alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Stanley Bartosiewicz, Appellant, v. Richard E. Stanley, Respondent.

Special Term correctly determined that there was an *861insufficient showing of actual damages to sustain a fine for the full amount of the judgment. It appears from the affidavit of the attorney for the judgment creditor that the actual value of the transferred property may be recoverable from the leviable interest in the 1961 automobile of the judgment debtor. Order affirmed, without costs. Bergan, P. J., Gibson, Herlihy and Taylor, JJ., concur.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS – EASTERN DIVISION 

CHICAGOLAND AVIATION, LLC, ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiff, ) 

 ) 

) Case No. 12-cv-1139 

) 

RICHARD R. TODD, CHICAGO ) 

PREMIER BOAT RENTAL AND ) 

LEASING, LLC, d/b/a CHICAGO ) 

PREMIER FLIGHT TRAINING, ) 

 ) 

 Defendants. ) 

CHICAGOLAND AVIATION, LLC’S 

MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION 

 Plaintiff, CHICAGOLAND AVIATION, LLC, by its attorneys, David L. 

Newman, Jenifer H. Caracciolo, and Robert A. McKenzie (Arnstein & Lehr LLP, of counsel), 

submit this Motion for Preliminary Injunction against Defendants, RICHARD R. TODD and 

CHICAGO PREMIER BOAT RENTAL AND LEASING, LLC, d/b/a CHICAGO PREMIER 

FLIGHT TRAINING. In support of its motion, Plaintiff has contemporaneously filed a 

Memorandum in Support of its Motion Preliminary Injunction and supporting declaration of 

Matthew Zahora. 

Respectfully submitted, 

CHICAGOLAND AVIATION, LLC 

By:__/s Robert A. McKenzie ___________ 

One of its attorneys 

Arnstein & Lehr LLP 

120 S. Riverside Plaza, Suite 1200 

Chicago, Illinois 60606 

(312) 876-7100 

Responsible Attorneys: 

 David L. Newman (ARDC #6210912) 

 Jenifer H. Caracciolo (ARDC #6280221) 

Robert A. McKenzie (ARDC #6293346) 

Case: 1:12-cv-01139 Document #: 14 Filed: 02/23/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:74
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This Schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from the
Form 10-KSB of Kent  Financial  Services,  Inc., for the year ended December 31,
2000 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<CIK>                                          0000316028
<NAME>                                         Kent Financial Services, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-2000
<CASH>                                         3,812
<SECURITIES>                                   8,233
<RECEIVABLES>                                  328
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               12,373
<PP&E>                                         1,720
<DEPRECIATION>                                 614
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 13,681
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          2,029
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       178
<OTHER-SE>                                     11,474
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   13,681
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               4,498
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               4,366
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             462
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (330)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   27
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (357)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (357)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.19)



</TABLE>
#### 1228.306 Insurance under fixed-price contracts.
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**Certifications**

 

I, J. Coley Clark, certify that:

 

1.             I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of BancTec, Inc;

 

2.             Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.             Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant asof, and for, the periods presented in this report.

 

4.             The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) andI are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))for the registrant and have: 

 

a) Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b) Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation, and

 

c) Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.             The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) andI have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions).

 

a) All significant deficienciesand material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data;and

 

b) Any fraud, whetheror not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date: April 7, 2005 |     | /s/ J. Coley Clark                       |   |
|---------------------|----------|------------------------------------------|--------|
|                |     | *J. Coley Clark*                         |
| * *            | * * | *President and Chief Executive  Officer* |

 

----
#### 1652.204-71 Coordination of Benefits.

As prescribed in 1604.7001, the following clause shall be inserted in all FEHBP contracts:

# Coordination of Benefits (JAN 1991)

(a) The Carrier shall coordinate the payment of benefits under this contract with the payment of benefits under Medicare, other group health benefits coverages, and the payment of medical and hospital costs under no-fault or other automobile insurance that pays benefits without regard to fault.

(b) The Carrier shall not pay benefits under this contract until it has determined whether it is the primary carrier or unless permitted to do so by the Contracting Officer.

(c) In coordinating benefits between plans, the Carrier shall follow the order of precedence established by the NAIC Model Guidelines for Coordination of Benefits (COB) as specified by OPM.

(d) Where (1) the Carrier makes payments under this contract which are subject to COB provisions; (2) the payments are erroneous, not in accordance with the terms of the contract, or in excess of the limitations applicable under this contract; and (3) the Carrier is unable to recover such COB overpayments from the Member or the providers of services or supplies, the Contracting Officer may allow such amounts to be charged to the contract; the Carrier must be prepared to demonstrate that it has made a diligent effort to recover such COB overpayments.

