alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

THOMAS G. BRENNAN, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. ) Civil Action 11-00418-CB-N

)

DAVID WISE, )

)

Respondent. )

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of the issues raised, and a de novo determination of 

those portions of the recommendation to which objection is made, the Report and 

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and dated 

August 28, 2014, is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Petitioner Thomas G. Brennan’s petition for habeas 

corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Docs. 1, 2, 12) is DENIED, that this action is 

DISMISSED with prejudice, and that Petitioner is not entitled to a certificate of appealability 

or to appeal in forma pauperis.

DONE and ORDERED this the 13th day of July, 2014.

/s/Charles R. Butler, Jr.

CHARLES R. BUTLER, JR.

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:11-cv-00418-CB-N Document 33 Filed 07/13/15 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         104,560
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  496,269
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (111,000)
<INVENTORY>                                  5,164,263
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,981,600
<PP&E>                                       9,629,950
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,991,427)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,868,395
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,554,030
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     6,789,056
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,868,395
<SALES>                                      1,640,133
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,640,133
<CGS>                                          786,726
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  786,726
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               693,557
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             124,201
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 94,947
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             94,947
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    94,947
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .02


</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.2

I, Salim Ghafari, certify that:

1. I have  reviewed  this  quarterly  report  on Form  10-QSB  of Life  Energy &
Technology Holdings, Inc.

2. Based on my  knowledge,  this  quarterly  report  does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the  circumstances  under which such statements
were made, not  misleading  with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report.

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information  included in this quarterly  report,  fairly present in all material
respects the financial  condition,  results of operations  and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report.

4.  The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and  I are  responsible  for
establishing and maintaining  disclosure  controls and procedures (as defined in
exchange act rules 13a-14 and 15d- 14) for the registrant and have:

     A) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others  within those  entities,  particularly  during the
period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;
     B) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's  disclosure controls and
procedures  as of a date  within  90  days  prior  to the  filing  date  of this
quarterly report (the "evaluation date"); and
     C)  presented  in  this  quarterly   report  our   conclusions   about  the
effectiveness of the disclosure  controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the evaluation date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation,  to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's   board  of  directors  (or  persons   performing   the  equivalent
functions):

     A) all  significant  deficiencies  in the design or  operation  of internal
controls  which  could  adversely  affect  the  registrant's  ability to record,
process,  summarize  and  report  financial  data  and have  identified  for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and
     B) any fraud,  whether or not material,  that involves  management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls.

6. The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and I have  indicated in this
quarterly  report  whether or not there  were  significant  changes in  internal
controls or in other factors that could  significantly  affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent  evaluation,  including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: October 17, 2003

By:/s/Salim Ghafari
-----------------------------------------
Chief Financial Officer (or equivalent thereof)
11127.

#### Perry *v.*Cooper.

Decided May 11, 1920.

Complaint; from Morgan superior court — Judge Park. October 25, 1919.

Luke, J.

In this case, because of the uncertainty and ambiguity of a part of the contract, the true construction thereof, in the light of the intent and meaning of the parties thereto, was a question for the jury, under a proper charge by the court. The evidence was conflicting, but the verdict was authorized, and met with the approval of the trial judge. There being no error of law in the trial of the ease, the judgment overruling the motion for a new trial must be affirmed.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.*

*296The contract in question was a lease of a farm, containing a provision that “no timber is to be cut except in clearing back from the boundaries of the land heretofore cleared for cultivation.” The trial judge held that this provision was ambiguous, and admitted testimony as to its meaning, and in Ms charge to the jury instructed them to determine its meaning.

*T. H. Burruss Jr.,*for plaintiff in error.

*Williford & Lambert,*contra.
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER





Pursuant to


18 U.S.C. Section 1350,


As Adopted pursuant to


Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





I, Zeynep Hakimoglu, certify, to my best knowledge and belief, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of ClearOne Communications, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of ClearOne Communications, Inc.











Date:  August 12, 2010
By:
/s/ Zeynep HakimogluZeynep HakimogluChief Executive Officer








---
#### Wm. McCarley’s Ex’r *v.*J. O. Perkins and Wife.

Mortgage Waives Right to Homestead Exemption.

