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

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 419 

Acknowledging the contributions of America’s addiction professionals and 

their commitment to delivering evidence-based practice to individuals 

with substance use disorders through recognized standards of education, 

training, and competencies. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 3, 2019 

Mr. JOYCE of Ohio (for himself, Mr. RYAN, Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio, Mr. 

TONKO, Mr. SENSENBRENNER, and Ms. KUSTER of New Hampshire) 

submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee 

on Energy and Commerce 

RESOLUTION 

Acknowledging the contributions of America’s addiction professionals and their commitment to delivering evidencebased practice to individuals with substance use disorders 

through recognized standards of education, training, and 

competencies. 

Whereas the addiction professional workforce represents more 

than 100,000 counselors, educators, and other addictionfocused health care professionals; 

Whereas addiction professionals specialize in prevention, 

intervention, treatment, recovery support, and education; 

Whereas addiction professionals work across a wide variety of 

settings including outpatient care centers, mental health 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 419 IH 

and substance use disorder facilities, general medicine 

and surgical hospitals, psychiatric and substance use disorder hospitals, private practice, clinics, as well as prisons, probation agencies, juvenile detention facilities, halfway houses, detoxification centers and more; and 

Whereas addiction professionals are addressing the full range 

of substance use disorders in our communities across the 

treatment and recovery continuum, including in the face 

of the current opioid crisis: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives supports 

2 the delivery of evidence-based care for substance use dis3 order by acknowledging the contributions of addiction pro4 fessionals and encourages that recognized credentials re5 flect the requisite knowledge, training, and competencies 

6 for delivering quality, effective substance use disorder 

7 counseling. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
NO. 07-11-0139-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL C

NOVEMBER 9, 2012

HARVEY BRAMLETT JR. and JASON BLAKENEY, 

Appellants

v.

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE INSTITUTIONAL 

DIVISION, et al.,

Appellees

_____________________________

FROM THE 108TH DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY;

NO. 99,017-00-E; HONORABLE DOUGLAS WOODBURN, PRESIDING

Memorandum Opinion

Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.

Harvey Bramlett Jr. and Jason Blakeney, indigent inmates, appeal from the trial 

court‟s dismissal of their lawsuit against the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and 

specified individual employees of the Department (collectively referred to as “the 

Department”). Though they allege various issues, we need only address one. It 

pertains to the trial court‟s execution of the dismissal order several months after the two 

inmates moved to recuse the trial judge. We reverse and remand.
2

On November 10, 2010, the district clerk of Potter County received “Plaintiffs[„]

Verified Motion for Recusal.” They alleged therein that the trial judge was subject to 

recusal because he was a defendant in a separate lawsuit they initiated against him. 

Nothing of record indicates that the trial judge either denied the motion or forwarded it to 

the regional presiding judge for disposition. Nor does anyone contend that such was 

done. Instead, and in apparent response to the Department‟s motion to dismiss, the 

trial judge executed a “Final Judgment” dismissing the cause on March 14, 2011.

Once a party files a motion to recuse, the trial court has the obligation to either 

recuse himself or request the presiding judge of the administrative judicial district to 

assign a judge to hear the matter. TEX. R. CIV. P. 18a(c).1 And, “[e]xcept for good 

cause stated in the order in which further action is taken, the judge shall make no 

further orders and shall take no further action in the case after filing of the motion and 

prior to a hearing on the motion.” Id. 18a(d). More importantly, orders issued in 

contravention of Rule 18a(d) are void. In re Stearman, 252 S.W.3d 113, 117 (Tex. App.

–Waco 2008, orig. proceeding); In re A.R., 236 S.W.3d 460, 477 (Tex. App.–Dallas 

2007, no pet.). Because the trial court did not comply with Rule 18a(c) once the motion 

to recuse was filed or 18a(d) when issuing its order dismissing the suit (i.e. provide 

good cause for proceeding), the dismissal order was and is void.

Accordingly, we reverse the “Final Judgment” and remand the cause.

