alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2208

L. RUTHER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LAKE DEL RAY APARTMENTS, Defendant - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (CA-01-1032-A) Submitted: February 22, 2002 Decided: March 15, 2002 Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. L. Ruther, Appellant Pro Se. Bernard Joseph DiMuro, DIMURO, GINSBERG, & LIEBERMAN, P.C., Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: L. Ruther appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his civil action and motion to reconsider. The record does not contain a transcript of the hearing conducted on September 7, 2001, at which the district court gave its reasons for dismissing the action. Ruther has the burden of including in the record on appeal a transcript of all parts of the proceedings material to the issues raised on appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 10(b); 4th Cir. Local R. 10(c). Appellants proceeding on appeal in forma pauperis are entitled to transcripts at government expense only in certain circumstances. 28 U.S.C. § 753(f) (1994). By failing to produce a transcript orto qualify for the production of a transcript at government expense, Ruther has waived review of the issues on appeal which depend upon the transcript to show error. Keller v. Prince George’s Co. , 827 F.2d 952, 954 n.1 (4th Cir. 1987). We therefore affirm the district court’s orders. We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 19, 2021

No. 04

- 21

- 0024 0

- CV

INTEREST OF C.H., J.H., E.H., I.B.H., AND I.A.H.

From the 112th Judicial District Court

, Sutton County, Texas

Trial Court No. CV06287

Honorable Pedro (Pete) Gomez Jr. , Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

The Appellant, S.H.'s Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief is hereby GRANTED.

The appellant, S.H.'s brief is due on or before August 31, 2021.

_________________________________ Liz a A. Rodriguez , Justice

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

court on this 19th day of August, 2021

.

___________________________________ M ichael A. C ruz

, Clerk of Court
CIRCUIT COURT OF ARLINGTON COUNTY

#### Kurt W. Riegel et al. v. James E. Knudsen et al.

October 24, 1983

Case No. (Law) 24382

By JUDGE CHARLES H. DUFF

For decision are the Defendants’ demurrer and motion to strike various portions of the Motion for Judgment. I have carefully considered the able arguments presented and have reviewed the authorities cited, and hasten to advise you as follows.

With respect to the demurrer, reading all of the numbered paragraphs of the Motion for Judgment collectively, I am of the opinion that the alleged defects in the property as well as the alleged breaches by the defendants are sufficiently specific to require that the demurrer be overruled. Undoubtedly additional information will be needed by the defendants and this may be obtained through appropriate discovery proceedings. Similarly I am of the view that the Motion for Judgment adequately states a cause of action against the limited partnership and the individual defendants. They have all been named as defendants and have been described in the body of the Motion with sufficient specificity.

As regards defendants’ motion to strike the claim for attorneys’ fees, the law requires that it be granted. It is well settled that as a general rule in the absence of any contractual or statutory liability therefor, attorneys’ fees and expenses incurred by the plaintiff in the litigation of his claim against the defendant, aside from the usual taxed court costs, are not recoverable as an item of damages in action *ex*
      *125
      *contractu.*Plaintiff cites *Hiss*v. *Friedberg,*201 Va. 572 (1960), in support of his claim for attorneys’ fees. However, a careful reading of the *Hiss*case does not support his position. On page 578 of the opinion the Supreme Court points out that the allowance of counsel fees does not apply in litigation between the parties themselves.

Similarly the claim for punitive damages must be striken as there has been an insufficient allegation of an independent separate willful tort. Leave will be granted to the plaintiffs to reassert this claim if further discovery shows the existence of the appropriate elements therefor.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA F OURTH D ISTRICT

U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCI ATION , As Trustee for Lehman Mortgage Trust Pass

- Through Certificates Series 2007

- 8

, Appellant,

v.

GEORGE E. BUCHANAN a/k/a G. EUGENE BUCHANAN and JO ANNE BUCHANAN , Appellee s

.

No. 4D 19

- 1416

[ May 20 , 2020 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Martin County ; William L. Roby , Judge; L.T. Case No. 2016CA001099

.
Sara F. Holladay

- Tobias, Emily Rott mann, and C. H. Houston, III of McGuireWoods LLP, Jacksonville, for appellant.

W. Trent Steele of Steele Law, Hobe Sound, for appellees

.

G ERBER , J.

The bank appeals from the circuit court’s final judgment of dismissal against the bank and in the borrowers’ favor after a non

- jury trial. The bank argues the trial court erred in three respects: (1) finding the bank did not prove it owned and was entitle d to enforce the note when the note was l ost; (2) finding th e bank did not prove it satisfied the condition precedent of having mailed a default letter to the borrowers at their changed address ; and (3) denying the bank’s two declaratory judgment
counts to declare certain quit claim deeds legally sufficient

.

