alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
BILL OF COSTS

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, FOURTEENTH DISTRICT, AT HOUSTON

No. 14-15-00212-CV

In Estate of Doris J. Simon, Incapacitated

(No. 419,625-401 IN PROBATE COURT NO 1 OF HARRIS COUNTY)

TYPE OF FEE CHARGES PAID/DUE STATUS PAID BY

RPT RECORD

RPT RECORD

CLK RECORD

MT FEE

FILING

STATEWIDE EFILING

$210.00

$282.00

$261.04

$10.00

$175.00

$20.00

04/24/2015

04/24/2015

04/16/2015

04/09/2015

03/13/2015

03/13/2015

PAID

PAID

PAID

E-PAID

NOT PAID

NOT PAID

ANT

ANT

ANT

APE

ANT

ANT

The costs incurred on appeal to the Fourteenth Court of Appeals Houston, Texas 

are $958.04.

Court costs in this cause shall be paid as per the Judgment issued by this Court.

I, CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE, CLERK OF THE FOURTEENTH COURT OF 

APPEALS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing 

is a true and correct copy of the cost bill of THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 

FOURTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS, showing the charges and payments, in the 

above numbered and styled cause, as the same appears of record in this office.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness 

my hand and the Seal of the COURT 

OF APPEALS for the Fourteenth District 

of Texas, July 10, 2015.
Order entered July 10, 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 18

- 00476

- CV

LYNDA BLISS, Appellant

V.

BANK OF AMERICA , N.A. , ET AL. , Appellee s

On Appeal from the 401 st Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 401

- 04804

- 2016



### O RDER

Before the Court is appellant’s July 5, 2018 unopposed second motion for an extension of

time to file a brief. We GRANT the motion and extend the time to August 6 , 2018 . We caution

appellant that further requests for extension will be disfavored.

/s/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE
*Wednesday, February 26, 1997*

MOTION DOCKET

95-64.

#### State ex rel. Crandall, Pheils & Wisniewski v. DeCessna.

In Procedendo and Prohibition. This cause came on for further consideration upon relators’ motion for an order to show cause. On December 18,1996, this court issued an alternative writ setting forth a briefing schedule. On February 6, 1997, this court granted relators’ request for a stay of proceedings. Relators have now filed a motion for an order dismissing their earlier-filed motion for an order to show cause as moot. Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion be, and hereby is, granted.

Resnick, J., not participating.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3481 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 715
111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3481

  To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to clarify Federal 
                responsibility for stormwater pollution.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 10, 2010

Mr. Cardin (for himself, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Voinovich, and Mrs. Murray) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
               Committee on Environment and Public Works

                           December 17, 2010

               Reported by Mrs. Boxer, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to clarify Federal 
                responsibility for stormwater pollution.

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

SECTION 1. FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR STORMWATER POLLUTION.

    Section 313 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 
1323) is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(c) Federal Responsibility for Stormwater Pollution.--Reasonable 
service charges described in subsection (a) include reasonable fees or 
assessments made for the purpose of stormwater management in the same 
manner and to the same extent as any nongovernmental entity.
    ``(d) No Treatment as Tax or Levy.--A fee or assessment described 
in this section--
            ``(1) shall not be considered to be a tax or other levy 
        subject to an assertion of sovereign immunity; and
            ``(2) may be paid using appropriated funds.''.
                                                       Calendar No. 715

111th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 3481

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

  To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to clarify Federal 
                responsibility for stormwater pollution.

