alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed January 20, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D19-2257 Lower Tribunal No. 13-27684

________________ Giuliana Gomez De Cordova n/k/a Giuliana Llanso 

### , Appellant,
vs. Jose Gomez De Cordova 

### , Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Migna Sanchez-Llorens, Judge. Cruz Legal, P.A., and Marisol Cruz; Martinez-Scanziani & Associates Law, P.A. and Denise Martinez-Scanziani, for appellant. Valdespino & Associates, P.A., and Jacqueline M. Valdespino, for appellee. Before SCALES, GORDO and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM.2

Affirmed. See Llanso v. Gomez de Cordova, 263 So. 3d 137, 140-41 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (noting that “[o]ur reversal, however, is without prejudice to the trial court’s re-entry of a similar final judgment and subsequent orders as the interlocutory appeal has been dismissed”); see also Cadwell v. Cadwell, 549 So. 2d 1133, 1135 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (explaining that a final judgment may be reentered on remand “as the trial court deems appropriate”); Garcia-Lawson v. Lawson, 82 So. 3d 137, 138 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (“We note that, on remand, the trial court is authorized to re-enter the final judgment since the interlocutory appeals that prevented that court from disposing of the case have been resolved with finality.”). Both appellant and appellee move for appellate attorney’s fees. Pursuant to Rosen v. Rosen, 696 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1997), we remand both motions for appellate attorney’s fees to the trial court for further proceedings thereon.
ex-10_1.htm







Cross Border Resources, Inc., 8-K


 


Exhibit 10.1




 


CROSS BORDER RESOURCES, INC.


2515 McKinney, Ave, Suite 900


Dallas, Texas 75201







February 28, 2013







Frank James


4501 Spanish Club Oaks Blvd. #18


Austin, TX 78739







Gentlemen:







Reference is hereby made to the 2002 petition for reorganization with the United States Bankruptcy Court (“Bankruptcy Court”) made by Pure Energy Group, Inc. (“Pure Sub”), the predecessor to Cross Border Resources, Inc. (“XBOR”).  Pursuant to the plan of reorganization approved by the Bankruptcy Court, the undersigned is entitled to receive $608,726.91 as of February 28, 2013 for its claims from the future “net revenues” (generally defined as revenues from producing wells net of lease operating expenses and other direct costs) of XBOR (the “Fees”).







The undersigned and XBOR hereby agree that XBOR will pay the undersigned 50% of the Fees in cash ($304,363.45) and the other 50% by arranging for Red Mountain Resources, Inc., XBOR’s parent company (“RMR”), to issue to him an aggregate of 358,075 shares (“Shares”) of the common stock of RMR, valued at the closing price of RMR’s common stock on the date immediately preceding the date hereof.  The undersigned hereby represents and warrants that (i) he has been advised that the Shares have not been registered under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”), and that neither XBOR nor RMR is under any obligation to so register the Shares, (ii) the Shares will bear a restrictive legend and may not be pledged, sold or transferred except in accordance with federal and state securities laws of the United States, (iii) he is acquiring the Shares for his account for investment purposes only, (iv) he has no present intention of selling or otherwise disposing of the Shares in violation of the securities laws of the United States, (v) he is an “accredited investor” as defined by Rule 501 of Regulation D promulgated under the Securities Act, (vi) he is familiar with the business, management, financial condition and affairs of RMR and XBOR and (vi) he has reviewed all of the public filings made by XBOR and RMR with the Securities and Exchange Commission.







Please indicate your agreement to the foregoing in the space provided below.







 





	 	 	Very truly yours,
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	  	  	
CROSS BORDER RESOURCES, INC.


	  	  	  
	  	  	
By:

	
/s/ Kenneth S. Lamb


	  	  	
Name:

	Kenneth S. Lamb  
	  	  	
Title:

	Secretary  







	 	 	
RED MOUNTAIN RESOURCES, INC.


	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	
By:

	
/s/ Alan W. Barksdale


	 	 	
Name:

	Alan W. Barksdale
	 	 	
Title:

	President and CEO






 







	
ACCEPTED AND AGREED AS OF

	  
	THE DATE FIRST ABOVE WRITTEN:	 
	 	 
	  	  
	

/s/ Frank James



	  
	Frank James
Exhibit 31.1

                          CERTIFICATIONS

I, John W. Winterholler, Chief Executive Officer of Speaking Roses
International, Inc., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Speaking Roses
International, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 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 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 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
     report is being prepared;

     b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
     and procedures and presented in this 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
     second fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2005 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.

