alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In re Darryl KULWIN, Debtor. Nathan REESE, Plaintiff, v. Darryl KULWIN, Defendant.

Bankruptcy No. 92-21557. Adversary No. 92-6144.

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Kansas.

May 7, 1997.

Jack N. Bohm of Buck, Bohm & Stein, P.C., Leawood, KS, for plaintiff.

John F. Michaels of Rose, Brouillette & Shapiro, Kansas City, MO, for debtor/defendant.

Carl R. Clark of Lentz & Clark, P.A., Overland Park, KS, Chapter 7 Trustee.

*ORDER ON DEBTOR’S MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT*

JOHN T. FLANNAGAN, Bankruptcy Judge.

NOW on this 7th day of May, 1997, comes on for consideration Debtor’s Motion for Approval of Settlement Agreement with Nathan Reese and For Grant of Discharge (“Settlement Motion”). Upon reviewing the pleadings, the file, and being otherwise fully and duly advised in the circumstances, this Court finds and orders as follows:

1. The Debtor filed his Settlement Motion on March 3, 1997, wherein he requested the Court approve the Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release of Claims dated January 29, 1997, by and between Nathan J. Reese (“Reese”) and Debtor (“Settlement Agreement”). Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, Debtor agreed to pay and Reese agreed to accept, $170,000.00 in full satisfaction of any and all claims between them.

2. Furthermore, pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, Reese agreed to cooperate with Debtor’s efforts to restore his credit rating, including the vacating of the judgment in the above-entitled adversary proceeding denying Debtor’s discharge, thereby allowing Debtor to obtain a discharge of the bankruptcy action.

3. Due and proper notice of the Debtor’s Settlement Motion was given to the parties in interest as evidenced by the Notice with Opportunity for Non-Evidentiary Hering on Debtor’s Motion for Approval of Settlement Agreement with Nathan Reese and for Grant of Discharge filed herein on March 3, 1997, and no objections to the Settlement Motion were filed, although the deadline therefore has now passed.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Debt- or’s Settlement Motion be and hereby is approved and Debtor is authorized to pay and Reese is authorized to accept the sum of $170,000.00 in full satisfaction of any and all claims between them in accordance with the Settlement Agreement.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Judgment flied in the above-entitled matter on August 8, 1995, denying Debtor’s discharge in the above-entitled matter is vacated and Debtor shall be granted a discharge pursuant to the *Courts standard Discharge*of Debtor and Final Decree.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that any legal publisher who previously published the Judgment filed August 8, 1995, (cited by West Publishing Co. as follows: *In re Kulwin,*187 B.R. 341 (Bankr.D.Kan.1995)) is directed to *230publish this Order vacating the Order of August 8,1995.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
October 10, 1975 

The Honorable Ted Butler 

Criminal District Attorney 

County of Bexar 

San Antonio, Texas 78204 

Opinion No. H- 714 

Re: Whether a writ of habeas corpus 

is available to a proposed patient 

under an.order for protective custody 

pursuant to article 556lc-1, V. T. C. S. 

Dear Mr. Butler: 

You have requested our opinion concerning whether a writ of habeas corpus 

is available to a proposed alcoholic patient under an order for protective custody. 

Article 5561c, section 9(c), V. T. C. S., provides that upon the filing of a 

petition and a Certificate of Medical Examination for Alcoholism which states, 

that it is: 

the opinion of the examining physician that the 

proposed patient is an alcoholic and because 

of his alcoholism is likely to cause injury to 

himself or others if not immediately restrained, 

the Judge may order any health or peace officer 

to take the proposed patient into protective custody. . . . 

While section 11 of article 5561~ recognizes the availability of a writ of habeas 

corpus for one committed to the Texas Commistiion on Alcoholism, it contains no 

provision which would authorize the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus for one 

in protective custody under section 9(c). 

However, article 1, section 12 of the Texas Constitution provides: 

The’writ of habeas corpus is a writ of right, 

and shall never be suspended. The Legislature shall 

enact laws to render the remedy speedy and effectual. 

In our opinion this provision of the Texas Constitution provides the remedy 

of habeas corpus to persons held in protective custody pursuant to article 5561c, 

p. 3068 
The Honorable Ted Butler - page 2 (H-714) 

section 9(c). See Code Grim. Proc. arts. 11.01 and 11.64; Ex parte Ramzy, 424 

S. W. 2d 220 (TzSup. 1968); Ex parte Calhoun, 91 S. W. 2d 1047 (Tex. Sup. 1936); 

Strode v. Silverman, 217 S. W. 2d 454 (Tex. Civ. App. --Waco 1949, writ ref’d). 

Of course, the issue at a habeas corpus hearing is the legality of the custody involved. Clark v. Matthews, 5 S. W. 2d 221 (Tex. Civ. App. --San Antonio 1928, no 

writ). 

SUMMARY 

A writ of habeas corpus is available to 

a proposed alcoholic patient held under a 

writ of protective custody. 

*Very truly yours, 

Attorney General of Texas 

APPROVED: 

Opinion Committee 

jad: 

p. 3069
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-29-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-01-1999
<CASH>                                           10315
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    11002
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     261528
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                293280
<PP&E>                                           99090
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  487452
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           319301
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           102
<OTHER-SE>                                       31535
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    487452
<SALES>                                         315275
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                318006
<CGS>                                           227113
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   227113
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                107492
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                6882
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (23481)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (23481)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (23481)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (2.30)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.30)


</TABLE>
ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE







Reference
is hereby made to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of May 6, 2013, by and among CITIGROUP COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE
SECURITIES INC., as Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Servicer, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as
Special Servicer, CITIBANK, N.A., as Certificate Administrator and U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, with respect to
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2013-375P (the “Agreement”). Capitalized terms used herein not
otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.



Pursuant
to Section 12.7 of this Agreement, I, Lea Land, Director of Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that:



| | 1. | A review of the activities of the Special Servicer during the period from
January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance per the Agreement during
such period has been made under my supervision, and
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Special Servicer,
has fulfilled all of its obligations under this Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------









IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 6thday of March
2015.











Lea
Land, Director

Wells Fargo Bank















|Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. |  | 
|---------------------- |  |
#### Jovita A. WELGA, Claimant-Appellee, v. Gordon H. MANSFIELD, Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellant.

No. 2007-7007.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Dec. 10, 2007.

Before RADER, SCHALL, and PROST, Circuit Judges.

*ORDER*

SCHALL, Circuit Judge.

The Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs moves without opposition to vacate the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and remand this appeal.

Jovita A. Welga appealed to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims from a November 13, 2003 decision of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals that, inter alia, determined Welga had received adequate notification of the evidence or information necessary to substantiate her claim as required by 38 U.S.C. § 5103(a) through receipt of various pre and post-decisional communications.

Having determined that the Board’s reliance on post-decisional communications was improper under *Mayfield v. Nicholson,*444 F.3d 1328 (Fed.Cir.2006) and noting that it was uncertain whether the Board would have concluded that pre-deeisional communications alone would have satisfied the Secretary’s section 5103(a) notice requirements, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims held that it was not in a position to determine whether the notice error was prejudicial. The court vacated and remanded for the Board to decide the issue in the first instance. The Secretary appealed, seeking review by this court.

On October 4, 2007, the court issued its decision in *Mlechick v. Mansfield,*503 F.3d 1340, (Fed.Cir.2007). *Mlechick*held that the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims cannot refuse to consider the rule of prejudicial error if the Board relied on both pre and post-decisional communications. Slip opinion at 8. Rather, in cases such as this, where the Secretary has attempted to show the notice error was nonprejudicial, the court should review the pre-decisional communications “to determine if any differences between the notice given and the notice required by [section 5103(a)] ‘affected the fundamental fairness of the adjudication’ being mindful that the burden is on [the Secretary] to make such a showing.” *Id.*(citation omitted).

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The Acting Secretary’s motion is granted.

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

(3) The revised official caption is reflected above.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

Kurtis T. Wilder,

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.

 June 7, 2017

p0531

Order 

Clerk

June 7, 2017

154848

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 154848

COA: 334544

Kalamazoo CC: 2015-000489-FC

KENDALL MARCEL WILLIAMS-JOHNSON,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 17, 2016 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications.

 

 

I, Helaine M. Kaplan, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filedin respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the COMM 2013-CCRE8 Mortgage Trust (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");

 

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information requiredto be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report underItem 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligationsunder the servicing agreements in all material respects; and

 

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backedsecurities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities requiredto be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been includedas an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in suchreports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to meby the following unaffiliated parties:

 

Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer, LNRPartners, LLC, as Special Servicer, U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee prior to October 17, 2022, U.S. Bank Trust Company, NationalAssociation, as Trustee on and after October 17, 2022, Park Bridge Lender Services LLC, as Operating Advisor, Wells Fargo Bank, NationalAssociation, as Primary Servicer for the 375 Park Avenue Mortgage Loan, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Special Servicer forthe 375 Park Avenue Mortgage Loan, U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee for the 375 Park Avenue Mortgage Loan, Citibank, N.A., asCustodian for the 375 Park Avenue Mortgage Loan, U.S. Bank National Association, as Servicing Function Participant for the 375 Park AvenueMortgage Loan, and CoreLogic Solutions, LLC, as Servicing Function Participant for the 375 Park Avenue Mortgage Loan.