_______________________________________________________________________

                           December 17, 2010

                       Reported without amendment
```
MISCELLANEOUS DISMISSALS

96-2791.

#### State ex rel. Sun Newspapers v. Moreland Hills.

In Mandamus. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint for a writ of mandamus. It appears from the records of this court that relator has not filed a brief, due April 11, 1997, in compliance with the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court and therefore has failed to prosecute this cause with the requisite diligence. Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed sua sponte.
Document

Exhibit 10.3



FISCAL 2023 DIRECTOR COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENTS 


For the 12 month period ending June 30, 2023, each non-employee director of Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. will receive the following compensation:
 												
	 ●		 	Retainers of $50,000 for service as a Board member; $22,000 for service as the chair of the Audit committee; $20,000 for service as a chair of a Board committee other than the Audit committee; $10,000 for service as a member of a Board committee; and $1,200 per Board or committee meeting attended in the event that more than 12 of such meetings are held during the period. Directors may irrevocably elect, in advance of the fiscal year, to receive these fees in cash, in common stock of the Company or a combination thereof, or in restricted stock units (“RSUs”). Each director electing to receive fees in RSUs shall at the time of such election also irrevocably select the date of settlement of the RSU. On the settlement date, RSUs may be settled, at the Company’s discretion, in cash or in shares of common stock or a combination thereof.



 												
	 ●		 	An RSU award with a value of $150,000 payable, in the Company’s discretion, in cash or in shares of common stock. The Company will provide for the RSU payment, whether paid in cash or shares of common stock, to be made (in a lump sum if paid in cash) within 30 days following the six-month anniversary of the termination of the director’s Board membership.





In addition, the Lead Independent Director of the Board receives an additional annual retainer of $40,000, and may irrevocably elect, in advance of the fiscal year, to receive this retainer in cash, in common stock of the Company or a combination thereof, or in RSUs. The non-employee members of the Board are also reimbursed for travel, lodging and other reasonable expenses incurred in attending Board or committee meetings.
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

I,
E. Follin Smith, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that to my knowledge:



|/s/E. FOLLIN SMITH                                                   |  | 
|-------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|E. Follin Smith
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |  | 

Date:
March 9, 2004

143

---

QuickLinks
Exhibit 32.2
                   CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 63 1350, the Chief Financial Officer of Art's-Way
Manufacturing Co., Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify that this Form
10-KSB and the financial statements thereto fully comply with the
requirements of Sections 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, and the information contained in the Form 10-KSB and the
financial statements thereto fairly present, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

By: /s/ Carrie L. Majeski

Name: Carrie L. Majeski
Chief Financial Officer

Date 2/28/06
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER>1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                     5,861
<SECURITIES>                               3,589
<RECEIVABLES>                             21,738
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                               10,361
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          69,055
<PP&E>                                    33,490
<DEPRECIATION>                            20,903
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            82,125
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     16,471
<BONDS>                                        0
<COMMON>                                   5,221
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<OTHER-SE>                                58,347
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              82,125
<SALES>                                   77,888
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          77,888
<CGS>                                     79,538
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            104,595
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          (701)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          (20,398)
<INCOME-TAX>                                (750)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      (19,648)
<DISCONTINUED>                            (6,659)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                             (26,307)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                              (5.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                              (5.05)
        

</TABLE>
#### Johnny Watson, Appellant, v Salvatore Priore et al., Defendants, and Steven A. Abdoo et al., Respondents.

Submitted July 22, 2013;

decided September 3, 2013

Motion, insofar as it seeks leave to appeal from the Appellate Division order affirming the June 2012 Supreme Court order, dismissed upon the ground that such order does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution; motion for leave to appeal otherwise denied.
<PAGE>


                                                               Exhibit 32.1

                               CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                                 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the annual report of Broadband Wireless International
Corporation, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended March
31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Michael Williams, Chief Financial Officer of the

<PAGE>




        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.


            A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906,
or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.



Date:  August 19, 2004                     By:  /s/ Michael Williams
                                                --------------------
                                                          Michael Williams
                                                        Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>




                                                                    Exhibit 31.1

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Donald P. Fusilli, Jr., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Michael Baker Corporation.

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual 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 annual report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 annual report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures 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 financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, 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 and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant'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 have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.

 /s/  Donald P. Fusilli, Jr.                              Dated:  March 15, 2004
--------------------------------------------
Donald P. Fusilli, Jr.
