alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Commonwealth *v.*Jas L. Bland.

Indictment and Information — Requisites and@ Sufficiency of Accusation: First, An indictment is sufficient if it can be understood' therefrom:

That it was found by a grand jury of a county or city impaneled in a court having authority to receive it.

Second, That the offense was committed within the jurisdiction1 of the court and at some time prior to the finding of the indictment.

Third, That the act or omission charged as the offense is stated with such a degree of certainty as to enable the court to pronounce judgment on conviction.

APPEAL FROM MASON 'CIRCUIT COURT.

June 4, 1872.

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

An indictment is sufficient if it can be understood therefrom1:

1st. That it was found by a grand jury of a county or city impaneled in a court having authority to receive it.1 * * *

2d. That the offense was committed within the jurisdiction of the court and at some time prior to the finding of the indictment.

3d. That the act or omission charged as the offense is stated with such a degree of certainty, as to enable the Court to pronounce judgment on conviction, according to the right of the case, Section 128, Criminal Code. Testing the indictment in this case by the rule thus prescribed by the Legislature it seems to us that it is sufficient.

*796
      *Attorney General, for appellant.*

*Phister, for appellee.*

It is direct and certain as to the offense charged. No one can mistake the statute under which it was found.

The charge that the defendant had been guilty of “carrying concealed a deadly weapon” was sufficient to apprise him' O' fthe nature of the accusation upon which he was to be tried, and a trial under the indictment would constitute a bar tO' any subsequent proceeding for the same offensé. No greater degree of certainty than, this is or ought to1 be required. *Commonwealth v. Perrigo,*3d Metcalfe 5.

The defendant can not be convicted unless the offense is proved as charged, i. e., that he carried the deadly weapon concealed upon or about his person. The defect complained of, if it be one, does not tend to prejudice the substantial rights of the defendant. Sec. 129, Criminal Code.

The demurrer should have been overruled. Judgment reversed and cause remanded for further proper proceedings.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1



                             NOVELLUS SYSTEMS, INC.

                                  CERTIFICATION

In connection with the periodic report of Novellus Systems, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 28, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Richard S. Hill, Chairman
of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63,
Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:

           (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
               or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods
               indicated.

Date: November 12, 2002               By: /s/ Richard S. Hill
                                          --------------------------------------
                                          Richard S. Hill
                                          Chairman of the Board of Directors and
                                          Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.2
                                  CERTIFICATION


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss.1350,  the undersigned  officer of ING USA Annuity and
Life Insurance  Company (the "Company")  hereby certifies that, to the officer's
knowledge,  the  Company's  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
June 30, 2004 (the  "Report")  fully complies with the  requirements  of Section
13(a) or 15(d), as applicable,  of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 and that
the  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all  material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


August 12, 2004                       By:/s/ Keith Gubbay
---------------                          ---------------------------------------
    (Date)                                   Keith Gubbay
                                             Director and President
10223.

#### Jones *v.*Word & Mauldin.

Decided April 19, 1919.

' Certiorari; from Fulton superior court—Judge Ellis. October 30, 1918.

Jones owed Word & Mauldin $226.18, the amount of an open account for merchandise* running from February to July, 1917. On October 1, 1917, suit against Jones for a sum less than the amount due on the account was brought thereon in the municipal court of Atlanta in the name of Wood & Mauldin by their attorney at law, and garnishment was sued out; it being stated in the suit that it was for “balance due on account for merchandise and groceries, $126.18.” A few days later the defendant paid to the attorney who brought the suit the full amount sued for, with costs, as a settlement of the case, taking from the attorney a receipt which stated that the amount paid was in full settlement." On November 30, 1917, the plaintiffs brought suit against the defendant, in the same court, for the unpaid balance of $100 on the account. The defendant pleaded that the account sued on had been settled in full. The case was tried on an agreed statement of facts, in which it is stated that the former suit was brought by the attorney for the plaintiffs on instruction given over a telephone by Ward, one of the plaintiffs, who stated that the amount of the account was $226.18, but the attorney understood him to say $126.18, and accordingly brought suit for the latter amount, and did not know of the mistake until after the settlement with the plaintiff; that the settlement was unauthorized by the plaintiffs and has never been sanctioned or ratified by them; that the attorney had no authority to settle for less than the entire amount due, and that on learning of the ■'mistake he notified the defendant and demanded payment of the balance due. It is “ agreed, that the amount stated in this suit is correct and the balance of $100 sued for has never been paid by the defendant.” Judgment for this amount was rendered against the defendant, and he sued out certiorari, alleging that the judgment *647was contrary to law and without evidence to support it. The certiorari was overruled, and he excepted.

