alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CIRCUIT COURT OF HENRICO COUNTY

#### Miller v. Miller

December 9, 1986

Case No. 86C514

By JUDGE JAMES E. KULP

This matter came before the court on November 17, 1986, upon plaintiff's motion to Vacate Memorandum of Lis Pendens. Plaintiff's position is essentially that the parties separated in December 1984, that in July 1985 a Louisiana court entered a Bed and Board Decree, and that this particular real estate was purchased after the separation and should be considered separate property.

Section 20-107.3(A)(1) defines separate property as property acquired before the marriage, property acquired during marriage by bequest, divorce, etc. and property acquired during marriage in exchange for or from proceeds of sale of separate property. Section 20-106.3(A)(2) defines marital property as all property titled in the names of the parties and all property acquired by either party during the marriage which is not separate property.

Under the facts of this case the parties agree that a court in Louisiana granted defendant a Bed and Board Decree in July 1985. It is represented to the court by the plaintiff, and not contested by the defendant, that the property in question was purchased in October 1985, after the entry of the Bed and Board Decree. The Court assumes that the Louisiana Bed and Board Decree is similar to one obtainable in Virginia. This being so, 6 20-116 provides that such decree shall operate upon property thereafter acquired as a decree for a divorce from the *250bond of matrimony. See *Stewart*v. *Commonwealth,*219 Va. 887 (1979).

The above discussion would seem to indicate that the property in question is not marital property, it having been acquired after the Bed and Board Decree. The difficulty presented, however, is that this court has been requested to order equitable distribution, and by filing the lis pendens the defendant is making a claim that the questioned property may be a part of the marital property subject to equitable distribution. Section 20-107.3(A)(2) gives rise to a presumption of marital property to any property acquired during the marriage before the last separation. Since the questioned property was not purchased before the last separation, no presumption arises that it is marital property. This does not mean, however, that defendant is precluded from showing that the subject property was purchased with funds which are a part of the marital property. To the extent that the funds used to purchase this property can be identified as having been acquired during the marriage, they are marital property and not plaintiff’s separate property. *See Rexrode*v. *Rexrode,*1 Va. App. 385 (1986).

The lis pendens does no more than serve notice that a person who purchases this property does so subject to a decree by the court. Since the court is not prepared to rule that the subject property is not marital property, it would be improper to remove the lis pendens. Accordingly, the court will deny plaintiff’s Motion to Vacate Memorandum of Lis Pendens.
Order filed January 16, 2013

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 11

- 01092

- CV

MARK THORNTON AND DE BRA DEMPSEY THORNTON , Appellant

V.

AMANDA CASH AND DANA VARNEY, Appellee

On Appeal from the 308th District Court

Ha rris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2010

- 19565



### O R D E R

The clerk’s record was filed February 3, 2012 . Our review has determined
that a relevant item has been omitted from the clerk's record. See Tex. R. App. P. 34.5(c). The record does not contain (1) Motion fo r Enforcement of Post Judgment Temporary Order s a nd Order to Appear filed July 2, 2012; (2) Order on Motion for
Clarification of Prior Order for Possessi o n or Access signed September 28, 2012; (3) Docket sheet related to hearing on September 20, 2012.

The Ha rris County Dis trict Clerk is directed to file a supplemental clerk’s record on or before January 28, 2013, containing ( 1) Motion for Enforcement ofPost Judgment Temporary Orde rsa nd Order to Appear filed Jul y 2, 2012; (2)

Order on Motion for Clarificatio n of Prior Order for Possessi o n or Access signed September 28, 2012; (3) Docket sheet related to hearing on September 20, 2012.
If the omitted item is not part of the case file, the district clerk is directed to file a supplemental clerk’s record containing a certified statement that the omitted item is not a part of the case file.

PER CURIAM
#### Dragon Head LLC, Appellant, v Steven Munro Elkman et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.

[987 NYS2d 60]

*425Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.), entered January 23, 2013, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

While plaintiff is correct that separate writings can be considered together when they evince an intent to forward the same transaction or purpose *(see Nau v Vulcan Rail & Constr. Co.,*286 NY 188, 197 [1941]), that does not avail it, since two of the written agreements at issue expressly contradict the overarching purpose it seeks to establish through parol evidence *(see Crabtree v Elizabeth Arden Sales Corp.,*305 NY 48, 56-57 [1953]). The third writing is characterized by precatory language, such as, “It is the intention of [the parties]” and “The goal is” to effect certain acts. Given this language, combined with the number of agreements yet to be negotiated that this third writing contemplates, the third writing is an unenforceable agreement to agree *(see IDT Corp. v Tyco Group, S.A.R.L.,*13 NY3d 209, 214 [2009]). Even if the third writing were an enforceable contract, we would affirm the dismissal of the complaint, since plaintiff failed to show a breach of the “break-up” provision. The plain language of that provision demonstrates that the provision is triggered only by the death or incapacity of one of the signatories.