W e conclude the circuit court erred on the second argument

. However,
t h at error is harmless, because we conclude on the first argument that the bank did not p resent sufficient competent substantial evidence to prove it owned and was entitled to enforce the note when the note was lost. Thus, we affirm the final judgment as to the bank’s mortgage foreclosure and re

establishment of lost note counts (Counts I and II) without further
comment

.2 We also affirm the final judgment as to the bank’s d eclaratory judgment
counts (both inadvertently labeled Count III ) without further comment

.
Affirmed.

G ROSS and M AY , J J., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

TRIAL PRACTICES, INC., a Florida )

corporation, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D17-3412

)

HAHN LOESER & PARKS, LLP, an Ohio )

limited liability partnership; TRIAL )

SIMULATIONS, INC., a Florida corporation; ) 

TRIAL VISUALIZATION, INC., a Florida )

corporation; HARVEY MOORE AND )

ASSOCIATES, INC., a Florida corporation; )

HARVEY MOORE, an individual; and )

LYNETTE M. MOORE, an individual, )

)

Appellees. )

___________________________________)

Opinion filed October 10, 2018.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for 

Hillsborough County; Steven Scott 

Stephens, Judge.

G. Donovan Conwell, Jr., of Conwell 

Business Law, LLLP, Tampa, for Appellant. 

Edmond E. Koester of Coleman, 

Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., Naples; and 

Edward K. Cheffy of Cheffy Passidomo, 

P.A., Naples, for Appellee Hahn Loeser & 

Parks, LLP.

No appearance for remaining Appellees.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

SILBERMAN, KELLY, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



  As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the inclusion of
our reports dated February 24, 2000 included in Transcend Services, Inc.'s
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999, as well as the
incorporation by reference of such reports into the Company's previously filed
Registration Statement File Nos. 33-57072, 33-41361, 33-37685, 33-32587 and 33-
16213.



                              ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


Atlanta, Georgia
March 30, 2000
April
20, 2018


 


Brands
International Corporation


Attn:
Mark Rubinoff, CEO


Via
email 


 


RE:
Amendment #3 for the 12-26-17 Letter of Intent Termination Date to June 1, 2018


 


Dear
Mr. Rubinoff:


 


Novo
Integrated Sciences, Inc., a Nevada corporation (“NIS”) and Brands International Corporation (the parties”)
are parties to the Letter of Intent, dated 12-26-17, as attached hereto as Exhibit A (the “LOI”). Effective January
30, 2018, the parties amended the termination date of the 12-26-17 Letter of Intent to March 20, 2018, as attached hereto as Exhibit
B. Additionally, effective March 16, 2018, the parties amended (“Amendment #2) the termination date of the 12-26-17 Letter
of Intent to April 20, 2018, as attached hereto as Exhibit C.


 


The
purpose of this letter is to amend the LOI (“Amendment #3”) to extend the termination date therein. As we have discussed,
the “Termination Date” for all purposes under the LOI is hereby amended to be June 1, 2018. The LOI, as amended herein,
shall remain in full force and effect.


 


We
continue to look forward to working with you to complete the transaction successfully and expeditiously. If the foregoing correctly
sets forth your understanding, please execute a copy of this Letter in the space set forth below and return to me.


 


	 	Sincerely, 
	 	 	 
	 	Novo Integrated Sciences, Inc.
	 	 	 
	 	By:
    	/s/
    Christopher David
	 	Name:
    	Christopher
    David
	 	Title:
    	President
	 	 	 
	 	Agreed and accepted:
	 	 	 
	 	Brands International Corporation
	 	 	 
	 	By:
    	/s/
    Mark Rubinoff
	 	Name:
    	Mark
    Rubinoff
	 	Title:
    	Chief
    Executive Officer


 


11120
NE 2nd Street, Suite 200 Bellevue, WA 98004 USA


Phone:
(206) 617-9797


www.novointegrated.com
Exhibit 32.2
                                                                    ------------

                                  CERTIFICATION
                                  -------------

                    Certification of Chief Executive Officer
      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
                                  Section 1350

     In connection with the Annual Report of Epic Media, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the year ended November 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Nicholas A.
Czuczko, Chief 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, 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 2 condition and results of operations
          of the Company at the dates and for the periods presented in this
          Report.


Date: March 15, 2006


                                                 /s/ Nicholas A. Czuczko
                                                 -----------------------
                                                    Nicholas A. Czuczko,
                                                 Chief Financial Officer



                                       29
Exhibit 32











CERTIFICATION




By signing below, each of the undersigned officers hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his or her knowledge, (i) this report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of River Valley Bancorp.