Date:     August 19 , 2005    By   /s/ John W. Winterholler,
                              Chief Executive Officer
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Hostopia.com Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Colin Campbell, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, to my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (1350, as adopted pursuant to (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, as amended; and |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

| Date: August 14, 2007 | /s/ COLIN CAMPBELL   |
|-----------------------|--------------------------------|

|   | Colin Campbell |
|--------|----------------|

|   | Chief Executive Officer |
|--------|-------------------------|

 

 

33

----
#### MISKELL v. W. T. COWN, Inc.

No. 11256.

United States District Court E. D. Pennsylvania.

Dec. 5, 1950.

*618Morris L. Rush, Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiff.

Swartz, Campbell & Henry, Philadelphia, Pa., for defendant.

McGRANERY, District Judge.

Defendant moves to bring in a third party, under Rule 14, Fed.Rules Civ.Proc. 28 U.S.C.A., in a case arising out of an automobile accident. The plaintiff opposes the motion on the ground that the proposed third party is a sailor who may be unavailable at the time of the trial, and who may consequently be in a position to invoke the Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Civil Relief Act, 50 U.S.CA.Appendix, § 501 et seq., to the prejudice of the plaintiff’s interest in a prompt disposition of the case.

The plaintiff’s concern is, I believe, premature. For even though the motion to implead be granted, this Court has, under the Federal Rules, ample discretion to protect the plaintiff from prejudice and inconvenience. If, at the time of trial, the third party is not required to answer, the Court may order a separate trial between plaintiff and defendant under Rule 42(b) and, under Rule 54(b) enter a separate judgment. In this manner, not only may the plaintiff be protected, but the defendant may also be protected against the necessity of filing a separate suit should the situation not require it. Accordingly, the defendant’s motion will be granted.
, 

(

)

V.

DAVID FINDEL 0 R D E R

Upon application of the United States Attorney for the

District of New Jersey (by Frances C. Bajada, Assistant United

States Attorney), for an order unsealing the Affidavit in support

of the Amended Order of Forfeiture and all related documents in

the above-captioned matter, and good and sufficient cause having

been shown,

IT IS on this day of March, 2011,

ORDERED that the Sealing Order previously entered in

the above-captioned matter is no longer in effect; and it is

further

ORDERED that the Affidavit in support of the Amended

Order of Forfeiture and all related documents in the above

captioned matter be UNSEALED.

HONORABLE PETER S. SHERIDAN

United States District Judge
SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Chart 2-5. Education pays for everyone, regardless of race or 

Hispanic ethnicity

$0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200

Bachelor's degree and

higher

Some college or

associate degree

High school graduates,

no college

Less than a high school

diploma

White

Black or African American

Asian

Hispanic or Latino

2005

Median weekly earnings of full-time wage and salary workers 25 years of age and over

Chart 2-5. Education pays for everyone, regardless of race or 

Hispanic ethnicity

• Regardless of race or Hispanic ethnicity, college graduates earn substantially 

more than do high school graduates and more than twice as much as high 

school dropouts. 

• In 2005, for example, median weekly earnings for black high school dropouts 

were $372, while earnings for black college graduates were $828.

• Among Hispanics, median weekly earnings for high school dropouts were 

$388, while earnings for Hispanic college graduates were $866.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 December 21, 2016

a1214

Order 

Clerk

December 21, 2016

154396 & (79)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellant/

Cross-Appellee,

v SC: 154396

COA: 325782 

Wayne CC: 14-006454-FH

GARY PATRICK LEWIS,

Defendant-Appellee/

Cross-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 21, 2016 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered. We direct the Clerk to schedule oral 

argument on whether to grant the application or take other action. MCR 7.305(H)(1). 

The parties shall file supplemental briefs within 42 days of the date of this order 

addressing whether the denial of counsel to the defendant at his preliminary examination 

is an error requiring automatic reversal or whether harmless error analysis applies. The 

parties should not submit mere restatements of their application papers.

The application for leave to appeal as cross-appellant remains pending.
**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**

| (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. |
|-----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                              |                                                                 |         |         |
|---------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------|--------------|
| Date:              November 14,              2006 |                                                                 |
|                                              |                                                            |    |    |
|  By:                                         | * /s/*              Dennis C. Cossey                            |         |         |
|                                              | Name:                Dennis C. CosseyTitle:                President |              |
|                                              |                                                                 |         |

----
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 31, 2022

No. 04-22-00308-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF M.A.C.

From the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2021EM503388

Honorable Nick Catoe Jr., Judge Presiding

O R D E R

On August 30, 2022, this court received appellant’s brief. The brief violates Texas Rule 

of Appellate Procedure 38 in that it does not (1) identify the parties and counsel; (2) include a 

table of contents; (3) include an index of authorities; (4) include a statement of the case; (5) 

include a brief statement of the issues presented; (6) include record references in the statement of 

facts; (7) include a summary of the argument; (8) include a conclusion stating the nature of the 

relief sought. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1. While substantial compliance with Rule 38 is sufficient, 

this court may order a party to amend, supplement, or redraw a brief if it flagrantly violates Rule 

38. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.9(a). We conclude that the formal defects described above constitute 

flagrant violations of Rule 38. 

