alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EVIDENCE IN AN APPROPRIATION CASE.

Circuit Court of Medina County.

#### The Wadsworth *&*Western Traction Co. v. John Hutchinson, Sr., et al.

Decided, September 28, 1907.

*Practice*— Appropriation *Cases*— Where *View of Premises is Treated- as Evidence Reviewing Court Can Not Pass Upon Weight of Evidence.*

Where all parties acquiesce in a court’s instructions that the view of the premises is evidence in an appropriation case, it is impossible to include all the evidence in a bill of exceptions and a reviewing court can not therefore pass upon the weight of the evidence.

*Rogers, Rowley & Rockwell,*for plaintiff in error.

*Andrew & Woods,*contra.

Marvin, J.; Winch, J., and Henry, J., concur.

The action below was an appropriation proceeding in probate court, which resulted in an award and judgment of $600 for one-half acre taken and $1,250 damages to the residue of a mining leasehold estate. This award is complained of as excessive, but the point is made that we can not weigh the evidence on this or any other issue herein, because the bill of exceptions fails to exhibit all the evidence which was submitted to the jury’s consideration.

A view was had under the statute; and, following a former decision of this court, all parties acquiesced in the court’s instruction to the jury to consider such view as evidence in making their award. The Supreme Court has since overturned this doctrine, in *Zanesville, M.*& *P. R. R. Co.*v. *Bolen et al,*76 O. S., 376, declaring in the opinion that—

> “Counsel is surely right in assuming that if the impressions obtained by the jury from the view are themselves evidence in the case, there is no way by which that evidence can be carried into a bill of exceptions, and hence it inevitably follows, as he insists, that there is not power in a reviewing court to pass upon the weight of the evidence.” ■ ■

*59Here, where the view was expressly made evidence, not indeed by force of the statute, but by what is equivalent to an express stipulation of the parties, it is manifest that the evidence before us in the bill of exceptions is incomplete and hence incapable of review.

The witnesses of the plaintiff railroad company should have been permitted to answer the questions put to them on direct examination, at pages 158 and 159, asking what was the fair value of the acre of land taken, and for error in sustaining objections to said questions (and for no other error, for we find no other in the record), the judgment of the courts below are reversed, and the cause remanded to the court of common pleas for a new trial.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

January 30, 2012 

p0123 

Order 

 

January 30, 2012 

143868 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 143868 

 COA: 305836 

Macomb CC: 10-001222-FH 

JAMES HENRY MCHENRY, 

 Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 22, 2011 

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

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Exhibit 32.2



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



In connection with the annual
report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016 (the “Report”) of GSV Growth Credit Fund Inc. (the “Registrant”),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Thomas B. Raterman, the Chief Financial Officer of
the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, 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 condition and results of operations of the Registrant.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | /s/ Thomas B. Raterman  
| | ------------------------
| | Name: Thomas B. Raterman
| | Date: March 29, 2017
§ 1.6014-1 Tax not computed by taxpayer for taxable years beginning before January 1, 1970. ( a ) *In general.* If an individual is entitled under paragraph (a)(7) of § 1.6012-1 to use as his return Form 1040A, he may elect not to show thereon the amount of the tax due in connection with such return if his gross income is less than $5,000.
( b ) *Computation and payment of tax.* A taxpayer who, in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section, elects not to show the tax on Form 1040A is not required to pay the unpaid balance of such tax at the time he files the return. In such case, the tax will be computed for the taxpayer by the Internal Revenue Service, and a notice will be mailed to the taxpayer stating the amount of tax due. Where it is determined that a refund of tax is due, the Internal Revenue Service will send such refund to the taxpayer. See paragraph (c) of § 301.6402-3 of this chapter (Regulations on Procedure and Administration).
( c ) *Joint return.* ( 1 ) A husband and wife who, pursuant to paragraph (a)(7) of § 1.6012-1, file a joint return on Form 1040A may elect not to show the tax on such return if their aggregate gross income for the taxable year is less than $5,000.
( 2 ) The tax computed for the taxpayer who files Form 1040A and elects not to show thereon the tax due shall be the lesser of the following amounts: ( i ) A tax computed as though the return on Form 1040A constituted the separate returns of the spouses, or
( ii ) A tax computed as though the return on Form 1040A constituted a joint return.
( d ) *Married individuals filing separate returns.* In the case of a married individual who files a separate return and who elects under this section not to show his tax on Form 1040A his tax shall be computed with reference to the 10-percent standard deduction rather than the minimum standard deduction.
( e ) This section shall apply to taxable years beginning before January 1, 1970.
[T.D. 6500, 25 FR 12108, Nov. 26, 1960, as amended by T.D. 6581, 26 FR 11678, Dec. 6, 1961; T.D. 6792, 30 FR 531, Jan. 15, 1965; T.D. 7102, 36 FR 5497, Mar. 24, 1971]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                  5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
COMPANY'S FORM 10-QSB FOR THE 9 MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>              9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                         JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                           SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                                      45,820
<SECURITIES>                                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                              289,595
<ALLOWANCES>                                                30,000
<INVENTORY>                                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                           891,217
<PP&E>                                                   2,058,017
<DEPRECIATION>                                           1,023,692
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                           2,073,722
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    2,635,081
<BONDS>                                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                            0
<PREFERRED>                                                      0
<COMMON>                                                     5,121
<OTHER-SE>                                              (1,461,919)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                             2,073,722
<SALES>                                                    398,590
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                           398,590
<CGS>                                                       67,390
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            6,506,651
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                               206
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                         109,031
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                         (6,104,114)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                     (6,104,114)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                  0
<CHANGES>                                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                            (6,104,114)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                (1.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                (1.19)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATION I, Rosaline Shau, certify that: 1.
I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Milestone Scientific, Inc. (the
registrant).  2.
Based
on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;  3.
Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods
presented in this quarterly report;  4.
The
registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14
and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:  a.
Designed
such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to
the registrant, is made known to us by others, particularly during the period in which
this quarterly report is being prepared;  b.
Evaluated
the  effectiveness  of the  registrants  disclosure  controls and  procedures as of
a date within 90 days prior to the                 filing date of this quarterly report
(the Evaluation Date); and  c.
Presented
in this quarterly report our conclusions  about the  effectiveness  of the disclosure
 controls and procedures based on                 our evaluation as of the Evaluation
Date:  5.
The
registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  a.
All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal
controls which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b.
Any
fraud,  whether or not material,  that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the registrants                 internal controls; and  6.
The
registrants other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly report
whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors
that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most
recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant
deficiencies and material weaknesses.  Date: August
      15, 2005
    