Brian Quinn 

Chief Justice

 

1

Because the motion was filed and the dismissal executed before the 2011 changes to Texas 

Rule of Civil Procedure 18a became effective, we apply the provisions of Rule 18a in existence before the 

2011 changes. But, the result would be the same irrespective of which rules were applied.
-1- 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

COURT OF APPEALS 

TED WHITBY, f/k/a THEODORE WHITBY, 

 Plaintiff-Appellant, 

and 

TRACEY WHITBY, 

 Plaintiff, 

UNPUBLISHED 

July 16, 2015 

v No. 321272 

Calhoun Circuit Court 

DENNIS LEE WRIGHT, a/k/a DENNIS L. 

WRIGHT, 

LC No. 2013-001578-NO 

 Defendant-Appellee. 

Before: O’CONNELL, P.J., and OWENS and M. J. KELLY, JJ. 

M. J. KELLY, J. (concurring). 

 I concur in the result only. 

/s/ Michael J. Kelly
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Rogelio Figueroa, Appellant.

[821 NYS2d 763]

Judgments, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Michael A. Gross, J.), rendered February 21, 2002, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of manslaughter in the second degree, and upon his pleas of guilty, of bail jumping in the first degree, criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to an aggregate term of IOV2 to 21 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning credibility. The evidence disproved defendant’s justification defense beyond a reasonable doubt.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Tom, J.E, Marlow, Sullivan, McGuire and Malone, JJ.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

MICHAEL MARQUARDT

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 17

- 2905

[ January 11, 2018 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.853 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Glenn D. Kelley , Judge;

L.T. Case No. 2009CF005155AMB

.

Michael Marquardt, Jasper, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

W ARNER

, D AMOORGIAN and C IKLIN

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
EXHIBIT 32.2
 Certification of Chief Financial Officer of Concho Resources Inc.
(Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)
  1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date: May 7, 2010
    
    /s/ Darin G. Holderness

Darin G. HoldernessVice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
#### In the Matter of Douglas Latta, Appellant, v Maxwell Wiley et al., Respondents.

Submitted July 8, 2013;

decided September 3, 2013

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the issues presented have become moot.

Judge Abdus-Salaam taking no part.
#### In the Matter of Setona Hall, Appellant, v Raymond W. Kelly, as Police Commissioner of the City of New York, and as Executive Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Police Pension Fund, Article II, et al., Respondents.

[822 NYS2d 534]

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Michael D. Stallman, J.), entered December 2, 2005, which denied the petition brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking to annul respondents’ denial of accidental disability retirement benefits to petitioner, and dismissed the proceeding, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Contemporaneous accounts of petitioner’s injury included her own statement in the line-of-duty injury report that she had injured her knee as she ran in formation with her classmates in the gym of the Police Academy. Not until two years later did she allege that her injuries resulted from a slippery substance or foreign object on the gym floor. In reaching its determination, by a tie vote, to deny accidental disability retirement benefits, the Board of Trustees reasonably relied on the contemporaneous accounts of petitioner’s line-of-duty injury *(see Matter of Reichfeld v Safir,*259 AD2d 298 [1999], *lv denied*93 NY2d 809 [1999]). We cannot say, as a matter of law, that the injury was the result of an accident and not petitioner’s own misstep *(see Matter of Morgan v Kerik,*305 AD2d 288 [2003], *lv denied*1 NY3d 507 [2004]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.E, Friedman, Nardelli, Williams and Malone, JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Donny P. Beaty, Appellant.

Submitted August 13, 2012;

decided August 28, 2012

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Timothy E Donaher, Esq., Monroe County Public Defender, 10 N. Fitzhugh Street, Rochester, New York 14614 assigned as counsel to the appellant on the appeal herein.
IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 515 

Expressing support for the designation of October 23, 2019, as a national 

day of remembrance of the tragic 1983 terrorist bombing of the United 

States Marine Corps Barracks in Beirut, Lebanon. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 24, 2019 

Mr. PENCE (for himself, Mr. GALLAGHER, Mr. CARBAJAL, and Mr. 