Signed this 14 day of May, 2010.







/s/ Matthew P. Forrester

/s/ Vickie L. GrimesMatthew P. Forrester

Vickie L. GrimesPresident and Chief Executive Officer

Vice President of Finance
```

[United States Government Policy and Supporting Positions (Plum Book), 1996]
[Independent Agencies and Government Corporations]
[Inter-American Foundation]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

The Plum Book (United States Government Policy
        and Supporting Positions): 1996 EditionBRANCH: EXECUTIVE INTER-AMERICAN FOUNDATIONLocationPosition TitleName of IncumbentPay PlanType of Appt.Level Grade or PayTenureExpiresArlington, VAMemberHarriet C. Babbitt (D)WCPAS..........6 years09/20/2000Arlington, VAPresidentGeorge A. Evans (I)EXXSIV..................Arlington, VAVice ChairNeil H. Offen (D)WCPAS..........6 years10/06/1998Arlington, VAChairMaria Otero (D)WCPAS..........6 years09/20/2000Arlington, VAMemberMark L. Schneider (D)WCPAS..........6 years09/20/1998Arlington, VAMemberAnn B. Sloane (R)WCPAS..........6 years10/06/1996Arlington, VAMember VacantWCPAS............................Arlington, VAMember VacantWCPAS............................Arlington, VAMemberPatricia H. Williams (D)WCPAS..........6 years09/20/2000Arlington, VAMemberFrank D. Yturria (R)WCPAS..........6 years06/25/1996
```
## In T he Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 20 - 00294 - CV HEATH BRYN PAYNE , A PPELLANT V. STATE OF TEXAS FOR THE PROTECTION OF MELISSA WATTS , APPELLEE

On Appeal from the 433rd District Court

Comal County, Texas Trial Court No . C2020 - 1335D , Honorable Charles A. Stephens II , Presiding



### January 8 , 2021 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before PIRTLE and PARKER and DOSS, JJ . Appellant, Heath Bryn Payne, appeals from the trial court’s Family Violence Protective Order

. 1 Now pending before this Court is Payne’ s motion seeking voluntary dismissal of his appeal. The C ourt finds the motion complies with the requirements of Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a)(1) and that granting the motion will not prevent any

1 Originally appealed to the Third Court of Appeals, this appeal was transferred to this Court by the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalization efforts. See T EX . G OV ’ T C ODE A NN . § 73.001 (West 2013).2

party from seeking relief to which it would otherwise be entitled. As no decision of the Court has been delive red to date, we grant the motion. The appeal is dismissed. Because the motion does not address costs, costs will be taxed against Payne. T EX . R. A PP . P . 42.1(d). No motion for rehearing will be entertained and our mandate will issue forthwith. Per Curiam
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     Closure Medical Corporation Financial Data Schedule Per Item 601(c) of
Regulation S-X
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                             0001016006           
<NAME>                                            Closure
<MULTIPLIER>                                      1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                     6-MOS                                 
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                 Dec-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                    Jan-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                      Jun-30-1998
<CASH>                                              3,259,937  
<SECURITIES>                                       15,437,380  
<RECEIVABLES>                                         857,857  
<ALLOWANCES>                                                0  
<INVENTORY>                                           595,275  
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   15,436,683  
<PP&E>                                              6,912,330  
<DEPRECIATION>                                       (536,556) 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     27,255,909  
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               4,934,494  
<BONDS>                                                     0  
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                       0  
<PREFERRED>                                                 0  
<COMMON>                                              132,726  
<OTHER-SE>                                         18,338,093  
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       27,255,909  
<SALES>                                             2,112,069  
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    2,112,069  
<CGS>                                               1,384,198  
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       1,384,198  
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    5,457,923  
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                            0  
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          0  
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (4,276,355) 
<INCOME-TAX>                                                0  
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (4,276,355) 
<DISCONTINUED>                                              0  
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                             0  
<CHANGES>                                                   0  
<NET-INCOME>                                       (4,276,355) 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                           (0.32) 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           (0.32) 
                                                               

</TABLE>
```

[United States Government Policy and Supporting Positions (Plum Book), 1996]
[Independent Agencies and Government Corporations]
[Commission of Fine Arts]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

The Plum Book (United States Government Policy
        and Supporting Positions): 1996 EditionBRANCH: EXECUTIVE COMMISSION OF FINE ARTSLocationPosition TitleName of IncumbentPay PlanType of Appt.Level Grade or PayTenureExpiresWashington, DCSecretary of the CommissionCharles H. AthertonESCA............................Washington, DCChairmanJ. Carter BrownWCPA..........4 years10/01/1998Washington, DCMemberCarolyn BrodyWCPA..........4 years10/01/1998Washington, DCMemberBarbaralee Diamonstein-SpielvogelWCPA..........4 years04/01/2000Washington, DCMemberEden RafshoonWCPA..........4 years10/01/1998Washington, DCMemberHarry G. Robinson, IIIWCPA..........4 years10/01/1998Washington, DCMemberSusan Porter RoseWCPA..........4 years12/01/1996Washington, DCMember VacantWCPA..........4 years........
```
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11