    /s/ Rosaline Shau
      
            Rosaline Shau
            Acting Chief Financial Officer  25
The Honorable David S. Doty, United States District Judge for the District of 1 Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable John M
. Mason, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.



## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 98-1132

___________ Patricia A. Tenhoff, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Minnesota. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of * Social Security, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: December 17, 1998 Filed: December 22, 1998

___________ Before WOLLMAN, HANSEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Patrici a A. Tenhoff appeals from the district court’s order granting summary 1 judgment in favor of the Social Security Com missioner, upholding the Commissioner & s dec ision to deny Tenhoff & s applications for disability insurance benefits an d supplem ental security income. For reversal, Tenhoff argues the administrative la w judge (ALJ) who presided over the hearing posed a deficient hypothetical question to-2-

the vocational expert, as the hypothetical did not include all of Tenhoff & s limitation s resulting from her mental impairments. We disagree, and we conclude the ALJ & s decision is supported by substantial evidence. Initially , we observe that the ALJ was entitled to resolve conflicting evidenc e created by differing opinions of two mental health professionals. See Bentley v
. Shalala , 52 F.3d 784, 785-87 (8th Cir. 1995). Next, although the ALJ & s hypothetical questio n did not specifically include that Tenhoff would have difficulty keeping u p with her peers with regard to fol lowing instructions, maintaining pace, and completing tasks, it did include her marginal literacy, her tendency to be slow in all her actions , and her inability to do work requiri ng a fast pace or intense concentration. See Roe v. Chater , 92 F.3d 672, 675-77 (8th Cir. 1996) (while hypotheticalquestion must set forth all claimant & s impairments, it need not use specific diagnostic or symptomatic term s wher e other descriptive terms adequately define claimant & s impairments; testimon y fr om vocational expert based on properly-phrased hypothetical question constitute s substantial evidence; hypothetical n eeds to include only those impairments judge finds substantially supported by record as whole). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### Dominic J. Carilli *v.*City of Hartford

King, C. J., Murphy, Shea, Alcorn and Comley, Js.

Argued June 7

reargued November 7, 1963

decided January 7, 1964

*Joseph J. Burns,*assistant corporation counsel, for the appellant (defendant).

*Elihu H. Berman,*for the appellee (plaintiff).

Per Curiam.

The charter of the city of Hartford was amended in 1957 to provide a special disability *704retirement allowance, payable from the municipal employees’ retirement fund, for employees, other than teachers, who suffer a permanent disability in the course of their employment which does not prevent them from engaging in any gainful employment. Hartford Charter, c. 17, § 3 (f) *(1961);*28 Spec. Laws 423. On February 1,1960, the plaintiff, a member of the fire department, became so disabled. At the time, and thereafter, he had outside remunerative employment. He applied for a special disability retirement allowance. The city pension commission denied the application. The plaintiff appealed to the Court of Common Pleas, which sustained the appeal and remanded the case to the commission. The court, in effect, directed that the plaintiff’s earnings from his outside gainful employment at the time of disability be included with his fire department salary in the computation of the amount of income which he was earning at the time he became disabled. The defendant has appealed from that judgment.

A revised charter for the city of Hartford was adopted in 1947. 25 Spec. Laws 36, No. 30. It created the municipal employees’ retirement fund and a pension commission to administer it. 25 Spec. Laws 78, §§ 2, 3. Neither the 1947 act nor the 1957 amendment made provision for an appeal to the courts from the action of the commission. In the absence of such provision, the Court of Common Pleas was without jurisdiction to hear the case. *Bartlett*v. *Rockville,*150 Conn. 428, 430, 190 A.2d 690, and cases cited. The appeal should have been dismissed.

There is error, the judgment is set aside and the case is remanded with direction to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
**Exhibit32.1**

 

**Certificationof the Principal Financial OfficerPursuant to 18 U.S. C. Section 1350**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qof Kaiser Group Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period endingMarch 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), I, Marian P. Hamlett, Chief Financial Officer ofthe Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:

 

(1)  The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended; and

 

(2)  The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

 
| May 24, 2004 |   /s/ Marian P. Hamlett |   |
|--------------|------------------------------|--------|
|         | Marian P. Hamlett,           |
|         | Chief Financial Officer      |

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 154 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 154

To congratulate the Republic of China on Taiwan on the occasion of its 
                first Presidential democratic election.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 26, 1996

Mr. Funderburk (for himself, Mr. Smith of New Jersey, Mr. Scarborough, 
Mr. Graham, Mr. Hilleary, Mr. Jones, Mr. Cox of California, Mr. Foley, 
 Mr. Gutknecht, Mrs. Chenoweth, Mr. Underwood, Mr. Salmon, Ms. Pelosi, 
Mr. Bono, Mr. Burton of Indiana, Mr. Solomon, Ms. Brown of Florida, Mr. 
Hastings of Washington, Mr. Baker of California, Mr. Pombo, Mr. Cooley 
    of Oregon, Mr. Ehrlich, Mr. Coble, Mrs. Cubin, Mr. Istook, Mr. 
   Brewster, Mr. Buyer, and Mr. Rohrabacher) submitted the following 
     concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 
                        International Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
To congratulate the Republic of China on Taiwan on the occasion of its 
                first Presidential democratic election.

Whereas the Chinese people have the world's oldest continuous civilization;
Whereas for the first time in over 4,000 years of Chinese history, the Chinese 
        people on Taiwan will elect its president by popular vote on March 23, 
        1996; and
Whereas this historic event on Taiwan should be honored: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That--
            (1) the Congress congratulates the people of Taiwan on 
        holding the first democratic presidential election in Chinese 
        history;
            (2) the United States continues its commitment to move 
        nations toward freedom and democracy; and
            (3) the United States is committed to encouraging and 
        protecting its democratic friends on Taiwan, within the 
        framework of the Taiwan Relations Act.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
                            The Schedule contains summary
                            financial information extracted from
                            the financial statements for Freedom
                            Tax Credit Plus L.P. and is qualified
                            in its entirety by reference to such
                            financial statements
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000854926                   
<NAME>                        Freedom Tax Credit Plus L.P. 
<MULTIPLIER>                  1                                             
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS

<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           5,510,087
<SECURITIES>                                       155,657
<RECEIVABLES>                                            0
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,138,031
<PP&E>                                         142,245,738
<DEPRECIATION>                                  35,820,737
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 115,269,321
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           79,697,053
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                      35,572,268
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   115,269,321
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,439,885
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,427,438
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,217,902
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1,205,455)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      0
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,205,455)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       (16.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0
        


</TABLE>
**PLS CPA, A Professional Corp.**

t 4725 MERCURY STREET SUITE 210 t SAN DIEGO t CALIFORNIA 92111 t

t TELEPHONE (858)722-5953 t FAX (858) 761-0341  t**FAX (858) 764-5480**

t E-MAIL changgpark@gmail.com t

 

May 14, 2020

 

 

 

***To Whom It May Concern:***

 

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this annual report on Form 10-K of American Rebel Holdings, Inc., Inc. of our report dated on April 5, 2019, on the audit of the consolidated financial statements of American Rebel Holdings, Inc. as of December 31, 2018, and the related statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for the year then ended. 

 

 

Very truly yours,

 

 

***/s/ PLS CPA***

____________________________                                               

PLS CPA, A Professional Corp.

----