Persons who execute a mortgage) on their real estate thereby waive their right to a homestead exemption on such property.

Appeals.

When an appeal is granted by the court rendering a judgment the record must be filed in the clerk’s office of the court of appeals ninety days after judgment rendered, subject to the power of the court to extend the time not later than the first day of the second term after judgment, but an appeal may be granted by the clerk of the court of appeals at any time within three years from the date of judgment.

APPEAL PROM LOGAN CIRCUIT COURT.

September 14, 1875.

Opinion by

Judge Cofer :

The opinion of this court in the case of *Robbins, et al., v._ Cookendoffer,*Mss. Opinion and the authority therein cited, are conclusive of this case. The mortgage executed by Perkins and wife purports to convey their whole estate in the lot, and was a waiver of the homestead exemption. The judgment exempting a homestead was, therefore, erroneous.

The appeal in this case was granted by the clerk of this court, and is not affected by the fact that the record was not filed on or before the first day of the second term after the judgment was rendered. When an appeal is granted by the court rendering the judgment, the record’must be filed in the clerk’s office of this court ninety days after the judgment was rendered, subject to the power of the court to extend the time for filing not later than the first day of the second term after the rendition of the judgment, or the appeal will be dismissed on motion of the appellee. Sec. 879, Civil Code. But when an appeal has been granted by the court below, and has been dismissed, or the record has not been filed within the time *494required by Sec. 879, an appeal may be granted by the clerk of this court at any time within three years from the date of the judgment. Secs. 876 and 884, Civil Code. This latter course was pursued in this case, and the appeal cannot be dismissed.

*A. G. Rhea, for appellant. Berry & Grubbs, for appellees.*

The judgment setting apart to the appellees a homestead is reversed, and the cause is remanded with directions to render judgment subjecting the whole property, or so much thereof as may be necessary for that purpose, to the satisfaction of the judgment.
#### Reeves *v.*Allen.

*Deposition.—Proceedings before*Mayor.—Depositions of witnesses may be taken out of the State, in an action pending before the mayor of a city.

APPEAL from the Putnam Common Pleas.

.S'. *Turman*and *J.*Birch, for appellant.

*JD. E. Williamson*and *A.*Daggy, for appellee.

Downey, J.

The only question in this case is, whether or not depositions of witnesses may be taken out of the State, in an action pending before the mayor of a city, who, by law, has the jurisdiction and powers of a justice of the peace. The common pleas decided that they could not be taken. We are of the opinion that this decision cannot be maintained. Prof. Greenleaf says: “ This method of obtaining testimony from witnesses, in a foreign country, has always been familiar in the courts of admiralty; but it is also deemed to be within the inherent powers of all courts of justice.” 1 Greenl. Ev., sec. 320.

But however this may be, we think the question in this State is settled by statute. It is enacted, in sec. 49, p. 591, 2 G. & H., that “ depositions of witnesses or parties residing out of the county, or sick, or about to leave the same, may be taken under the rules prescribed by law for taking depositions; and if such party or witness be absent from the county or unable to attend at the trial, may be read as evidence in any cause; and no dedimus shall be necessary in such case.” The question, whether a dedimus or commission is necessary when the deposition is taken out of the State, is not before us in this case, and need not be decided, for there was a dedimus or commission issued by the mayor, in pursuance of which the deposition was taken.

The judgment is reversed, with costs, and the cause remanded, with instructions to grant a new trial, to overrule the motion to suppress the deposition on the ground stated, and for further proceedings.
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

UNITED STATES

v.

Senior Airman RASHAD D. RAMSEUR

United States Air Force

ACM S32159

12 February 2014

Sentence adjudged 15 May 2013 by SPCM convened at Nellis Air Force 

Base, Nevada. Military Judge: Christopher M. Schumann.

Approved Sentence: Bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 4 months, 

and reduction to E-1.

Appellate Counsel for the Appellant: Captain Jeffrey A. Davis.

Appellate Counsel for the United States: Colonel Don M. Christensen.

Before

HELGET, WEBER, and PELOQUIN

Appellate Military Judges

This opinion is subject to editorial correction before final release.