Concur—Tom, J.E, Renwick, Andrias, Freedman and Clark, JJ.
| (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/ Mark      Mi        |   |
|   | Mark      Mi            |   |
|   | Finance      Controller |   |
Order filed, March 27, 2013

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 13

- 00107

- CV

____________ JUNE G. BARTLE , Appellant

V.
MAIN STREET ACQUISIT ION CORP. , Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No 1

Galveston Coun ty, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CV

- 0067462



### ORDER
The reporter’s record in this case was due March 11, 2013

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the
record. The record has not been filed with the co urt. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Lynnette Erskine , the official court reporter, to file the record in this appeal within 30 days of the date of this order

. PER CURIAM
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
  Certification
    of Chief Executive Officer
    Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
    2002
    (Subsection (a) and (b) of Section 1350 of
    Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States
    Code)
    (a)
    the Quarterly Report on
    Form 10-Q
    for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 (the
    Report) of the Company fully complies with the
    requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
    Exchange Act of 1934; and  (b)
    information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
    material respects, the financial condition and results of
    operations of the Company.
<PAGE>   1



                                  EXHIBIT 21.1



                          SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
       Name                                          State of Incorporation
       ----                                      ----------------------------
  <S>                                      <C>   <C>
  Zeigler Coal Holding Company                   Delaware
    Phoenix Land Company                         Delaware
    Americoal Development Company                Delaware
    Fairview Land Company                        Delaware
    Franklin Coal Sales Company                  Delaware
        Franklin Coal International, Inc.        Virgin Islands
    Old Ben Coal Company                         Delaware
    Bluegrass Coal Development Company           Delaware
        Turris Coal Company                      Delaware
        Triton Coal Company                      Delaware
        R. &  F. Coal Company                    Ohio
        Bellaire Trucking Company                Delaware
        Encoal Corporation                       Delaware
        Evergreen Mining Company                 West Virginia
        Paragon Coal International, Inc.         Delaware
        East Kentucky Energy Corporation         Kentucky
        Kermit Coal Company                      West Virginia
        Heritage Mining Company                  Delaware
        Mountaineer Coal Development Company *   West Virginia
        Shipyard River Coal Terminal Company **  South Carolina
    Zenergy, Inc.                                Delaware
    EnerZ Corporation                            Delaware
    Zeigler International, Inc.                  Caymen Islands
    Zeigler Environmental Services Company       Delaware
</TABLE>


*    Does business under the following names:  Marrowbone Development Company,
     Wolf Creek Collieries Company and Pier IX Terminal Company.

**   Does business under the following names:  Pike County Coal Corporation,
     Shipyard River Terminal Company, Clark Elkhorn Coal Company, Utility Coals
     Company, and Knott County Mining Company.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3263 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to allow the storage and conveyance 

of nonproject water at the Norman project in Oklahoma, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 26, 2011 

Mr. COLE (for himself and Mr. LANKFORD) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to allow the storage and conveyance of nonproject water at the Norman 

project in Oklahoma, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Lake Thunderbird Ef5 ficient Use Act of 2011’’. 

6 SEC. 2. NORMAN PROJECT, OKLAHOMA. 

7 Public Law 86–529 (74 Stat. 225) is amended by 

8 adding at the end the following: 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3263 IH

1 ‘‘SEC. 10. LAKE THUNDERBIRD. 

2 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary of the Interior 

3 determines that there is enough excess capacity in the res4 ervoir on the Little River known as ‘Lake Thunderbird’ 

5 that nonproject water can be stored in Lake Thunderbird, 

6 the Secretary of the Interior may, in accordance with the 

7 reclamation laws, amend an existing contract, or enter 

8 into 1 or more new contracts, with the Central Oklahoma 

9 Master Conservancy District for the storage and convey10 ance of nonproject water in Norman project facilities to 

11 augment municipal and industrial supplies for the cities 

12 served by the Central Oklahoma Master Conservancy Dis13 trict. 

14 ‘‘(b) COSTS.—If any additional infrastructure is 

15 needed to enable the storage and conveyance of non16 project water in Norman project facilities under sub17 section (a) or any other provision of this Act, the costs 

18 of constructing, operating, and maintaining the infrastruc19 ture shall be the responsibility of the non-Federal entity 

20 contracting with the Secretary of the Interior for storage 

21 and conveyance rights.’’. 