(e) COB savings shall be reported by experience rated carriers each year along with the Carrier's annual accounting statement in a form specified by OPM.

(f) Changes in the order of precedence established by the NAIC Model Guidelines implemented after January 1 of any given year shall be required no earlier than the beginning of the following contract term.

(End of clause)

[55 FR 27415, July 2, 1990]
#### 19.809 Preaward considerations.
1516.603-1 What is a Notice to Proceed? ( a ) A Notice to Proceed (NTP) is a type of letter contract issued pursuant to FAR 16.603 under which an EPA Federal Classification Series 1102 (FCS) contracting officer or a duly authorized EPA on-scene coordinator with delegated procurement authority may initiate, in certain defined situations and subject to certain limitations and conditions, contracting actions to respond to certain situations as described in CERCLA section 104(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 9604(a)(1)) and the Clean Water Act sections 311(c)(2) and (e)(1)(B) (33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2) and (e)(1)(B)). An NTP may be utilized as a contractual instrument for certain— ( 1 ) Actions that EPA is authorized to undertake under CERCLA section 104(a)(1), 42 U.S.C. 9604(a)(1), and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (40 CFR part 300), to respond to situations where any hazardous substance has been released or there is a substantial threat of such a release into the environment, or there is a release or substantial threat of release into the environment of any pollutant or contaminant which may present an imminent and substantial danger to the public health or welfare, and
( 2 ) Actions that EPA is authorized to undertake under sections 311(c)(2) and (e)(1)(B) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2) and (e)(1)(B), and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (40 CFR part 300), to respond when there is a discharge, or a substantial threat of a discharge (to or upon navigable waters, adjoining shorelines, the contiguous zone, or natural resources belonging to, appertaining to, or under the exclusive management of the United States), of oil or a hazardous substance from a vessel, onshore facility, or offshore facility that is a substantial threat to the public health or welfare. Pursuant to a class Justification For Other Than Full and Open Competition executed under the authority of FAR 6.302-2 and 6.303-1(c), an NTP may be issued on a non-competitive basis.
( b ) What do subsections 1516.603-1 and 1516.603-2 cover? EPAAR 1516.603-1 and 1516.603-2 contain information and procedures relating to issuance and definitization of an NTP. An NTP is subject to, and must comply with, the applicable requirements for letter contracts in FAR 16.603 and the requirements in this section, and be definitized by an EPA FCS 1102 contracting officer.
[66 FR 12900, Mar. 1, 2001]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 5.1.1

Eastern Division

Michelle M. Suvada

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:11−cv−07892

Honorable Edmond E. Chang

The Gordon Flesch Company, Inc.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Friday, December 13, 2013:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: In light of the successful

settlement conference, the status hearing of 12/16/2013 is vacated. The Court expresses its

deep gratitude to the magistrate judge for bringing the parties together, and commends the

parties for arriving at a mutually agreeable resolution. Civil case terminated. Mailed

notice(slb, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:11-cv-07892 Document #: 75 Filed: 12/13/13 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:778
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF BRADLEY ESTATE, INC. FOR THE
THREE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1995 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1994
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                             982
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,312
<ALLOWANCES>                                       632
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                17,666
<PP&E>                                         187,418
<DEPRECIATION>                                  26,229
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 178,855
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,033
<BONDS>                                         34,667
<COMMON>                                           112
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     136,043
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   178,855
<SALES>                                          9,411
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,411
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,948
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,263
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 843
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,357
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,357
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,357
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .21
        

</TABLE>
#### 1811.404-70 NASA contract clauses.

The clause at 1852.211-70, Packaging, Handling, and Transportation, must be included in solicitations and contracts for deliverable items, including software, designated as Class I (mission essential), Class II (delicate or sensitive), or Class III (requires special handling or monitoring).
Exhibit 32.2



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 Synthetic Blood International, Inc.(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, David H. Johnson, 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 to the best of my knowledge:



| | 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.
| | -- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                   | 
|------------------ | 
|September 19, 2003 | 
|                   |
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the filing of the Quarterly Report of Jo-Ann Stores, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended July 31, 2004, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) on or about the date
hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to such officers knowledge:  (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. Dated: September 9, 2004/s/ Alan RosskammAlan RosskammPresident and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Brian P. CarneyBrian P. CarneyExecutive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer
 A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company
and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon
request.
### §911. Acceptance of services of Federal or State officers; application of civil service laws; expenditures for supplies and equipment

In order to carry out the provisions of this chapter the Secretary may accept and utilize such voluntary and uncompensated services of Federal, State, and local officers and employees as are available, and he may appoint and fix the compensation of attorneys, engineers, and experts and he may, subject to the civil-service laws, appoint such other officers and employees as he may find necessary and prescribe their duties. The Secretary is authorized, from sums appropriated pursuant to section 906 of this title, to make such expenditures (including expenditures for personal services; supplies and equipment; lawbooks and books of reference; directories and periodicals; travel expenses; rental at the seat of government and elsewhere; the purchase, operation, or maintenance of passenger-carrying vehicles; and printing and binding) as are appropriate and necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter.

