alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Burbage *v.*The American National Bank.

Bleckley, C. J. — When one and his family are temporarily absent from the city and county of his permanent residence, by reason of the prevalence of an epidemic, he is still subject to suit by ordinary action in the superior court of that county, and service of process upon him may be effected by leaving a copy of the same at his residence during such absence.

October 22, 1894.

Traverse of sheriff’s return. Before Judge Sweat. ■Glynn superior court. December term, 1893.

Burbage was residing at Brunswick with his family prior to the breaking out of an epidemic of yellow fever there in the summer and fall of 1893, in a house that was then, and for ten years had been, his permanent home and residence. On August 12, 1893, he refugeed with his family to a point outside of Glynn county, and was away from said county with his family on November 17,1898, the date of service of this suit, which was made by leaving a copy of the suit at the residence first mentioned. He left his residence with the full intension of returning to it as soon as the epidemic was over, .and only on account of the epidemic, and with no intention of remaining away permanently. He did return to said residence with his family on December 3, *5041893, as soon as the epidemic was over, where he has-since resided, and which is now his permanent residence. He had a temporary residence in Atlanta, Ga., while absent as before mentioned, and during his absence his-home in Brunswick was occasionally visited' by his hired servant to whose care he committed it when he refugeed. The issue made by the traverse of the return of service-was submitted to the judge on the foregoing facts. He sustained the return of service, and Burbage excepted.

*503*Judgment affirmed.*

*504Goodyear & Kay and Crovatt & Whiteield, for plaintiff" in error. Owens Johnson, *contra.*
# Occupational Requirements Survey Latest Numbers

Latest Numbers for Occupational Requirements Survey, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

- Occupational Requirements Survey Latest Numbers Physical demands of civilian workers															           Sedentary work strength level					29.3%  in  2023					Historical Data								           Light work strength level					32.9%  in  2023					Historical Data								           Medium work strength level					28.6%  in  2023					Historical Data								           Heavy work strength level					8.2%  in  2023					Historical Data								           Very heavy work strength level					1.0%  in  2023					Historical Data																		Environmental conditions of civilian workers															           Exposed to outdoors					33.0%  in  2023					Historical Data								           Quiet noise intensity level					13.5%  in  2023					Historical Data								           Moderate noise intensity level					80.2%  in  2023					Historical Data								           Loud noise intensity level					6.1%  in  2023					Historical Data																		Education, training, and experience of civilian workers															           No minimum education requirement					30.0%  in  2023					Historical Data								           High school diploma education requirement					40.1%  in  2023					Historical Data								           Associate's degree education requirement					4.3%  in  2023					Historical Data								           Bachelor's degree education requirement					19.3%  in  2023					Historical Data								           Master's degree education requirement					2.5%  in  2023					Historical Data								           Professional degree education requirement					1.4%  in  2023					Historical Data																		Cognitive and mental requirements of civilian workers															           Interaction with the general public					79.2%  in  2023					Historical Data								           Varying work pace					52.9%  in  2023					Historical Data								           Telework available					11.4%  in  2023					Historical Data
EXHIBIT NO 99.2

                         ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

                           PREMIER AUTO FINANCE, INC.

             OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE / ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

The undersigned certifies that he is President of Premier Auto Finance, Inc.
(Premier), and that as such is duly authorized to execute and deliver this
certificate on behalf of Premier, as Servicer, in connection with the Sale and
Servicing Agreement (the Sale and Servicing Agreement) dated as of August 24,
2000 by and among Premier, as Servicer, Dealer Auto Receivables Corp. (DARC),
The Bank of New York, as Indenture Trustee and Dealer Auto Receivables Owner
Trust 2000-1 (Issuer), (all capitalized terms used herein without definition
having the respective meaning set forth in the Sale and Servicing Agreement),
and further certifies and follows:

(1)  This Certificate is being delivered pursuant to Section 9.02 and 9.05 of
     the Sale and Servicing Agreement

(2)  A review of the activities of the Servicer during Calendar year 2002 and of
     Premier's performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement was made under
     my supervision.

(3)  To my knowledge, based the review, Premier has fully performed all its
     obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement.

It is understood and acknowledged that the undersigned is executing this
Certificate not in an individual capacity by solely in his capacity as an
officer and is without any personal liability as to the matters contained in
this Certificate.

In Witness Whereof, I have affixed by signature hereto as of February 26, 2003.

By: /s/ David Greenberg
    --------------------------------

Printed Name:  David Greenberg
Title:         CEO
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 649 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 649

      For the relief of Web's Construction Company, Incorporated.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 5, 2003

   Mr. Wynn introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      For the relief of Web's Construction Company, Incorporated.

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

SECTION 1. PAYMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION WORK.