*646Luke, J.

It is well settled that an attorney at law can not without special authority receive anything in discharge of his clients claim but the full amount in cash. Civil Code (1910), § 4956. Upon the agreed statement of facts the trial court did not err' in rendering the judgment complained of; and it was, (therefore, not error for the judge of the • superior court to overrule the certiorari.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Wade, C. J., and Jenkins, J., concur.*

*647*Lawton Nalley,*for plaintiff in error, cited:

*Evans*v. Collier,79 *Ga.*319; *Johnson*v. Klassett,9 *Ga. App.*733; Civil Code (1910), § 4389; *Thompson*v. *McDonald,*84 *Ga.*5; *Macon & Augusta R. Co.*v. *Garrard,*54 *Ga.*327.

*Virlyn B. Moore,*contra, cited:

Park’s Code, §§ 4956, 5795; *Patterson*y. *Childs,*9 *Ga. App.*646; *Bell*v. *Kwilecki,*11 *Ga. App.*9; *Kaiser*v. *Hancoch,*106 *Ga.*217; *A. C. L. Railroad Co.*v. *Blalock,*8 *Ga. App.*44 (4); *Johnson*v. *Klassett,*supra, distinguished.
##### 



EXHIBIT 15 November 1, 2004 CRT Properties, Inc.
225 NE Mizner Blvd Suite 200
Boca Raton, Florida 33432 We have made a review, in accordance with standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States), of the unaudited interim financial
information of CRT Properties, Inc. and subsidiaries, formerly Koger Equity,
Inc. and subsidiaries, for the periods ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, as
indicated in our report dated November 1, 2004; because we did not perform an
audit, we expressed no opinion on that information. We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, is
incorporated by reference in Registration Statement No. 33-55179 of CRT
Properties, Inc. on Form S-3, Registration Statement No. 33-54617 of CRT
Properties, Inc. on Form S-8, Registration Statement No. 33-54621 of CRT
Properties, Inc. on Form S-8, Registration Statement No. 333-20975 of CRT
Properties, Inc. on Form S-3, Registration Statement No. 333-23429 of CRT
Properties, Inc. on Form S-8, Registration Statement No. 333-37919 of CRT
Properties, Inc. on Form S-3, Registration Statement No. 333-33388 of CRT
Properties, Inc. on Form S-8 and Registration Statement No. 333-38712 of CRT
Properties, Inc. on Form S-8. We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under
the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration
Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act. DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
West Palm Beach, Florida
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA 

AUSTIN HUMPHRIES, 

Appellant, 

vs. 

THE STATE OF NEVADA, 

Respondent. 

No. 82688 

FILED 

AUG 1 2021 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

BROWN 

'OURT 

BY 

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL DEPUTY CLERK 

This is an appeal from an amended judgment of conviction. 

Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Michelle Leavitt, Judge. 

This court previously entered an order noting that this appeal 

may have been rendered moot and ordering appellant to either file and 

serve a motion or stipulation to dismiss this appeal, or points and 

authorities explaining why this appeal is not moot. The parties have now 

filed a stipulation to dismiss this appeal. The stipulation is approved and 

this appeal is dismissed. 

It is so ORDERED. 

Cadish 

, J. 

Pickering 

A ,J. (74=mm.mill", J. 

Herndon 

- Tut 77-S" 
cc: Hon. Michelle Leavitt, District Judge 

Clark County Public Defender 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Clark County District Attorney 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

OH 1947A alas' 15 2
----

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350,

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

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

|                               |                        |                                |
|------------------------------------|-----------------------------|-------------------------------------|
|                               | STUDIO ONE MEDIA,      INC. |
|                          |                   |                           |
| Date:  May      12, 2008 | By:               | /s/       Preston J.      Shea |
|                               | Preston J.      Shea        |
|                               | President                   |

|                               |                                                      |                                    |
|------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
|                               | STUDIO ONE MEDIA,      INC.                               |
|                          |                                                 |                               |
| Date:  May      12, 2008 | By:                                             | /s/       Kenneth R.      Pinckard |
|                               | Kenneth R.      Pinckard                                  |
|                               | Chief Financial Officer and      Chief Accounting Officer |

----
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

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

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

# **SECTION 302 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

 

# **I, Brian W. Bethers, certify that:**

# ** **

1.               I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Qof 1-800 CONTACTS, INC.;

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain anyuntrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;

 

3.               Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations, and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.               Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a)              Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b)             Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

c)              Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

5.               Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

a)              All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize, and reportfinancial information; and

 

b)             Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Dated:  August 16, 2005 | /s/ Brian W. Bethers                   |   |
|------------------------------|----------------------------------------|--------|
|                         | President and Chief  Financial Officer |

 

----
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                            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 Innovative Solutions and Support,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), each of the undersigned officers of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 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 result of operations of the
      Company.

   /s/    GEOFFREY S. M. HEDRICK
--------------------------------------------------
          GEOFFREY S. M. HEDRICK
 CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


February 7, 2005

      /s/    JAMES J. REILLY
-------------------------------------------
              JAMES J. REILLY
          CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

February 7, 2005
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r Marilyn Kell y Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman,

J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk December 11, 2008 

# Order

December 11, 2008

136880(8)

IN THE MATTER OF:

Honorable WILLIAM C. HULTGREN Judge, 19 th 

## District Court.

BEFORE THE ENTIRE BENCH

___________________ ________________

On order of the Court, the motion by the Judicial Tenure Commission for leave to file a supplemental pleading is considered and it is GRANTED.
**EXHIBIT 31.2****CERTIFICATION**I, R. Michael Andrews, Jr., certify that:     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Buffets Holdings, Inc.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or 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 informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;     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 disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;     (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and     (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):     (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.     /s/ R. Michael Andrews, Jr.     R. Michael Andrews, Jr.
Order entered February 20 , 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 19 - 00006 - CV IN RE IC, JAMES DONDERO, Relator Original Proceeding from the 256th Judicial District C ourt

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF - 11 - 16417



### O RDER Before Justices Brown, Schenck, and Reichek Before the Court is relator’s January 3, 2019 petition for writ of mandamus. This original proceeding is one of multiple proceedings filed in r elation to the underlying suit affecting the parent - child relationship (“SAPCR”) and pending in this Court . See 05 - 18 - 00629 - CV, 05 - 18 - 01125 - CV, and 05 - 18 - 01368 - CV. In each of these proceedings, relator complains, at least in part, of orders enforcing a f ee provision in the parties’ divorce decree. On the Court’s own motion, we conclude th is proceeding should be consolidated into cause number 05 - 18 - 00629 - CV. Accordingly, we ORDER cause number 05 - 19 - 00006 - CV CONSOLIDATED into cause number 05 - 1 8 - 0 0629 - CV. We DIRECT the Clerk of Court to remove all docum ents from cause number 05 - 1 9 - 00006 - CV and refile them in cause number 05 - 1 8 - 0 0629 - CV and to treatcause number 05 - 1 9 - 00006 - CV as a closed case. We ORDER that all future pleadings be filed

in and bear only cause number 05 - 1 8 - 0 0629 - CV. The Court will issue a briefing schedule in cause number 05 - 18 - 00629 - CV in due course. /s/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE