alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET OF WINDSOR PARK PROPERTIES 4 AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1995 AND THE RELATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS, PARTNER'S EQUITY AND CASH FLOWS FOR THE YEAR THEN
ENDED AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                         885,500
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       6,521,600
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,944,400
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,826,800
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                      1,400,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,326,200<F1>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,826,800
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,241,600
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  783,500
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,417,800
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              31,500
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (991,200)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (991,200)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (991,200)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (4.89)<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>LIMITED AND GENERAL PARTNERS EQUITY
<F2>NET LOSS PER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP UNIT
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

ROSIE PEARL MITCHELL,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No.: 3:20-cv-5922/MCR/ZCB

ESCAMBIA COUNTY SCHOOL

DISTRICT,

Defendants.

_____________________/

ORDER

The magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation on January 30, 

2023. (Doc. 35). The Court furnished the parties a copy of the Report and 

Recommendation and afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, 

United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). There have been no timely filed objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation and the record, I have 

determined the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 35) is 

adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.

2. The Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, (Doc. 29), is 

GRANTED and Plaintiff’s case DISMISSED with prejudice.

Case 3:20-cv-05922-MCR-ZCB Document 36 Filed 03/17/23 Page 1 of 2
3. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this 

order and close the case.

DONE AND ORDERED this 17th day of March 2023.

M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:20-cv-05922-MCR-ZCB Document 36 Filed 03/17/23 Page 2 of 2
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

PAUL BRANCH,

Petitioner,

v. 4:20cv441–WS/MJF

SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT

OF CORRECTIONS,

Respondent.

 

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S PETITION

FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (ECF

No. 15) docketed March 10, 2022. The magistrate judge recommends that

Petitioner’s amended petition for writ of habeas corpus be DENIED. Petitioner has

filed no objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation.

Upon review of the record, the undersigned has determined that the

magistrate judge’s report and recommendation should be adopted. Accordingly, it

is ORDERED:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation (ECF No. 15) is

Case 4:20-cv-00441-WS-MJF Document 16 Filed 04/25/22 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

adopted and incorporated by reference in this order of the court.

2. Petitioner’s amended petition for writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 5),

challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence in State of Florida v. Paul

Branch, Jefferson County Circuit Court Case No. 2019–45 CFA, is DENIED.

3. The clerk shall enter judgment stating: “Petitioner’s petition for writ of

habeas corpus is DENIED.”

4. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.

5. The clerk shall close the case.

DONE AND ORDERED this 25th day of April , 2022.

s/ William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:20-cv-00441-WS-MJF Document 16 Filed 04/25/22 Page 2 of 2
28.103-3 Payment bonds.

(a) A payment bond is required only when a performance bond is required, and if the use of payment

bond is in the Government’s interest.

(b) When a contract price is increased, the Government may require additional bond protection in an

amount adequate to protect suppliers of labor and material.

Parent topic: 28.103 Performance and payment bonds for other than construction contracts.
160 So.2d 228

#### Oliver C. TAPP v. GUARANTY FINANCE COMPANY, Inc., and Elmer A. Uffman.

No. 47069.

Feb. 14, 1964.

In re: Guaranty Finance Company, Inc., applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 158 So.2d 228.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal the result is correct.

FOURNET, C. J.,

is of the opinion the judgment complained of is wrong and the writ should be granted. The judgment sought to have annulled was granted by a court of competent jurisdiction after service of citation on the defendant, a default duly entered and after proper delays, hence the judgment can only be annulled for causes set forth in the Code of Civil Procedure and subject to the one year prescription therein provided.

*642McCALEB, J., thinks that a writ should he granted, being in accord with the views of FOURNET, C. J.

SANDERS, J., is of the opinion that a writ should be granted on the ground that the one year prescription of Article 2004, LSA-Code of Civil Procedure, is applicable to the action to annul the deficiency judgment.
EXHIBIT
10.2

    


    CONFIDENTIAL
INFORMATION (IDENTIFIED BY **) HAS BEEN OMITTED BASED 

    UPON
A REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT PURSUANT TO RULE 24b-2 OF 
THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND HAS BEEN SEPARATELY FILED

    WITH
THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

    


    February
28, 2009

    


    Neal
Simco

    VP
National Accounts

    Tyson
Foods

    2200 Don
Tyson Parkway

    Springdale,
AR 72762

    


    Dear
Neal:

    


    As
discussed and agreed, contingent on full approval by EPL Quality Assurance,
Tyson Foods will supply to the El Pollo Loco system needs for the products shown below:


    


    A minimum
of ** pounds annually of whole birds, EPL Specification **.  Pricing
will be ** FOB; **  per pound delivered to MBM, Rancho Cucamonga, CA
and ** per pound delivered to MBM, Pleasanton, CA.

    


    As part
of this Purchase Agreement, Supplier warrants that the prices for the items
identified herein are not higher than those currently extended to any other
customer for the same or like items in equal or less quantities. If Supplier
reduces its price for such items to any other customer during the term of this
Purchase Agreement, Supplier agrees to correspondingly reduce the price quoted
herein.

    


    El Pollo
Loco’s decision to enter into this Purchase Agreement is independent of any
support your firm may or may not choose to provide to the El Pollo Loco
system.

    


    This
Purchase Agreement is subject to and incorporates the General Terms and
Conditions of Supply (“T/C”) executed by the parties hereto and currently on
file with El Pollo Loco, Inc. The Purchase Agreement and the T/C collectively
constitute the entire agreement between the parties and supersede all prior or
contemporaneous oral or written agreements.

    


    Terms:  Net
14 Days

    Pricing
contract period 03/01/09 through 2/28/10

    


    Please
sign and return both copies of this letter.  After I have received the
signed copy, I will sign and return a copy for your files.  Signing
this letter acknowledges acceptance of the terms and conditions as presented
above.

    


    Neal,
thank you for your help and support on this matter and please contact me with
any questions.

    


    
      	
              /S/
      NEAL SIMCO

            	
              /S/
      GARY CAMPANARO

            
	
              Neal
      Simco

            	
              Gary
      Campanaro

            
	
              Tyson
      Foods, Inc.

            	
              El
      Pollo Loco, Inc.

            


    

    


    cc:  Jennifer
Benus, Yvette Johnson/MBM
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME AND CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUNE-30-2000
<CASH>                                             445
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     7071
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (208)
<INVENTORY>                                        527
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  8797
<PP&E>                                             831
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (546)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   11530
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             7720
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             1053
<PREFERRED>                                        550
<COMMON>                                            32
<OTHER-SE>                                        3770
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     11530
<SALES>                                          48475
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 48475
<CGS>                                            47165
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     2249
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   193
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 213
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1132)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1132)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1132)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.38)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   ( .38)


</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of John Dabney, Petitioner, v Leonard Olsen et al., Constituting the Vocational Education and Extension Board, Respondents.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, *inter alia,*to review a determination of respondent Vocational Education and Extension Board, dated September 19, 1978, and made after a hearing, which found petitioner guilty of certain misconduct and dismissed him from his employment. Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements. The determination is supported by substantial evidence in the record and the penalty of dismissal is not so disproportionate to the offense, in the light of all the circumstances, as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see *Matter of Pell v Board of Educ.,*34 NY2d 222, *233).*Lazer, J. P., Gulotta, Cohalan and Gibbons, JJ., concur.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

ALBERTO SANCHEZ,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO.: 4:20-cv-360-AW-MJF

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT 

OF CORRECTIONS, et al.,

Defendants.

_______________________/

PLAINTIFF’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO 

RESPOND TO DEFENDANT ALEJANDRO A. RADI, M.D.’S MOTION 

TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, Alberto Sanchez, by and through the undersigned counsel, pursuant 

to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A) and N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 6.1, hereby files this Unopposed

Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Defendant Alejandro A. Radi, M.D.’s 

(“Dr. Radi”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint and Supporting 

Memorandum of Law, and states as follows:

1. Dr. Radi filed his motion to dismiss on October 1, 2020 [ECF No. 44].

Thus, Plaintiff’s response is currently due on October 15, 2020.

2. Plaintiff seeks a 7-day extension of time to respond to Dr. Radi’s 

motion to dismiss. A lawyer in the undersigned counsel’s firm was unexpectedly 

hospitalized all last week, thereby requiring the other three lawyers in the firm to 

Case 4:20-cv-00360-AW-MJF Document 52 Filed 10/15/20 Page 1 of 3
2

cover several obligations in his absence. Consequently, the undersigned requires 

additional time to prepare a response to Dr. Radi’s motion to dismiss, and this brief 

extension is requested for that purpose.

3. This request is made in good faith and not for purposes of delay. 

Further, Dr. Radi, through his counsel, does not oppose Plaintiff’s request for 

extension, and therefore would not suffer any prejudice by a brief, 7-day extension.

Good cause is therefore shown for the relief requested herein. 

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court enter an 

order extending the deadline for Plaintiff to respond to Defendant Dr. Radi’s Motion 

to Dismiss to October 22, 2020.

Respectfully submitted,

ANDREWS LAW FIRM

822 North Monroe Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32303

T: (850) 681-6416 / F: 681-6984

/s/ John M. Vernaglia

JOHN M. VERNAGLIA (FBN: 1010637)

RYAN J. ANDREWS (FBN: 0104703) 

DAVID A. WEISZ (FBN 1023229)

john@andrewslaw.com

ryan@andrewslaw.com

david@andrewslaw.com

service@andrewslaw.com

Counsel for Plaintiff

Case 4:20-cv-00360-AW-MJF Document 52 Filed 10/15/20 Page 2 of 3
3

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERRAL

Pursuant to N.D. Loc. R. 7.1(B), the undersigned counsel has conferred with 

counsel for Defendant Radi regarding the relief requested herein, and reports that 

counsel for Defendant Radi does not oppose the requested extension of time.

/s/ John M. Vernaglia

JOHN M. VERNAGLIA

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 15th day of October, 2020, a true and 

correct copy of the foregoing was electronically filed in the United States District 

Court for the Northern District of Florida using the CM/ECF system, which will 

send a notice of electronic filing to all counsel of record.

/s/ John M. Vernaglia

JOHN M. VERNAGLIA

Case 4:20-cv-00360-AW-MJF Document 52 Filed 10/15/20 Page 3 of 3
Summary of 2011 Management Incentive Plan
 
  The 2011 management incentive plan (the “Plan”) of Heelys, Inc. (the “Company”) is not formalized in any definitive plan document.  Set forth below is a summary of the material provisions of the Plan, as adopted by the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”).  These provisions serve as the criteria for payments of cash bonuses to the Company’s executive officers for service in fiscal 2011.
 
 The Plan assigns a specific target bonus to each participant.  The target bonus for the Company’s Chief Executive Officer is 50% of his base salary, and the target bonus for the Company’s Chief Financial Officer and the Company’s Vice President, International is 30% of their respective base salary.
 
 Under the Plan, bonus payout amounts generally will be a percentage of each participant’s respective target bonus, and will vary depending on the Company’s financial performance.  The Plan divides the Company’s financial performance into three levels:  At the “threshold” level, the participant will be eligible for 50% of his target bonus; at the “target” level, the participant would be eligible for 100% of his target bonus; and at the “maximum” level, the participant would be eligible for 250% of his target bonus.  Bonus payout opportunities at each level (i.e., threshold, target, and maximum) are based 25% on the Company’s net sales and 75% on its profit before tax.  The Board may, in its discretion, adjust the payout opportunities at each level to exclude one-time, non-operating items that may occur during fiscal 2011.
 
 All bonus payout amounts are subject to prior approval by the Board.  The Board retains discretion to vary the bonus payout amounts up to 20% (higher or lower), based on its subjective assessment of the participant’s performance and contribution to achieving the Company’s financial performance level.
 
 The amounts payable under the Plan are not determinable at present. However, if, during fiscal 2011, the Company’s financial performance reaches the threshold level, the maximum bonuses available to our Chief Executive Officer (Thomas C. Hansen), Chief Financial Officer (Craig D. Storey) and Vice President, International (John W. O’Neil) will be $107,500, $30,000 and $26,250 , respectively.  If the Company’s financial performance reaches the target level, the maximum bonuses available to Messrs. Hansen, Storey and O’Neil will be $215,000, $60,000 and $52,500, respectively.  If the Company reaches the maximum level, the maximum bonuses available to Messrs. Hansen, Storey and O’Neil will be $537,500, $150,000 and $131,250, respectively.  All of the foregiong amounts are before the discretionary subjective assessment that the Board may make — which can vary the bonus payment amounts — up to 20% higher or lower.
**Exhibit 99.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

 

In connection with the quarterlyreport of SurgiCare, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period endedJune 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Charles S. Cohen, Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of myknowledge:

 

(1) The Report fully complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

 

(2) The information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand result of operations of the Company.

 

 

/s/ CHARLES S. COHEN

Charles S. Cohen, Co-CEOAugust 13, 2002

 

----
#### § 54.12 [Reserved]
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Novell, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company), on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report),
Ronald W. Hovsepian, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to his knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * *

|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|                                     
|/s/ Ronald W. Hovsepian              
|Ronald W. Hovsepian                  
|President and Chief Executive Officer



Date: June 9, 2009
162 So.2d 8

#### Marie Baucum SCOTT et al. v. HUNT OIL COMPANY et al.

No. 47164.

March 30, 1964.

In re: Marie Baucum Scott applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, Parish of Claiborne. 160 So.2d 433.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal we find no error of law in its judgment.
#### §§ 4287.337-4287.344 [Reserved]
KING WORLD




                                        March 2, 1999

Jonathan Birkhahn, Esq.
King World Productions, Inc.
1700 Broadway
New York, New York 10019

Dear Jon:

This letter, when accepted by you, shall constitute an amendment (this
"Amendment") to the letter agreement dated as of September 1, 1996 (the "Letter
Agreement"), between King World Productions, Inc. (the "Company") and you. All
of the definitions set forth in the Letter Agreement shall govern this
Amendment. The Company and you hereby agree as follows:

1.   The Employment Period shall terminate on August 31, 2002.

2.   Your salary compensation for the period (a) from September 1, 2000 through
     August 31, 2001, shall be payable at the annual rate of $425,000 and (b)
     from September 1, 2001, through August 31, 2002, shall be payable at the
     annual rate of $451,560.

Except as modified herein, all terms and conditions of the Letter Agreement
shall continue in full force and effect.

                                             Very truly yours,

                                             KING WORLD PRODUCTIONS, INC.


                                             By: /s/ Robert Madden
                                                -------------------------

Accepted:


     /s/ Jonathan Birkhahn
--------------------------------
Jonathan Birkhahn
# •

@) WtCOm iC<I**111)11 <Of'**  S Wf' FofHt**Piu svi** **l! ~** 



# ..,. '0'8* 0 -ii

# -~·

# ~ G l e



# Appendix-E-5mile radius Ocean City, Maryland