MOULTON) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Oversight and Reform 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing support for the designation of October 23, 2019, 

as a national day of remembrance of the tragic 1983 

terrorist bombing of the United States Marine Corps 

Barracks in Beirut, Lebanon. 

Whereas the United States deployed members of the Armed 

Forces to Lebanon in 1982 as part of a multinational 

peacekeeping force; 

Whereas early on the morning of October 23, 1983, a truck 

packed with explosives detonated outside of a building at 

Beirut International Airport that served as quarters for 

several hundred members of the United States Armed 

Forces deployed as part of the peacekeeping force; 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 515 IH 

Whereas 241 members of the Armed Forces were killed in 

the blast; 

Whereas the Americans killed included 220 Marines, members of the 1st Battalion, 8th Marines-Battalion Landing 

Team, which made October 23, 1983, the deadliest day 

for the Marine Corps since the Battle of Iwo Jima in 

February 1945 during World War II; 

Whereas, in addition to the Marine Corps casualties, 18 Navy 

sailors and 3 Army soldiers were killed, and more than 

100 other members of the Armed Forces were injured; 

Whereas members of the Armed Forces from 39 States and 

Puerto Rico died while serving in Beirut, Lebanon, from 

1982 to 1984; 

Whereas, on the same day as the bombing of the Marine 

Corps Barracks, another suicide bomber killed 58 French 

paratroopers housed at another building in Beirut; and 

Whereas it is fitting and proper that the events of October 

23, 1983, and the members of the United States Armed 

Forces who died in Beirut on that day are recognized 

through the establishment of a national remembrance day 

on October 23: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) supports the designation of a national day 

3 of remembrance for members of the United States 

4 Armed Forces who were killed or injured by the ter5 rorist attack on the United States Marine Corps 

6 Barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, on October 23, 1983; 

7 and 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HRES 515 IH 

1 (2) encourages the people of the United States 

2 to support and participate in appropriate cere3 monies, programs, and other activities in observance 

4 of such a national day of remembrance. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
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

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of Dreams, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the year ending March 31, 2006, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ross Tannenbaum, Principal Financial 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, to the best of my knowledge, 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 fully presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|    |  |                            
|--- |  | ---------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Ross Tannenbaum        
|    |  | Ross Tannenbaum            
|    |  | Principal Financial Officer
|    |  | July 13, 2006
Exhibit 32.1

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

     In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of LILM,  Inc. (the "Company") on
Form  10-QSB  for the  period  ended  September  30,  2006,  as  filed  with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, George
I. Norman, III, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that:

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

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


/s/   GEORGE I. NORMAN, III
---------------------------------
George I. Norman, III
Chief Executive Officer
March 29, 2007



     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 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.  The foregoing  certifications  are  accompanying  the
     Company's Form 10-QSB solely pursuant to section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley
     Act of 2002  (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350,  chapter 63 of title
     18,  United  States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-QSB
     or as a separate disclosure document.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-19-00708-CR

Imelda BARRERA,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 79th Judicial District Court, Brooks County, Texas

Trial Court No. 18-06-11255-CRSI

Honorable Federico Hinojosa, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Irene Rios, Justice

Beth Watkins, Justice

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: May 6, 2020

DISMISSED

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal. The motion is signed by both appellant 

and her attorney. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a). We, therefore, grant the motion and dismiss this 

appeal. See id.

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
Exhibit 23.1

 

Consent of IndependentRegistered Public Accounting Firm

** **

Navidea Biopharmaceuticals, Inc.

Dublin, Ohio

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the RegistrationStatements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-173752 and 333-184173) and Form S-8 (Nos. 333-05143, 333-119219, 333-130636, 333-130640, 333-153110,333-158323 and 333-183317) of Navidea Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. of our reports dated March 18, 2013, relating to the consolidatedfinancial statements, and the effectiveness of Navidea Biopharmaceuticals, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting,which appear in this Form 10-K.

