alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 179 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 179

 To promote accountability and transparency in future executive orders.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 9, 2023

   Mr. Mann introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                        Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To promote accountability and transparency in future executive orders.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. NOTIFICATION RESPECTING CERTAIN EXECUTIVE ORDERS.

    (a) In General.--Not later than 30 days before issuing a qualifying 
executive order, the President shall transmit to the Congress, and make 
publicly available, a notification with respect to such executive 
order. Such notification shall contain--
            (1) the text of the executive order;
            (2) the Federal law or laws affected by the executive order 
        that is the subject of the notification;
            (3) how the President is working within the parameters 
        specified in Federal law and the Constitution;
            (4) the means by which the executive order will be 
        accomplished, including through any related Federal agencies or 
        departments; and
            (5) a comprehensive list of organizations, businesses, and 
        other parties or entities the President, or the President's 
        designee, engaged with prior to the issuance of such executive 
        order.
    (b) Reports.--Not later than 6 months after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, and every 12 months thereafter, the President 
shall submit to the Congress a report on the outcome of each qualifying 
executive order issued during the period covered by the report.
    (c) Qualifying Executive Order.--The term ``qualifying executive 
order'' means any executive order (including an executive order that 
revokes or nullifies a previous executive order) issued after the date 
of the enactment of this Act that relates to agriculture, food, and the 
livelihood of farmers, ranchers, and producers in the United States.
                                 <all>
```
#### Samuel Leibow, Appellant, *v.*Lucy Tilson and Another, Respondents.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

April 9, 1925.

Principal and agent — compensation of agent — principal liable for commission for sale made by himself where agent had exclusive agency.

A principal, having constituted the plaintiff an exclusive agent, is liable to said agent for commissions upon a sale made by himself where said agency has not been revoked.

Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the City of New York, Borough of The Bronx, Second District, in favor of defendant after trial by the court without a jury.

*Arnstein & Levine [Sidney S. Levine*of counsel], for the appellant.

No appearance for the respondents.

*744Per Curiam:

The plaintiff having been constituted an exclusive agent and his agency not having been revoked, *“*the principal cannot make a sale himself without becoming liable for the commissions.” *(Slattery*v. *Cothran,*210 App. Div. 581.) No misrepresentation made by the purchaser could have any effect on the plaintiff’s rights.

Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered, with thirty dollars costs to appellant to abide the event.

All concur; present, Bijur, Mitchell and Proskauer, JJ.
11825.

#### Bowden *v.*King.

Decided April 14, 1921.

Jenkins, P. J.

“ The right to rescind a horse swap exists only by virtue of such special terms of the contract of sale as may so authorize, or, in the absence of any such agreement, by reason of knowingly false and fraudulent misrepresentations of existing facts, made to the complaining party, whereby he was induced to act to his injury.” *Barnett v. Speir,*93 *Ga.*762; *Sewkirk*v. *Burts,*25 *Ga. App.*689 (104 S. E. 456) ; *Battle*v. *Livingston,*21 *Ga. App.*809 (95 S. E. 314) ; *Houze*v. *Blackwell,*144 *Ga.*700(2) (87 S. E. 1054); *Stovall*v. *McBrayer,*20 *Ga. App.*93 (92 S. E. 543). Under these principles of law, the verdict .for the plaintiff was authorized by the evidence.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Stephens and Sill, JJ., concur.*

*706Trover; from city court of Greensboro — Judge Brown. July 17, 1920.

Tbe exceptions, are to the-overruling of the defendant’s motion for a new trial, based on general grounds only. According to the plaintiff’s evidence, he and the defendant exchanged mules upon the express agreement that if the defendant’s mule " was not sound and all right, it was no trade,” and the mule delivered to the defendant was to be again the plaintiff’s mule, and vice versa. The mule received by the plaintiff proved to be deaf, and, immediately on his discovery of the defect, he sough", to restore the original status. By trover he sought to recover the mule delivered to the defendant, and the verdict was in his favor. The contention made in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error is that deafness is not "unsoundness” or such a defect as would prevent the animal from being considered “ sound and all right.”

*J. G.*Faust, for plaintiff in error. *Noel P.*Parle, contra.