President and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.1
              CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

   Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 63 1350, the President of Art's-Way Manufacturing
Co., Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify that this Form 10-KSB and the
financial statements thereto fully comply with the requirements of
Sections 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the
information contained in the Form 10-KSB and the financial statements
thereto fairly present, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

By: /s/ E.W. Muehlhausen

Name: E.W. Muehlhausen
President

Date 2/28/07
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

477 

CA 14-01406 

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CARNI, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ. 

 

ROBERT H. METCALF, 

PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT-APPELLANT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

DAVID M. CUNNINGHAM, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS 

FIDUCIARY FOR THE ESTATE OF JOAN S. 

CUNNINGHAM, DECEASED, PETER CUNNINGHAM, 

KIM CUNNINGHAM, POSSIBLY KNOWN AS KIMBERLY 

CUNNINGHAM, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS-RESPONDENTS,

ET AL., DEFENDANTS. 

 

BOND, SCHOENECK & KING PLLC, ROCHESTER (JEFFREY F. ALLEN OF COUNSEL),

FOR DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS-RESPONDENTS.

HALL AND KARZ, CANANDAIGUA (PETER ROLPH OF COUNSEL), FOR

PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. 

 

Appeal and cross appeal from an order of the Supreme Court,

Ontario County (William F. Kocher, A.J.), entered October 29, 2013. 

The order, among other things, denied the motion of David M.

Cunningham, individually and as fiduciary for the estate of Joan S.

Cunningham, deceased, Peter Cunningham and Kim Cunningham seeking to

dismiss plaintiff’s amended complaint. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: We affirm for reasons stated in the amended decision

at Supreme Court. We write only to note that certain contentions of

David M. Cunningham, individually and as fiduciary for the estate of 

Joan S. Cunningham, deceased, Peter Cunningham and Kim Cunningham,

possibly known as Kimberly Cunningham (collectively, defendants), are

not properly before us on this appeal. Defendants’ contention that

plaintiff either waived the right to sue defendants for their conduct

occurring before plaintiff executed a purported easement, or is

estopped from asserting a claim for such conduct, is raised for the

first time on appeal, and thus is not properly before us (see

Ciesinski v Town of Aurora, 202 AD2d 984, 985). Similarly,

defendants’ contention that they are entitled to counsel fees arising

from plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is raised for the first

time in their reply brief on appeal, and “it is well settled that a

contention raised for the first time in a reply brief is not properly

before us” (Becker-Manning, Inc. v Common Council of City of Utica,
-2- 477 

CA 14-01406 

114 AD3d 1143, 1144; see HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v Prime, L.L.C., 125 AD3d

1307, 1307-1308; Przesiek v State of New York, 118 AD3d 1326, 1327).

Entered: July 10, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                           5
<CIK>                               0000842881
<NAME>                              GEODYNE ENERGY INCOME LTD PSHP II-E

<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                      JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                        SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                   664,644
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                            508,830
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                       1,173,474
<PP&E>                                13,519,973
<DEPRECIATION>                        11,712,530
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                         3,196,985
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     68,010
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                             3,086,723
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>           3,196,985
<SALES>                                1,994,401
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                       2,164,639
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            875,569
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                        1,289,070
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                    1,289,070
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                           1,289,070
<EPS-BASIC>                                 4.98
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0



</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7415

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

HORACE OMAR JACKSON, a/k/a Horace Banks, a/k/a

Omar Jackson, a/k/a Todd Banks,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Richard C. Erwin, Senior

District Judge. (CR-91-57-G, CA-97-58-2)

Submitted: February 12, 1998 Decided: February 26, 1998

Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Horace Omar Jackson, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin H. White, Jr.,

Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying

his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997).

We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court.

United States v. Jackson, Nos. CR-91-57-G; CA-97-58-2 (M.D.N.C.

Sept. 16, 1997). 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
EXHIBIT 23.1

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

     We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-74255, No. 333-87786 and No. 333-140781) and on Form S-3 (No. 333-92388, as amended, and 333-117534) of Atwood Oceanics, Inc. of our report dated November 25, 2008relating to the consolidated financial statementsand the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting,which appears in the Annual Report toShareholders which is filed hwerewith and  incorporated in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.                                                   /S/ PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP            PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP                           Houston, Texas            November 25, 2008
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Eddie Thompson, Jr., Appellant.

Submitted July 30, 2012;

decided August 28, 2012

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Jack H. Weiner, Esq., 1488 State Route 203, Chatham, New York 12037 assigned as counsel to the appellant on the appeal herein.
##### 



AMENDMENT NO. 3
TO CONSULTING AGREEMENT
         MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATIONAttest:
    
    
    
    (The Corporation)/s/ H. James McKnight
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Donald P. Fusilli, Jr.H. James McKnight
    
    
    
    
    
    Donald P. Fusilli, Jr.Secretary
    
    
    
    
    
    President & Chief Executive OfficerWitness:
    
    
    
    Richard L. Shaw(The Executive)/s/ Beverly J. Merriman
    
    
    
    /s/ Richard L. Shaw
#### K2 Investment Group, LLC, et al., Respondents-Appellants, v American Guarantee & Liability Insurance Company, Appellant-Respondent.

Decided June 7, 2012

On the Court’s own motion, appeal by respondents-appellants dismissed, without costs, upon the ground that the dissent at the Appellate Division is not on a question of law in favor of respondents-appellants *(see*CPLR 5601 [a]). Motion by respondents-appellants for leave to appeal granted.