustee to hold the legal title for appellants. And under *Sec.*1, *Art.*13, *Chap.*36, 1 *Vol. R. S., p.*482, their beneficial interest in the land was not subject to sale under execution. Especially could not the trustee sell under an execution to pay his own debt.

/. *B. Husband, Scott, for appellant.*

*Gilbert, for appellee.*

Let the judgment be affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 3 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                       January 7, 1997.
    Resolved, That a committee of two Members be appointed by the Speaker on the 
part of the House of Representatives to join with a committee on the part of the 
Senate to notify the President of the United States that a quorum of each house 
has assembled and Congress is ready to receive any communication that he may be 
pleased to make.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 385 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                        March 26, 1998.
    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to 
consider the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 1757) to consolidate 
international affairs agencies, to authorize appropriations for the Department 
of State and related agencies for fiscal years 1998 and 1999, and to ensure that 
the enlargement of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) proceeds in a 
manner consistent with United States interests, to strengthen relations between 
the United States and Russia, to preserve the prerogatives of the Congress with 
respect to certain arms control agreements, 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.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```