**Exhibit32**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, theChief Executive Officer and the Principal Financial Officer of HCSB FinancialCorporation (the “Company”), certifies that, to his knowledge on the date ofthis certification:

1.               The annual reportof the Company for the period ended December 31, 2005 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on this date (the “Report”) fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

2.               The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| Date:  | March 15, 2007 |   | By:    | /s/ James R. Clarkson                   |
|--------|----------------|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------|
|   |           |   |   | James R. Clarkson                       |
|   |           |   |   | President & Chief Executive Officer |
|   |           |   |   |                                    |
| Date:  | March 15, 2007 |   | By:    | /s/ James R. Clarkson                   |
|   |           |   |   | James R. Clarkson                       |
|   |           |   |   | Principal Financial Officer             |

 

----
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6228

WILLIS ANDREA JONES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus G. J. HAYNES; MRS. ST. LOUIS; MRS. DUFAULT; MR. ZOOK, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-393-BO) Submitted: May 15, 2003 Decided: May 22, 2003 Before LUTTIG and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Willis Andrea Jones, Appellant Pro Se. James Philip Allen, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Willis Andrea Jones appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Jones’ motion for appointment of counsel, and we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. SeeJones v. Haynes , No. CA-01- 393-BO (E.D.N.C. filed Jan. 8, 2003; entered Jan. 10, 2003). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 32.1 Certificate 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 Annual Report of U.S. Neurosurgical, Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the
period ending December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Alan Gold, President and Chief
Executive Officer of U.S. Neurosurgical, Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 results of operations of U.S.
 Neurosurgical, Inc.  /s/ Alan
 GoldAlan GoldPresident
 and Chief Executive OfficerMarch 30,
 2009
In The 

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo 

 

No. 07-23-00050-CV 

 

MOHAMMMAD QUDDOOS MAHMOOD, APPELLANT 

V. 

AMANDA SUE SLAHETKA, APPELLEE 

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 

Williamson County, Texas 

Trial Court No. 19-3679-FC1, Honorable Daniel H. Mills, Presiding 

March 14, 2023 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before QUINN, C.J., and PARKER and YARBROUGH, JJ. 

In September 2022, Appellant, Mohammad Quddoos Mahmood, filed a petition to 

modify the parent-child relationship. His attorney later moved to withdraw as counsel and 

the trial court granted the motion. Mahmood, now proceeding pro se, appeals from the 
2

trial court’s Order on Motion for Withdrawal of Counsel.1 We dismiss the appeal for want 

of jurisdiction.

Generally, appellate courts only have jurisdiction over final judgments that dispose 

of all pending parties and claims. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 

2001). We have jurisdiction to consider immediate appeals of interlocutory orders only if 

a statute explicitly provides appellate jurisdiction. Stary v. DeBord, 967 S.W.2d 352, 352–

53 (Tex. 1998). The trial court has not entered a final judgment in this case. And, an 

order granting a motion to withdraw of counsel is not an appealable interlocutory order. 

Davis v. Alcatel USA, Inc., No. 05-07-00060-CV, 2007 Tex. App. LEXIS 1079, at *1 (Tex. 

App.—Dallas Feb. 15, 2007, no pet.) (per curiam) (mem. op.) (citing TEX. CIV. PRAC. &

REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(a)).

By letter of February 8, 2023, we notified Mahmood that it did not appear that a 

final judgment or appealable order had been issued by the trial court and directed him to 

show how we have jurisdiction over this appeal. Mahmood has not filed a response or 

had any further communication with this Court to date.

Because Mahmood has not presented this Court with a final judgment or 

appealable order, the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 

42.3(a).

Per Curiam

1 Originally appealed to the Third Court of Appeals, this appeal was transferred to this Court by the 

Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalization efforts. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

WM MOBILE BAY ENVIRONMENTAL )

CENTER, INC., )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

V. ) CASE NO. 13-0434-KD-N

)

THE CITY OF MOBILE SOLID WASTE )

AUTHORITY, )

)

Defendant. )

JUDGMENT

In accordance with the order on summary judgment (doc. 125), the verdict (doc. 171), 

and the order entered February 6, 2015 (doc. 172), it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and 

DECREED that DECLARATORY JUDGMENT is entered in favor of Plaintiff WM Mobile 

Bay Environmental Center, Inc., that it is entitled to an increased disposal rate in the current 

amount of $25.43.

DONE this the 5th day of March 2015. 

/s / Kristi K. DuBose 

KRISTI K. DuBOSE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-00434-KD-N Document 177 Filed 03/05/15 Page 1 of 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 19-0670

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

MATTHEW DOUGLAS WEBB,

Respondent and Appellant.

GRANT OF EXTENSION

Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30-day extension of time, 

and good cause appearing therefor, Appellee is granted an extension of time to 

and including September 25, 2020, within which to prepare, serve, and file its 

response brief.

MPD

Electronically signed by:

Bowen Greenwood

Clerk of the Supreme Court

August 26 2020

08/26/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0670
AO 247 (Rev. 11/11) ALSD Order Regarding Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________

United States of America

)

)

)

)

)

)

v.