                             The Leap Group, Inc.
                                        



             STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF PER-SHARE EARNINGS
                                        
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                          Three Months Ended October 31,               Nine Months Ended October 31,
                                          ------------------------------               -----------------------------
                                                1997          1996                          1997           1996
                                            -----------    -----------                   -----------    ----------- 
<S>                                         <C>            <C>                           <C>            <C>
Weighted average of common
   shares outstanding                         9,614,667      9,600,000                     9,613,037      9,600,000
Weighted average of common
   shares issued in the offering              4,000,000      1,333,333                     4,000,000        444,444
Effect of options granted within one
   year prior to the offering, based on
   the treasury stock method                         -         508,680                            -         508,680
                                            -----------    -----------                   -----------    ----------- 
 
Shares used in per share computation         13,614,667     11,442,013                    13,613,037     10,553,124
 
Net (loss) income                           ($3,038,595)      $435,234                   ($5,744,815)      $692,477
 
Net (loss) income
   per common share                               ($.22)         $0.04                         ($.42)         $0.07
</TABLE>
Employment(Salary)
Agreement


 


e-Marine
Co., Ltd.(The Company) and Ung Gyu Kim(The Employee) sign an annual salary agreement for the period between March 1st, 2017 and
February 28th, 2018 and mutually pledge to fulfill faithfully


 


Article
1. Agreement Period


 


The
agreement is for the period between March 1st, 2017 and February 28th, 2018, total of twelve (12) months. If the date of entry
is later than the commencement date of this Agreement (March 1st), the salary amount noted in the agreement is for the period
between the date of entry and Feb 28th of the following year.


 


Article
2. Compensation Configuration


 






	Sort	 	Summary
	Basic
    Salary	 	-
    Basic monthly Salary
	Legal
    Allowance	 	-
    Overtime Allowance 
	Other
    Allowance	 	-
    Meals, childcare allowance, vehicle maintenance cost, organization management fee
	 	 	-
    Bonus




 


Article
3. Compensation Calculation


 


3.1
Annual salary for the period between March 1st, 2017 and February 28th, 2018 is 202,411,080 KRW which consists of basic salary,
legal allowance and other allowance.


 


3.2
Basic salary is 143,447,134 KRW and it is calculated as below


 


-
Basic Salary = Monthly Basic Salary X 12


 


3.3
Legal Allowance means overtime allowance and it is 57,763,946 KRW. It is calculated with the base of 40 hours of overtime per
a month.


 


-
Monthly Overtime = Monthly basic salary ÷ 209 hours x 1.5 x 40 hours


-
Legal Allowance = Monthly overtime x 12


 


3.4
Other Allowance is 1,200,000 KRW for lunch meals. The company may pay a prescribed allowance determined by The Company.


 


Article
4. Payment method and time


 


4.1
Total annual salary is divided by twelve and distributed per month.


 


4.2
Monthly salary is given on 25th date of each month. If the date is a holiday, the salary is paid on the day before.


 




    	 



     


    

 


Article
5. Salary Establishment and Adjustment


 


5.1
Salary is adjusted once a year on the date that The Company chooses.


 


5.2
Salary can be adjusted due to reasons such as promotion, change of position, etc.


 


Article
6. Confidentiality 


 


Contents
of the agreement between The Company and The Employee must be confidential. The Employee’s salary shall not be disclosed
to other employees.


 


Article
7. Termination


 


If
The Company finds The Employee to be harmful to The Company and/or finds The Employee damaging The Company, The Company has the
right to terminate the agreement.


 


Article
8. Other


 


Regarding
severance pay and vacation days compensation, The Employee agree to follow The Company’s Articles of Incorporation and other
related Korean laws.


 


In
order to prove the above, two copies of the agreement must be fully executed, and The Company and The Employee each will keep
one copy.
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Jimmy Wayne Carr, Appellant

No. 06-19-00132-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 6th District Court of Lamar 

County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 27814). 

Memorandum Opinion delivered by Justice 

Stevens, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice 

Burgess participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court 

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We note that the appellant, Jimmy Wayne Carr, has adequately indicated his inability to 

pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JANUARY 9, 2020

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk