alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 4921.

(Court of Appeal, Parish of Orleans.)

#### SAMUEL F. HEASLIP vs. NEW ORLEANS RAILWAY AND LIGHT CO.

Rouse, Grant & Grant for plaintiff and appellant.

Dart & Kernan for defendant and appellee.

GO.DCHAUX, J.

A collision occurred between a heavily-laden float belonging to plaintiff and a street car of the defendant company, which resulted in such injury to one of the four mules drawing the float that it was necessary to destroy it. This suit, for the recovery of *243$265.00, its purported value, resulted in judgment in favor of the defendant, and plaintiff appealed.

March 7, 1910.

The float was in N. Peters Street, going towards Canal Street, and using the uptown rails or tracks on the former street. The defendant’s car was approaching it from Canal Street on the downtown rails; and, having stopped at Bienville Street, was proceeding on its way when plaintiff’s float, having reached the corner of North Peters and Conti Streets, attempted to turn at this point for the purpose of going into Conti Street towards the river. To effect the turn it was necessary to drive the mules somewhat beyond the intersection proper, then to swing them in a sweeping semi-circle into Conti Street.

There is conflict of testimony as to the distance separating the car and float at that moment, plaintiff seeking to show that it was amply sufficient within which to have halted the car before reaching the float. It will serve no purpose to review the evidence. Suffice it to say that the evidence shows the motorman was watchful and promptly discovered the danger; as promptly exerted every effort to avoid the collision and that its occurrence was due to no fault of his. To this effect is the testimony of the passengers in the car, who all affirm that he could not, under the circumstances, have avoided the accident, and who unite in praising the promptitude and skill which he exhibited. The only witness to the occurence who positively asserts that the collision was caused by the negligence of the motorman, is the driver of the float; but that the preponderance of evidence leads to a contrary conclusion was apparently the opinion of the trial Court, as it is of this Court.

The judgment is accordingly affirmed.
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 23

- 00228

- CR

T IAJAH T ERRON T URNER

, Appellant

V

.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS §

§

§

§

§ On Ap peal from Criminal District Court No. 3

of Tarrant County ( 1736166 )

May 16, 2024

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Kerr

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no error in the trial court’s j ud gment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial

court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By _ /s/ Elizabeth Kerr

__________________ Justice Elizabeth Kerr
Exhibit 32(b)

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





|(1) | The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2004 (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 as of the dates and for the periods presented in the Report.





/s/ Leo P. Denault                                 		Leo P. Denault
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
of Entergy Corporation


Date:  	March 9, 2005
SCAD-19-0000055

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL,

Petitioner,

vs.

CLAYTON C. IKEI,

Respondent.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

(ODC Case No. 16-O-032)

ORDER

(By: Nakayama, J.)

Upon review of the exhibits filed in this matter on

January 23, 2019 by the Disciplinary Board of the Hawai#i Supreme

Court, in support of its report and recommendation, it is

apparent that several docket items are sealed when, with proper,

specific redaction, as set forth in Rule 9.1 of the Hawai#i Court

Records Rules (HCRR), publicly accessible versions of those

docket items could be made available. See O#ahu Publications,

Inc. v. Takase, 139 Hawai#i 236, 246, 386 P.3d 873, 883 (2016). 

Therefore, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Disciplinary Board, with

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCAD-19-0000055

05-MAR-2019

01:59 PM
the cooperation of the Office of Disciplinary Counsel and

Respondent Clayton Ikei, shall file publicly accessible versions

of Dockets 3, 4, 7 and 8 by redacting social security and

financial account information pursuant to HCRR Rule 9.1, as well

as the information found at Docket 4:258-61, or good cause as to

why an entire docket item should remain sealed, based upon the

impracticability of specific redaction. The parties shall, in

future filings in this matter, similarly adhere to employing

redaction to ensure general public access to relevant documents.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, March 5, 2019.