Case No:

USM No:

Date of Original Judgment:

Date of Previous Amended Judgment:

(Use Date of Last Amended Judgment if Any) Defendant’s Attorney

ORDER REGARDING MOTION FOR SENTENCE REDUCTION

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)

Upon motion of the defendant the Director of the Bureau of Prisons the court under 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(2) for a reduction in the term of imprisonment imposed based on a guideline sentencing range that has

subsequently been lowered and made retroactive by the United States Sentencing Commission pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 994(u), and having considered such motion, and taking into account the policy statement set forth at USSG §1B1.10

and the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), to the extent that they are applicable,

IT IS ORDERED that the motion is:

DENIED. GRANTED and the defendant’s previously imposed sentence of imprisonment (as reflected in 

the last judgment issued) of months is reduced to .

(Complete Parts I and II of Page 2 when motion is granted)

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

Except as otherwise provided, all provisions of the judgment dated shall remain in effect.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Order Date:

Judge’s signature

Effective Date:

(if different from order date) Printed name and title

 Southern District of Alabama

FRANKIE ANTHONY SCOTT 09-00237

10830-003

7/26/2010

Pro Se

✔

✔

12/22/2011 /s/ Callie V. S. Granade

United States District Court

The defendant was sentenced to the statutory mandatory minimum sentence of 60 months, and is therefore not eligible

for a reduction under the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010.

Case 1:09-cr-00237-CG-N Document 52 Filed 12/22/11 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Maureen D. Howley, Chief Financial Officer and Senior Vice President of the Managing Owner,
Preferred Investment Solutions Corp. (the Managing Owner), of World Monitor Trust II  Series F (Series F), hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that:



| | (1) | Series Fs Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Annual
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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Series F.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------







|                                                 
|-------------------------------------------------
|/s/    Maureen D. Howley                         
|Maureen D. Howley                                
|Chief Financial Officer and Senior Vice President
|March 31, 2006
EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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 CreditRiskMonitor.com, Inc. ("CRM")
on Form 10-QSB for the three months ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jerome
S. Flum, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 results of operations
            of the Company.


                                        By: /s/ Jerome S. Flum
                                                Jerome S. Flum
                                                Chief Executive Officer

May 15, 2003

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to CRM and will be retained by CRM and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officersof EXCO Resources, Inc. (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to suchofficer’s knowledge, that:

 

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qfor the quarter ended June 30, 2008 (the “Form 10-Q”) of the Companyfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), asapplicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the informationcontained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for,the periods presented in the Form 10-Q.

 
| Date:  August 6,  2008 | /s/ DOUGLAS H. MILLER   |
|----------------------------------|-------------------------|
|                             | Douglas H. Miller       |
|                             | Chief Executive Officer |
|                             |                    |
|                             | /s/ J. DOUGLAS RAMSEY   |
|                             | J. Douglas Ramsey       |
|                             | Chief Financial Officer |

 

The foregoingcertification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-Q pursuantto Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as partof the Form 10-Q for purposes of Section 18 of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated by reference into anyfiling of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardlessof any general incorporation language in such filing.

 

1

----
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

   Schedule of Year-To-Date Principal and Interest Distributions
                           to
                  Certificateholders

                                                                  Ending
Class            Interest         Principal     Losses           Balance
<S>               <C>                <C>          <C>              <C>
A1              4341343.85       4149918.12          0       797328948.08
A2               598295.04                0          0          110454464
A3               873909.58        140268.57          0       161196884.26
A4              2322977.46       2695127.67          0       426162250.24
A5                  496470                0          0           91656000
AIO              510168.68                0          0                  0
APO                      0            10566          0         7676168.22
B1                82535.03         13247.45          0        15223988.31
B2                36682.24          5887.75          0          6766218.8
B3                32096.97           5151.8          0         5920443.43
B4                18341.12          2943.88          0         3383109.39
B5                27511.66          4415.63          0         5074660.74
M                192581.76         30910.71          0        35522644.71
R                     0.55              100          0                  0


</TABLE>
<PAGE>


                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

                                  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 Annual Report of American Oriental
Bioengineering, Inc. (the "Company"), on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") on the
date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned of the Company, certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (6)      the Report fully complies, in all material respects, with the
                  requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
                  Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (7)      the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
                  all material respects, the financial condition and results of
                  operations of the Company.





/s/ Tony Liu
------------
Name: Tony Liu
Title:  Chief Executive Officer
March 13, 2006



/s/ Yanchun Li
--------------
Name: Yanchun Li
Title:  Acting Chief Financial Officer
March 13, 2006



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained
by the Company and will be furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request. This
exhibit is not "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 but is instead furnished as provided by applicable rules of the SEC.