     The Secretary of the Treasury shall pay, out of any money in the 
Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Web's Construction Company, 
Incorporated, a company incorporated in the State of Maryland, 
$262,500, plus a reasonable rate of interest (as determined by the 
Secretary) for the period beginning February 1, 1990, and ending on the 
date of such payment, for construction work performed for the benefit 
of the Corps of Engineers in connection with Contract No. DACA31-88-C-
0316. Payment of the sum shall be in full satisfaction of any claim of 
Web's Construction Company, Incorporated, against the United States in 
connection with the construction work.

SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON ATTORNEY FEES.

     It shall be unlawful for an amount exceeding 10 percent of the 
amount paid pursuant to section 1 to be paid to, or received by, any 
agent or attorney for any service rendered in connection with the claim 
described in section 1. Any person who violates this section shall be 
guilty of an infraction, and shall be subject to a fine in the amount 
provided in title 18, United States Code.
                                 <all>
```
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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than August 6, 2009.

**A. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco**                     (Kenneth Binning, Vice President, Applications and Enforcement) 101 Market Street, San Francisco, California 94105-1579:                

*1. Dante B. Benedetti*, Petaluma, California, and James M. Ryan, Santa Rosa, California; to become trustees of the Frank P. Doyle Trust, Article IX, and thereby retain voting shares of Exchange Bank, both of Santa Rosa, California.                

*2. Rommel R. Medina and Ruell R. Medina*, both of San Bruno, California; to acquire additional voting shares of MNB Holdings Corporation, and thereby indirectly acquire additional voting shares of Mission National Bank, both of San Francisco, California.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 17, 2009.

Jennifer J. Johnson,

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. E9-17388 Filed 7-21-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-14-0000785

15-JUN-2015

07:50 AM
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

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



I, the undersigned, Richard N. Snyder, Chief Executive Officer, of Forgent Networks, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, that:



| | 1. | The quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended October 31, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as amended (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)), 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/ RICHARD N. SNYDERRichard N. SnyderChief Executive OfficerDecember 15, 2004
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 502 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 502

To require identification that may be used in obtaining Federal public 
     benefits to meet restrictions ensuring that it is secure and 
                              verifiable.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 29, 2003

    Mr. Tancredo (for himself, Mr. Deal of Georgia, Mr. Duncan, Mr. 
Norwood, Mr. Schrock, Mr. Bartlett of Maryland, Mr. Smith of Texas, Mr. 
 Weldon of Florida, Mr. Rohrabacher, Mr. Akin, Mr. Goode, Mr. King of 
 Iowa, and Mr. Miller of Florida) introduced the following bill; which 
was referred to the Committee on Government Reform, and in addition to 
the Committees on the Judiciary and House Administration, for a period 
    to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the 
                          committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To require identification that may be used in obtaining Federal public 
     benefits to meet restrictions ensuring that it is secure and 
                              verifiable.

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

SECTION 1. SECURE AND VERIFIABLE IDENTIFICATION REQUIRED FOR FEDERAL 
              PUBLIC BENEFITS.

    (a) In General.--In the provision in the United States of a Federal 
public benefit or service, including a law enforcement service, that 
requires the recipient to produce identification, no Federal agency, 
commission, or other entity within the executive, legislative, or 
judicial branch of the Federal Government may accept, recognize, or 
rely on (or authorize the acceptance or recognition of, or the reliance 
on) any identification document, unless the document was issued by a 
Federal or State authority and is subject to verification by a Federal 
law enforcement, intelligence, or homeland security agency.
    (b) Immunity.--An elected or appointed official, employee, or other 
contractor or agent of the Federal Government who takes an action 
inconsistent with subsection (a) is deemed to be acting beyond the 
scope of authority granted by law and shall not be immune from 
liability for such action, unless such immunity is conferred by the 
Constitution and cannot be waived.
    (c) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress that the 50 
States and the District of Columbia should implement policies modeled 
on this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 99.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report of World Am Communications, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2002
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, James H. Alexander, Chief Executive Officer
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  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 result of operations
of the Company.


/s/ James H. Alexander
James H. Alexander
Chief Executive Officer
April 11, 2003
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 588 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 588

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for coverage 
  under the Medicare Program of immunosuppressive drugs for Medicare 
 beneficiaries who receive an organ transplant without regard to when 
                      the transplant was received.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 5, 2003

Mr. LaTourette introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy 
    and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
  Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 
           within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for coverage 
  under the Medicare Program of immunosuppressive drugs for Medicare 
 beneficiaries who receive an organ transplant without regard to when 
                      the transplant was received.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Medicare Fairness for Organ 
Transplant Recipients Act of 2003''.

SEC. 2. COVERAGE OF IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE DRUGS FOR MEDICARE BENEFICIARIES 
              WITHOUT REGARD TO WHEN AN ORGAN TRANSPLANT OCCURRED.

    (a) In General.--Section 1861(s)(2)(J) of the Social Security Act 
(42 U.S.C. 1395x(s)(2)(J)) is amended by striking ``for which payment 
is made under this title''.
    (b) Stylistic Amendment.--Such section is further amended by 
striking the comma after ``furnished''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to drugs furnished on or after the date of the enactment of this 
Act.
                                 <all>
```
Case 3:11-cv-04194-PGS-DEA Document 29 Filed 10/03/12 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 710
Case 3:11-cv-04194-PGS-DEA Document 29 Filed 10/03/12 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 711
Case 3:11-cv-04194-PGS-DEA Document 29 Filed 10/03/12 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 712
Order entered December 19 , 2022