PER CURIAM:

The approved findings and sentence are correct in law and fact, and no error 

materially prejudicial to the substantial rights of the appellant occurred. Articles 59(a) 

and 66(c), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859(a), 866(c); United States v. Reed, 54 M.J. 37, 41 

(C.A.A.F. 2000). Accordingly, the approved findings and sentence are AFFIRMED.

FOR THE COURT

STEVEN LUCAS

Clerk of the Court
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SABARNES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Century Pacific Tax Credit Housing
Fund-II (the Partnership) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Irwin J. Deutch, Chief Executive Officer of the Partnership,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As adopted pursuant to Section 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
Partnership.


/s/ Essie Safaie
Essie Safaie
Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         942,097
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 942,097
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           24,005
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     918,092
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   942,097
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                22,755
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (22,755)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (22,755)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (22,755)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.44)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.44)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999             JUN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999             DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                               0                 138,900
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                 638,900
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                   9,500
<INVENTORY>                                          0                 381,300
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0               1,228,900
<PP&E>                                               0               2,787,500
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                 131,300
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0               4,818,400
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0                 772,200
<BONDS>                                              0               2,453,300
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0               1,026,100
<OTHER-SE>                                           0                  77,900
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0               4,818,400
<SALES>                                        163,000               1,974,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               192,000               1,997,300
<CGS>                                          134,100               1,602,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  139,400               1,800,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                 (6,500)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,300                 106,200
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 34,600                  99,800
<INCOME-TAX>                                    13,100                  18,200
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             21,500                  80,600
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    21,500                  80,600
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from  the
condensed consolidated balance sheet and statement of income and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such financial statements
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     9,002,700,000
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                  41,000,000
<MORTGAGE>                               1,913,100,000
<REAL-ESTATE>                               88,800,000
<TOTAL-INVEST>                          11,764,800,000
<CASH>                                      34,000,000
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                         179,800,000
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                     998,600,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          16,219,900,000
<POLICY-LOSSES>                         11,207,700,000
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                  0
<POLICY-OTHER>                             284,600,000
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                      193,400,000
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                            407,400,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      120,900,000
<PREFERRED>                                  6,400,000
<COMMON>                                   541,500,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 774,600,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            16,219,900,000
<PREMIUMS>                                 619,200,000
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                        703,200,000
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                           8,700,000
<OTHER-INCOME>                             293,600,000
<BENEFITS>                                 966,900,000
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                 60,000,000
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                       312,000,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            226,200,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                79,200,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        143,700,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               147,700,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     3.74
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     3.53
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0
        

</TABLE>
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 99-1020

___________ Estate of Sylvester Givens, by James * Givens and Shirley Givens, Personal * Representatives, * * Plaintiff-Appellant, * * v. * * Forrest City, Arkansas; K. L. Wynne, * Dispatcher; * * Defendants, * * Southwestern Bell Telephone Company; * * Defendant-Appellee, * Appeals from the United States * District Court for the Eastern Joe Goff, Chief of Police, Forrest City * District of Arkansas. Police Department, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Defendant. *

__________ No. 99-1022

__________ Estate of Sylvester Givens, by James * Givens and Shirley Givens, Personal * Representatives, * *-2- Plaintiff-Appellee, * * v. * * Forrest City, Arkansas; K. L. Wynne, * Dispatcher; * * Defendants, * * Southwestern Bell Telephone Company; * * Defendant-Appellant, * * Joe Goff, Chief of Police, Forrest City * Police Department, * * Defendant. *

___________ Submitted: February 7, 2000 Filed: February 11, 2000

___________ Before LOKEN, FAGG, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Sylvester Givens's estate appeals the district court's adverse grant of summary judgment in favor of Southwestern Bell Telephone Company (SWB) on the estate's negligenceclaim after it failed to respond to SWB's request for an admission that Givens's estate did not have any facts to support its negligence claim. After reviewing therecord and the parties' briefs, we conclude summary judgment was proper. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(a) and (b) (matter requested is deemed admitted unless party-3-

answers, and any matter admitted is "conclusively established" unless party files motion to withdraw or amend admission); Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c) (summary judgment is properly grantedif the admissions on file show there is no genuine issue as to any material fact). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See8th Cir. R. 47B. We also dismiss SWB's cross-appeal as moot. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.