 

 

 

Dated:March 17, 2023

 

 

/s/ Helaine M. Kaplan

 

 

Helaine M. Kaplan

President

(senior officer in charge of securitizationof the depositor)
Exhibit 13.1





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





In connection with the annual report of MiX Telematics Limited (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the year ended March 31, 2015 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “report”), each of the undersigned officers of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of our knowledge:


|   |                                                                                                                                                                             
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1. | the report, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, 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: June 26, 2015


By: /s/ Stefan Joselowitz


Stefan Joselowitz


Chief Executive Officer








Date: June 26, 2015


By: /s/ Megan Pydigadu


Megan Pydigadu


Group Chief Financial Officer
Motion Granted; Order filed December 21, 2018 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-18-00930-CV

____________

IN THE INTEREST OF C.A.G. III, A CHILD, Appellant

On Appeal from the 314th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2016-01043J

ORDER

This is an accelerated appeal from a judgment in a suit in which the 

termination of the parent-child relationship is at issue. Appellant’s brief was due 

originally due November 21, 2018. We granted an extension of time through 

December 18, 2018 noting that no further extensions would be entertained absent 

exceptional circumstances. On December 18, 2018 counsel filed a further request 

for extension of time. The motion is granted.

Therefore we order appellant’s appointed counsel, Donald Crane, to file 

appellant’s brief no later than January 4, 2019. If the brief is not filed by that date, 

counsel may be required to show cause why he should not be held in contempt of 
court. In addition, the court may require appointment of new counsel due to the 

failure to timely file appellant’s brief. 

PER CURIAM
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 21-0410

_________________

CRAZY MOUNTAIN CATTLE CO., RICHARD 

JARRETT, and ALFRED ANDERSON,

 Plaintiffs and Appellants,

 v.

WILD EAGLE MOUNTAIN RANCH, ENGWIS

INVESTMENT COMPANY, LTD., a Montana 

limited partnership, and R.F. BUILDING 

COMPANY, LP, a Montana limited partnership,

 Defendants and Appellees.

O R D E R

_________________

The Court has received notice that Appellants Crazy Mountain Cattle Co., Richard 

Jarrett, and Alfred Anderson have reached a settlement with two appellees, Rock Creek 

Ranch I, LTD, a Texas limited partnership, and Yellowstone River Ranch, d/b/a Diana’s 

Great Idea, LLC, a Montana limited liability company. Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellants Rock Creek Ranch I, LTD and 

Yellowstone River Ranch, d/b/a Diana’s Great Idea, LLC are dismissed from this appeal 

with prejudice. The caption is amended to reflect the current parties.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 27 2021

12/27/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0410
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Ludwig Kuttner, Chief Executive Officer, and Charles W. Clayton, Chief Financial
Officer of Hampshire Group, Limited, each hereby certify that:

1)   The Quarterly Report of Hampshire Group, Limited on Form 10-Q for the
     period ended October 1, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
     Commission on the date hereof (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 Hampshire
     Group, Limited.




                                               /s/ Ludwig Kuttner
                                              --------------------------
Date:  November 8, 2005                       Ludwig Kuttner
                                              Chief Executive Officer



                                              /s/ Charles W. Clayton
                                              ---------------------------
Date:  November 8, 2005                       Charles W. Clayton
                                              Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE 
UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME
FILED AS PART OF THE QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS 
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q.
</LEGEND>                                       
<MULTIPLIER>                                 1000
<CURRENCY>                                   US DOLLARS
       
<S>                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                               JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                 MAR-29-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                   1
<CASH>                                       11,080
<SECURITIES>                                    426
<RECEIVABLES>                                18,654
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (3,573)
<INVENTORY>                                  22,284
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             50,838
<PP&E>                                       34,158
<DEPRECIATION>                              (20,903)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               71,407
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        15,109
<BONDS>                                       6,489
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         3,192
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<COMMON>                                        392
<OTHER-SE>                                   46,225
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 71,407
<SALES>                                      23,580
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             23,580
<CGS>                                        18,889
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                18,889
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              4,783
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              221
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (324)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     64
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (260)
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (260)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 (0.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (0.07)
        


</TABLE>