In The 

### Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05

- 22

- 00419

- CR
EDWIN NOEL HERNANDEZ , Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee On Appeal from the Cr i minal District Court No. 2 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F

- 2115517

- I
O RDER Appellant was convicted of capital murder. His brief names the minor
victim and a minor witness

. B ecause the brief is in violation of rule 9.10 of the
Texa s Rules o f Appellate Procedure, we STRIKE appellant’s brief

. See T EX

. R.
A PP P . 9.10(a)( 3), (b)

. We ORDE R appellant to file, w ithin FIFTEEN DAYS of the d ate of this order, an amended brief that identif ies the minor victim and the minor witness b y initials only

./s / ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF JUSTICE
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7418

LEAMON L. TATUM,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

DIVISION OF CORRECTION; MARYLAND HOUSE OF CORRECTION; RICHARD LANHAM, DOC Comm.; WILLIAM L.

SMITH, MHC-J Warden; MAJOR WILLIAMS; CAPTAIN

KOPPEL,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA96-1009-S)

Submitted: January 9, 1997 Decided: January 24, 1997

Before HALL and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Leamon L. Tatum, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Toni-Jean Lisa, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF

MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Leamon L. Tatum appeals the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Tatum v. Division of Correction, No. CA-96-1009-S (D. Md.

Aug. 8, 1996). We deny Appellant's motions to appoint counsel and

for production of documents. We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
S07Y0720.

#### IN THE MATTER OF ANDREW JAMES McKENNA.

(651 SE2d 80)

Per curiam.

This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of the Special Master recommending that Respondent Andrew James McKenna be disbarred for his violations of Rule 8.4 (a) (4) of Bar Rule 4-102 (d) of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct. The maximum penalty for a violation of Rule 8.4 (a) (4) is disbarment. The State Bar issued a Formal Complaint in this matter and served McKenna, who resides in New York, by publication. After McKenna failed to respond as required by Bar Rule 4-212 (a), the State Bar filed a motion for findings of fact and conclusions of law by default, which the special master granted. Accordingly, the facts alleged and violations charged in the formal complaint are deemed admitted. Subsequent to the special master’s issuance of his report, neither party requested review by the review panel and thus pursuant to Bar Rule 4-217 (c), both parties have waived any right they may have under the bar rules to file exceptions with or make request for oral argument to this Court.

By his default, McKenna admits that in September 2002, while he was employed by the United States Department of Justice as a trial attorney, he assisted the Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”) in a narcotics investigation; that numerous search and arrest warrants were executed at several private residences and businesses throughout the Houston, Texas area; that among the items seized by law enforcement was a Rolex watch and approximately $35,300; that McKenna left the DEA office with a Rolex watch and $3,500 of seized currency in his possession; and that he did not have authorization to leave the office with the watch or the currency. After meeting with a DEA special agent regarding the missing watch and currency, McKenna gave the watch to the agent but did not produce the currency. McKenna also submitted numerous travel vouchers with false statements and information to the U. S. government between January 2002 and August 2002; made unauthorized charges totaling at least $1,715.11 with a government issued credit card during his time of employment with the Department of Justice; and made numerous false statements to government agents who were investigating his conduct.

We have reviewed the record and conclude that by engaging in the conduct described herein, McKenna violated Rule 8.4 (a) (4) of Bar Rule 4-102 (d) of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct and that the appropriate level of discipline in this case is disbarment. In imposing this discipline, we note as aggravating factors McKenna’s demonstration of a selfish motive in converting property of the U. S. *470government for his personal use and engaging in a pattern of misconduct in so doing. Accordingly, McKenna hereby is disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Georgia. He is reminded of his duties under Bar Rule 4-219 (c).

Decided September 24, 2007.

*William, P. Smith III, General Counsel State Bar, A. M. Christina Petrig, Assistant General Counsel State Bar,*for State Bar of Georgia.

*Disbarred.*

*All the Justices concur.*
[No. 31478-9-II.

Division Two.

November 15, 2005.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Donnell McKinnon, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Pierce County, No. 03-1-01422-4, Thomas P. Larkin, J., entered March 3, 2004. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Armstrong, J., concurred in by Hunt, J., and Morgan, J. Pro Tern.