(May 20, 1936, ch. 432, title I, §11, 49 Stat. 1366; Oct. 28, 1949, ch. 776, §2, 63 Stat. 948; Pub. L. 103–354, title II, §235(a)(13), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3221.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Provisions which authorized the appointment and fixing of compensation of attorneys, engineers, and experts "without regard to the provisions of the civil service laws applicable to officers and employees of the United States" were omitted from the Code as obsolete and superseded. Such appointments are now subject to the civil service laws unless specifically excepted by those laws or by laws enacted subsequent to Executive Order 8743, Apr. 23, 1941, issued by the President pursuant to act Nov. 26, 1940, ch. 919, title I, §1, 54 Stat. 1211, which covered most excepted positions into the classified (competitive) civil service. The Order is set out as a note under section 3301 of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees. As to the compensation of such personnel, sections 1202 and 1204 of the Classification Act of 1949, 63 Stat. 972, 973, repealed the Classification Act of 1923 and all other laws or parts of laws inconsistent with the 1949 Act. The Classification Act of 1949 was repealed by Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, §8(a), 80 Stat. 632, and reenacted as chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of Title 5. Section 5102 of Title 5 now contains the applicability provisions of the 1949 Act, and section 5103 of Title 5 authorizes the Office of Personnel Management to determine the applicability to specific positions and employees.

#### Amendments

1994—Pub. L. 103–354 substituted "Secretary" for "Administrator" in two places.

1949—Act Oct. 28, 1949, inserted "title I," in credit of act May 20, 1936.
#### Pearl Stern et al., Respondents, v. Jack Hausberg, Appellant.

Order, entered on December 17, 1963, granting plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss the affirmative defenses of Statute of Limitations and *res judicata,*unanimously modified, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent of permitting the defendant to replead the affirmative defense of the Statute of Limitations as to those allegations of the complaint which allege malpractice on the part of the defendant dentist with respect to bridgework installation, and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs. The action based upon defendant dentist’s malpractice was commenced on October 22, 1962. Three negligent acts are alleged, which, in order of "their occurrence, pertain to bridgework, root-canal work, and the treatment of an infected molar. The Statute of Limitations is interposed as a defense against all of the alleged acts of negligence. In an affidavit by defendant’s attorney it is stated that all work in connection with the installation of the bridge was completed as of August 8, 1960, more than two years prior to the commencement of the action. Thus, unless it is demonstrated upon a trial that the dental treatment rendered within the two-year period prior to the commencement of the action was part of “ continuous treatment” referable to the bridgework (see *Borgia*v. *City of New York,*12 N Y 2d 151), the defense, as it pertains to such bridgework, may be a valid one. However, there is no averment that the root-canal work and the treatment for the infected molar were likewise performed more than two years prior to the commencement of the action. To the contrary, it is conceded that “certain services were rendered” on December 5, 1960 — a date less than two years from the commencement of the action. Consequently, the affidavit submitted by defendant" does not support the defense as against the alleged acts of negligence which occurred after the installation of the bridge. Therefore, the defense as pleaded — against all three alleged acts of negligence — may not stand. However, since the defense may be valid in part, as aforesaid, leave to replead is granted. We agree with Special Term that the judgment obtained by the defendant in the Small Claims Part of the Civil Court, whereby he recovered a fee for the same root-canal work involved herein, is not a bar to the claim that the root-canal work was negligently done. Whereas *res judicata*would ordinarily apply in these circumstances, section 1808 of the New York City Civil Court Act provides that a judgment “may be pleaded as res judicata only as to the amount involved in the particular action, and shall not otherwise be deemed an adjudication of any fact at issue or found therein”, (see *Supreme Burglar Alarm Corp.*v. *Mason,*204 Misc. 185; *Kroll*v. *Ippolipo,*184 Misc. 596). A fortiori the judgment is not a bar to the other alleged acts of negligence which were not even in issue in the small claims action. Concur — Rabin, J. P., Yalente, Stevens, Steuer and Staley, JJ.