We, therefore, ORDER Appellant Guillermo Valverde III to file an amended brief within 

twenty days from the date of this order. If the amended brief does not correct the violations, we 

may strike the brief and prohibit appellant from filing another. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.9(a); see 

also id. 42.3(c) (allowing dismissal of appellant’s appeal if appellant fails to comply with a 

requirement of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure or an order of this court).

_________________________________

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 31st day of August, 2022.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
Case 1:97-cv-05127-RBK-JS Document 1000 Filed 02/13/08 Page 1 of 12 PageID: 7692
Case 1:97-cv-05127-RBK-JS Document 1000 Filed 02/13/08 Page 2 of 12 PageID: 7693
Case 1:97-cv-05127-RBK-JS Document 1000 Filed 02/13/08 Page 3 of 12 PageID: 7694
Case 1:97-cv-05127-RBK-JS Document 1000 Filed 02/13/08 Page 4 of 12 PageID: 7695
Case 1:97-cv-05127-RBK-JS Document 1000 Filed 02/13/08 Page 5 of 12 PageID: 7696
Case 1:97-cv-05127-RBK-JS Document 1000 Filed 02/13/08 Page 6 of 12 PageID: 7697
Case 1:97-cv-05127-RBK-JS Document 1000 Filed 02/13/08 Page 7 of 12 PageID: 7698
Case 1:97-cv-05127-RBK-JS Document 1000 Filed 02/13/08 Page 8 of 12 PageID: 7699
Case 1:97-cv-05127-RBK-JS Document 1000 Filed 02/13/08 Page 9 of 12 PageID: 7700
Case 1:97-cv-05127-RBK-JS Document 1000 Filed 02/13/08 Page 10 of 12 PageID: 7701
Case 1:97-cv-05127-RBK-JS Document 1000 Filed 02/13/08 Page 11 of 12 PageID: 7702
Case 1:97-cv-05127-RBK-JS Document 1000 Filed 02/13/08 Page 12 of 12 PageID: 7703
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion

s hould not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________
No. 97-21012

_______________

NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

VERSUS

MARIO TURTUR,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

(H-94-MC-278)

_________________________ NOvember 13, 1998

Before KING, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

We have reviewed the briefs and have heard oral argument from

counsel and have examined pertinent portions of the record. Much

of defendant Turtur's defense is actually an attempt to challenge

the turnover order collaterally; this is improper. We see no error

in the order of November 25, 1997, which, in part, finds Turtur in

civil contempt and directs him to pay certain sums and produce2

statements of account, or be incarcerated for failure to comply, or

in the order of December 18, 1997, which, in part, orders Turtur to

pay certain sums or be remanded to custody.

This court is of the opinion tha t it is time for this

seemingly endless litigation to be brought to conclusion, in light

of the lack of merit in any of Turtur's arguments. AFFIRMED.
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 Annual Report of OSK Capital III Corp., (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the
period ending December 31, 2003 (the "Report"), I, Deborah Salerno, President and a Director 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 requirement 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 Company's
> financial position and results of operations.

/s/Deborah Salerno



 Deborah Salerno,

 President and a Director

April 8, 2004
Raymond Miley, lIIi

Defendant

) ))

The court has ordered that (check one):

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL ACTION

D the plaintiff (name)

defendant (name) —- interest at the rate of dollars ($ -—_______%, plus post judgment interest at the rate of

recover from the 

the amount of

), which includes prejudgment

% per annum, along with costs.

D the plaintiff recover nothing, the action be dismissed on the merits, and the defendant (name)

other:

recover costs from the plaintiff (name)

Judgment is hereby entered in favor of Defendant Raymond Miley, Ill and against Plaintiff City Select Auto

Sales, Inc., a New Jersey corporation, individually and as the representative of a class of similar situatedpersons.

This action was (‘check one,):

91’ Tried by ajury with the undersigned_presiding, and the jury has rendered a verdict.l tried by Judge without a jury and the above decision

was reached.

D decided by Judge on a motion for

Date: M--

EROME B. SIMANDLE

Chief U.S. District Judge

LI
**Exhibit 32.3**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of PRIMEDIA Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert J. Sforzo, Senior VicePresident, Chief Accounting Officer and Controller of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

(1)          The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)          The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| /s/ Robert  J. Sforzo                                             |     |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------|----------|--------|
| Robert J. Sforzo                                                  |     |
| *Senior Vice President, Chief Accounting Officer  and Controller* | * * |

 

August 7, 2007

This certification accompanies each Report pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to theextent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by theCompany for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,as amended.

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained bythe Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

----