22 SEC. 3. EFFECT. 

23 Nothing in this Act or an amendment made by this 

24 Act authorizes any expansion of the storage capacity of 

25 Lake Thunderbird. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
---

Exhibit 99.14

CONSENT OF EXPERT February 25, 2010 British Columbia Securities Commission 
Alberta Securities Commission 
Saskatchewan Financial Services Commission 
Manitoba Securities Commission 
Ontario Securities Commission 
New Brunswick Securities Commission 
Nova Scotia Securities Commission 
Registrar of Securities, Prince Edward Island 
Securities Commission of Newfoundland and Labrador 
Registrar of Securities, Northwest Territories 
Registrar of Securities, Nunavut 
Registrar of Securities, Yukon 
United States Securities and Exchange Commission Re:
     Annual Information Form dated February 25, 2010 (the Annual Information Form) of Minefinders Corporation Inc. (the Company).
  I refer to the report entitled "NI 43-101 Technical Report on the Minable Reserve for the Dolores Gold-Silver Project, Chihuahua State, Mexico" dated March 25, 2008 (the "Report") as referenced in the Annual Information Form and documents incorporated by reference therein. This letter is being filed as my consent to the use of my name and the Report in the Annual Information Form and in documents incorporated by reference therein. I confirm that I have read the Annual Information Form and I have no reason to believe that there are any misrepresentations that are derived from the Report referred to above or that are within my knowledge as a result of the services I performed in connection with such Report. I consent to the filing of this consent with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission as part of the Companys Form 40-F dated February 25, 2010, and any amendment thereto, including post-effective amendments and as part of a post-effective amendment to the Companys Form F-10, to incorporate the Companys Form 40-F dated February 25, 2010. [Signature page follows] 5757 Central Ave Suite D Boulder, CO 80301 USA +1 (303) 443-2209 FAX +1 (303) 443-3156Mining Office:  274 Union Boulevard Suite 450  Lakewood, CO 80228  USA +1 (720) 407-4062  FAX +1 (720) 407-4067http://www.gustavson.comgustavson@gustavson.com


---

- 2 - Yours truly, */s/ Donald E. Hulse*
Donald E. Hulse February 25, 2010  5757 Central Ave Suite D Boulder, CO 80301 USA +1 (303) 443-2209 FAX +1 (303) 443-3156Mining Office:  274 Union Boulevard Suite 450  Lakewood, CO 80228  USA +1 (720) 407-4062  FAX +1 (720) 407-4067http://www.gustavson.comgustavson@gustavson.com


---
EXHIBIT
32.1. Certification of Principal Executive
Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002)   I, Dr. Thomas Drees, Chief Executive
Officer, and David Nelson, Principal Accounting Officer, of Sanguine Corporation
(the "Registrant") do 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, based upon a review of the Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the period December 31, 2008 of the Registrant, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"):  (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 Registrant.  Dated:  April 14, 2009 By:  /s/ Dr. Thomas
Drees  Dr. Thomas Drees  Chief Executive
Officer  By:  /s/  David
Nelson David
Nelson, Chief Financial Officer  * A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to Sanguine Corporation and will be
retained by Sanguine Corporation and furnished to the Securities Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
EXHIBIT 12.3

CERTIFICATION

I, Guenter Butschek, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Tata Motors Limited;
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------



|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; and
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|3. | Based on my knowledge, the other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations
and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

July 31, 2017



|                          |  | 
|------------------------- |  | 
|/s/ Guenter Butschek      |  | 
|Guenter Butschek          |  | 
|CEO and Managing Director |  |
#### DAVIS & RANKIN BLDG. & MANUF’G CO. v. DRIVER.

(Circuit Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit

January 18, 1895.)

No. 54.

Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Indiana. Geo. Shirts, for plaintiff in error.

Claypool & Claypool, for defendant in error.

Dismissed, per stipulation of counsel.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
 Certification of Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(Subsection (a) and (b) of Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code)
 Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section
1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code), the undersigned officer of LCC
International, Inc. (the Company), hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge that:
 (a)
    
    the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2006
(the Report) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(b)
    
    information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.
 August 9, 2006
    
    /s/ Dean J. DouglasDean J. Douglas
President and Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 99(a)

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

<PAGE>

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

     In connection with the Annual Report of Union Financial Bancshares, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Dwight V.
Neese, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as added by 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 results of
              operations of the Company as of and for the period covered by the
              Report.

                                    /s/ Dwight V. Neese
                                    -------------------------------------
                                    Dwight V. Neese
                                    President and Chief Executive Officer

Date:   December 2, 2002
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2



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


In connection with the Quarterly Report of The Majestic Star Casino, LLC and
Majestic Star Casino Capital Corp. (collectively, the "Registrant") on Form 10-Q
for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael E. Kelly, Executive
Vice President and Chief Operating and Financial Officer of The Majestic Star
Casino, LLC and Majestic Star Casino Capital Corp., 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) 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
Registrant.


By: /s/ Michael E. Kelly
    --------------------------------------
    Michael E. Kelly, Executive Vice
    President and Chief Operating and
    Financial Officer of The Majestic Star
    Casino, LLC and Majestic Star Casino
    Capital Corp.
    August 14, 2002
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jauan Griffith, Appellant.

[987 NYS2d 854]

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Buchter, J.), imposed March 17, 2009, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.

Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.

The defendant’s purported waiver of his right to appeal was invalid *(see People v Bradshaw,*18 NY3d 257, 267 [2011]; *People v Lopez,*6 NY3d 248, 257 [2006]; *People v DeSimone,*80 NY2d 273, 283 [1992]) and, thus, does not preclude review of his excessive sentence claim. However, contrary to the defendant’s contention, the sentence imposed was not excessive *(see People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

Eng, EJ., Dillon, Austin, Sgroi and Maltese, JJ., concur.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 22
- 0660 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. JOSHUA DUANE WOLFBLACK,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including October 30 , 2023 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 14 2023

09/14/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0660