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

Associate Justice

2
##### 



Exhibit 99.1 Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 Certifications

Certification of Principal Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to 18 U. S.C. Section 1350,
As Adopted By the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Nextel Communications, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, Timothy M. Donahue, President & Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350 (as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002) that, to the best of my knowledge:



| | (1) |  | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                               
| | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | (2) |  | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.

| |                                                                                          | 
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
| | /s/ Timothy M. DonahueTimothy M. Donahue
Chief Executive Officer
Date: November 14, 2002 | 

45



---



##### 



Certification of Principal Financial Officer
Pursuant to 18 U. S.C. Section 1350,
As Adopted By the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Nextel Communications, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, Paul N. Saleh, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to
18 U.S.C.§ 1350 (as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002) that, to the best of my knowledge:



| | (1) |  | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                               
| | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | (2) |  | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.

| |                                                                                | 
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 
| | /s/ Paul N. SalehPaul N. Saleh
Chief Financial Officer
Date: November 14, 2002 | 

46
1

The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

the Northern District of Iowa.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 10-1142

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Northern District of Iowa.

David Anton Wesley, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: June 9, 2010

Filed: June 11, 2010

___________

Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

David Wesley appeals the sentence the district court1

 imposed after revoking

his supervised release. Upon careful review, we conclude that the revocation sentence

is not unreasonable. See United States v. Tyson, 413 F.3d 824, 825 (8th Cir. 2005)

(per curiam) (revocation sentences are reviewed for unreasonableness in accordance

with United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005)). Accordingly, we affirm the

district court’s judgment, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-1402

CHANT’E N. HODGE; HAROLD HODGE,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

versus

GIANT FOOD INCORPORATED; GIANT CALIFORNIA

MARYLAND STORE; DICK BAIRD; ROSE CALYG, of

California Store; GREG HILLIARD; MIKE

KUBISIAH,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA03-106)

Submitted: August 6, 2003 Decided: November 20, 2003

Before WIDENER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Chant’e N. Hodge, Harold Hodge, Appellants Pro Se. Connie Nora

Bertram, Patricia A. Exposito, VENABLE, BAETJER, HOWARD &

CIVILETTI, L.L.P., Washington, D.C., for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellants, Chant’e N. Hodge and Harold Hodge, appeal the

district court’s order dismissing their civil action. Appellants

failed to file a notice of appeal within the prescribed thirty-day

period following final entry of the district court’s order. See

Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). Although the district court’s order

was entered on February 26, 2003, the Appellants did not file a

notice of appeal until March 31, 2003, three days past the

expiration of the appeal period. Moreover, the Appellants did not

file for an extension of time of the appeal period under Federal

Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5) or to reopen the appeal period

under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6). Because timely

filing of a notice of appeal is mandatory and jurisdictional, see

Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corr., 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1973), we

lack jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss

the appeal on this ground. 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.

DISMISSED
97-390.

#### Musa v. Musa.

Franklin App. No. 96APE07-831. On February 19, 1997, appellants filed a notice of appeal from a judgment entry denying certification of conflict filed February 4, 1997, by the Court of Appeals for Franklin County. Appellants attached a copy of the judgment entry filed February 4, 1997, but did not attach a copy of the court of appeals’ opinion of February 4,1997 to their memorandum in support of jurisdiction, as required by S.Ct.Prac.R. III(1)(D). Furthermore, it appears to this court that appellants’ memorandum in support of jurisdiction relates solely to a court of appeals’ journal entry and opinion entered December 11, 1996, that is attached to appellants’ memorandum in support of *1419jurisdiction. Under S.Ct.Prac.R. II(2)(A), an appeal from a decision entered December 11,1996 was due no later than January 26,1997.

Whereas appellants have not filed a memorandum in support of jurisdiction relating to the decision entered February 4, 1997, in compliance with the requirements of S.Ct.Prac.R. III(l), nor filed a timely appeal of the decision entered December 11, 1996, appellants have not perfected an appeal to this court. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED by the court, *sua sponte,*that appellants’ appeal be, and hereby is, dismissed.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-65,873]

Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on May 1, 2009 in response to a petition filed on behalf of workers of Tyco Electronics, Greensboro, North Carolina.

The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 13th day of May 2009.

Linda G. Poole,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-13914 Filed 6-12-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 7
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S DECEMBER 31, 1995, 1995 FORM 10-K FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000008802
<NAME> AVEMCO CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                                 0
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                            112,136
<EQUITIES>                                      22,524
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 149,544
<CASH>                                           3,466
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                              14,292
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                           5,511
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 213,802
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                 42,305
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                             32,363
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                 54,967
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,155
<OTHER-SE>                                      60,604
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   213,802
<PREMIUMS>                                      80,458
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                              8,498
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                 575
<OTHER-INCOME>                                  23,673
<BENEFITS>                                      55,605
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                          0
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                            44,273
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  9,102
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,184
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,918
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,918
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .90
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .90
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                  31,137
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                             56,753
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                              (1,148)
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                              33,023
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                20,786
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                 32,933
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                        (1,148)
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 112 (Friday, June 12, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 28046]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-13822]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION


Commission Meeting

Agency Holding the Meeting: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Date and Time: Wednesday, June 17, 2009, 10 a.m. Eastern Time.

Place: Commission Meeting Room on the First Floor of the EEOC Office 
Building, 131 M Street, NE., Washington, DC 20507.

Status:  The meeting will be open to the public.

Matters To Be Considered: 

Open Session: 
    1. Announcement of Notation Votes, and
    2. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the Americans with 
Disabilities Act (ADA)Amendments Act of 2008.

    Note: In accordance with the Sunshine Act, the meeting will be 
open to public observation of the Commission's deliberations and 
voting. (In addition to publishing notices on EEOC Commission 
meetings in the Federal Register, the Commission also provides a 
recorded announcement a full week in advance on future Commission 
sessions.)
    Please telephone (202) 663-7100 (voice) and (202) 663-4074 (TTY) 
at any time for information on these meetings. The EEOC provides 
sign language interpretation at Commission meetings for the hearing 
impaired. Requests for other reasonable accommodations may be made 
by using the voice and TTY numbers listed above. Contact Person for 
More Information: Stephen Llewellyn, Executive Officer on (202) 663-
4070.


    Dated: June 8, 2009.
Stephen Llewellyn,
Executive Officer, Executive Secretariat.
[FR Doc. E9-13822 Filed 6-11-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6570-01-P
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0256

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

LEA ALEX YATES II, 

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including July 13, 2022, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 6 2022

06/06/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0256
Exhibit 32.1

# Written Statement of
the Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and President of Bandag, Incorporated
 Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350

Solely
for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. §1350, I, the undersigned Chairman of
the Board, Chief Executive Officer and President of Bandag, Incorporated (the
Company), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Annual Report on
Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the Report)
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/ Martin G. Carver Martin G. CarverChairman
and Chief Executive Officer February 28, 2006
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS & CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOUND ON
PAGES 3 AND 4 OF THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE YEAR-TO-DATE AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          46,851
<SECURITIES>                                    69,508
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,178
<ALLOWANCES>                                       914
<INVENTORY>                                     10,527
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               172,742
<PP&E>                                          25,532
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,172
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 237,263
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,723
<BONDS>                                          2,821
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            40
<OTHER-SE>                                     209,895
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   237,263
<SALES>                                         18,926
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                18,926
<CGS>                                           10,216
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,216
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                12,387
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  58
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,543)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (890)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,653)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,653)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.04)
        

</TABLE>
Order entered April 4, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00161-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF T.R.N., ET AL., CHILDREN

On Appeal from the 305th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. JC-17-00385-X

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s April 2, 2019 motion for extension of time to file brief. 

We GRANT the motion and ORDER the brief be filed no later than April 29, 2019. Because 

this is an accelerated appeal in a parental termination case, we caution appellant that further 

extension requests will be disfavored.

/s/ KEN MOLBERG 

JUSTICE