 

/s/ BDO USA, LLP

 

Chicago, Illinois

March 18, 2013
# Refsum Disease, Adult

## What is adult Refsum disease?

Adult Refsum disease (ARD) is a rare genetic disease that causes weakness or numbness of the hands and feet (peripheral neuropathy). Due to a genetic abnormality, people with ARD disease lack the enzyme in peroxisomes that break down phytanic acid, a type of fat found in certain foods. As a result, toxic levels of phytanic acid build up in the brain, blood, and other tissues.

The disease usually begins in late childhood or early adulthood with increasing night blindness due to degeneration of the retina (retinitis pigmentosa). If the disease progresses, other symptoms may include:

                    - Deafness
                    - Loss of the sense of smell (anosmia)
                    - Problems with balance and coordination (ataxia)

                    - Dry and scaly skin (ichthyosis)
                    - Heartbeat abnormalities (cardiac arrhythmias)

Some individuals will have shortened bones in their fingers or toes, or a visibly shortened fourth toe. Although the disease usually appears in early childhood, some people will not develop symptoms until their 40s or 50s.

ARD is treatable because phytanic acid is not produced by the body but is only found in foods. With treatment, muscle weakness, numbness, and dry and scaly skin generally disappear. However, vision and hearing problems may persist, and the sense of smell may not return. Untreated, ARD can lead to sudden death caused by heartbeat abnormalities.

file-medical

## How can I or my loved one help improve care for people with adult Refsum disease?

ARD is considered a rare disease, which often means there is not much information known about it. This is usually the case because doctors and researchers do not see many people with the disorder, which makes it hard to learn from them through observations or large studies. 

Consider participating in a clinical trial so clinicians and scientists can learn more about ARD and related disorders. Clinical research uses human volunteers to help researchers learn more about a disorder and perhaps find better ways to safely detect, treat, or prevent disease. 

All types of volunteers are needed—those who are healthy or may have an illness or disease—of all different ages, sexes, races, and ethnicities to ensure that study results apply to as many people as possible, and that treatments will be safe and effective for everyone who will use them. 

For information about participating in clinical research visit NIH Clinical Research Trials and You. Learn about clinical trials currently looking for people with ARD at Clinicaltrials.gov.
> Where can I find more information about adult Refsum disease?
Information may be available from the following resources:

Genetic and Rare Diseases (GARD) Information Center

Global DARE Foundation

MedlinePlus

PubMed

United Leukodystrophy FoundationPhone 815-748-3211 or 800-728-5483

## Learn about related topics

              - Leukodystrophy

book-open
#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v Angel Malave, Respondent.

[975 NYS2d 909]

Appeal by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kron, J.), dated April 25, 2011, which, after a hearing, granted the defendant’s motion to suppress physical evidence and his statement to law enforcement officials.

Ordered that the order is affirmed.

The hearing court properly granted the defendant’s motion to *652suppress physical evidence and his statement to law enforcement officials. Following a one-car accident, while the defendant was semi-conscious on an ambulance stretcher, a police officer searched the pockets of the defendant’s jacket, allegedly looking for the defendant’s vehicle registration and insurance card for the purposes of completing an accident report. At the time, the police officer was already in possession of the defendant’s driver license. The police officer discovered a firearm and marijuana inside the pocket of the defendant’s jacket and placed him under arrest. The defendant subsequently admitted to ownership of the marijuana.

Contrary to the People’s contention, the hearing court properly suppressed the physical evidence obtained from the police officer’s search under these circumstances *(see People v Cook, 85*NY2d 928, 931 [1995]). Additionally, the hearing court correctly granted that branch of the defendant’s motion which was to suppress his statement to the police officer, as that statement was fruit of the unlawful arrest *(see Wong Sun v United States,*371 US 471, 488 [1963]; *People v Jennings,*54 NY2d 518, 522 [1981]; *People v Isaacs,*101 AD3d 1152, 1152 [2012]). Rivera, J.P, Lott, Sgroi and Miller, JJ., concur.