alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Norwich University *v.*Edward Denny.

*Principal and Agent.*

One having authority to sign the name of another to a subscription paper, may procure a third to do it in his presence.

Assumpsit upon a subscription of $200 to induce the location of the plaintiff university at Northfield. Plea, the general issue ; trial by jury, and verdict for the plaintiff, September term, 1872, Peck, J., presiding. Exceptions by the defendant. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion of the court.

*Heman*Carpenter, for the defendant.

*Creo. M.*Pish, for the plaintiff, cited Story Agency, 109, and cases cited ; *Moulton*v. *Hall et als.*27 Yt. 233 ; *Andrus*v. *How*ard,, 36 Yt. 248.

*14The opinion of the court was delivered by

Barrett, J.

The liability of the defendant for the sum claimed depended on the subscription of his name to the paper presented. If his name was put there by his authorization, then he is liable ; if not by his authorization, then he is not liable. Whatever authorization was given, he gave to Dr. Nichols. The question of fact in controversy in the jury trial was, whether the defendant gave such authorization to Dr. Nichols. That was determined by the jury upon legitimate evidence, with proper instructions by the court. It is shown and agreed that the defendant’s name was put there by the procurement of Dr. N., pretending to act in virtue of authority from the defendant.

It is now insisted that Dr. N. could not delegate such authority/ so as to enable another to make a binding subscription of the de-j fendant’s name. This cannot be maintained. It is matter of entire indifference for any purpose or reason by what hand the name was written ; provided it was done by the procurement of Dr. N. under and in execution of the authority given by the defendant to him. He might as well do it by the fingers of another person, as by the pen of another person. He was not delegating any authority, but only performing an authorized act by a servant, instead of doing it with his own hand. It was the act of his mind and will, and was an effectual doing by him of the act -he was authorized to do.

It differs entirely from cases in which the person is authorized to do things requiring the exercise of that person’s judgment and discretion, which can be exercised only by the person himself. An arbitrator cannot delegate his function to another ; but having heard and decided as arbitrator, he can have another person draw up his award and put his name to it, instead of doing it himself. So in this case, Dr. N. could execute the authority conferred on him byjbe defendant, by procuring another to use the pen under the direction of his own mind and will, instead of using the pen himself.

Judgment affirmed.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**** 

**CERTIFICATION**

**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 Alexander’s, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

 

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010**(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 the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

****
[Crim. No. 3966.

First Appellate District, Division One.

July 9, 1937.]

#### THE PEOPLE, Respondent, v. PRESTON JOHNSON, Appellant.

Bruce P. Griswold for Appellant.

U. S. Webb, Attorney-General, and Seibert L. Sefton, Deputy Attorney-General, for Respondent.

THE COURT.

—Appellant was charged with burglary and convicted. He appeals from the judgment and from an order denying his motion for a new trial.

The evidence shows that a service station operator was induced by false statements as to its condition to enter a rest room at the station. The door was then locked and the operator confined therein. The person who made the statements then opened the cash register in the station office and took a sum of money therefrom. Appellant was subsequently arrested and identified by the operator, and the identification was repeated at the trial.

Appellant contends that this testimony, when considered with that adduced on the cross-examination of the operator, was insufficient to support the verdict. *674It appears that the operator met the burglar face to face; and although in some particulars, namely, in the description of his apparel and hair, the testimony might have created a doubt in the minds of the jurors as to accuracy of the identification, nevertheless enough was shown to sustain their conclusion as expressed in the verdict. While inconsistencies in the testimony of a witness tend to impair his credibility, it still remains for the jury to determine its weight. (10 Cal. Jur., Evidence, sec. 364, p. 1146.) Here the identification was positive, and the evidence sustains the conviction. *(People*v. Wallach, 79 Cal. App. 605 [250 Pac. 578]; *People*v. *Radz,*119 Cal. App. 435 [6 Pac. (2d) 527] ; *People*v. *Villaruz,*16 Cal. App. (2d) 492 [60 Pac. (2d) 886].)

The judgment and order are affirmed. _
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT PIERCE DIVISION

CASE NO. 22-14305-CIV-CANNON/McCabe

TAMIKO N. PEELE,

Plaintiff,

v.

THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, et al.,

Defendants.

________________________________/

ORDER STRIKING RESPONSE 

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Plaintiff Tamiko N. Peele’s Response to the 

Joint Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 65], filed on September 20, 2022. In light of the Order 

Dismissing Complaint [ECF No. 63], which denied as moot the Joint Motion to Dismiss 

[ECF No. 32], Plaintiff’s Response [ECF No. 65] is hereby STRICKEN.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Pierce, Florida this 21st day of September

2022.

_________________________________

AILEEN M. CANNON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

cc: counsel of record

Tamiko N. Peele

4001 SW Melbourne Street

Port St. Lucie, Florida 34953

PRO SE

Case 2:22-cv-14305-AMC Document 69 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/21/2022 Page 1 of 1
## SOLUTIONS

TerrAqua Resource Management (TARM) is a joint venture of Larson Design Group (LDG) , Williamsport, PA and Newalta , Calgary, Alberta, Canada that offers water resource management services thatsupport exploration and development in the Marcellus Shale play. Because of this relationship, TARM’s operations are engineering-driven, focusing on high environmental compliance, occupational safety, and cost control

.
TARM’s primary service is a zero-liquid discharge process . TARM processes a client’s generated water (flowback and produced) that allows for reuse in well development operations. TARM faciliti es are located in or near established drilling patterns. Trucks travel loaded b oth ways, so mileage is reduced and efficiency increased. TARM’s treatme nt process results in water that meets client’s standard for reuse in drilling operations. After treatment, water is reused by the client, reducing the client’s dependency on fresh water. This process, including related services, is deployed by two facility types.

◾ Conventional Centralized facilities are convenient to dri lling patterns and supported by good roadway networks. These facilities a re permitted for 400K gpd and allocate treatment capacity to several operators.

◾ Fixed-Field facilities are located in the client’s drill ing pattern. The site is selected to reduce transportation expense. These fa cilities are not wheel-based. They utilize industry-standard constr uction methods and can be easily mobilized, demobilized, and rel ocated. This allows for site reclamation.

TARM’s initial facility at Water Tower Square in Willi amsport is the first facility to receive a Residual Waste-Beneficial Reuse Permi t (MWGR121/123) from PADEP’s Bureau of Waste Management . That permit was issued in March 2010. Operations started in Ap ril 2010. As of January23, 2012, TARM has treated and returned to its cl ients 100+ million gallons of generated water. In addition, thi s facility is the first to receive WQM-Part 1 approval for treatment and discharge under PADEP’s new TDS strategy. Page 1 of 2 Solutions | TARM

10/28/2013 http://www.tarmsolutions.com/solutions/Page 2 of 2

Solutions | TARM

10/28/2013 http://www.tarmsolutions.com/solutions/
Programs funded by Area Agencies on Aging 

such as AgeOptions are paid for using Older 

Americans Act funds, plus state and local 

monies and donations. Your health care 

team can send a referral to AgeOptions 

which will promptly call you to discuss 

your opportunities. 

If you do not have a health care professional 

you can talk to, call us directly: 

Call AgeOptions at: 

(800) 699-9043 or

(708) 383-0258

This brochure is prepared and printed in part with federal Older Americans Act, 

Administration for Community Living, State of Illinois General Revenue and AgeOptions 

funds. The Illinois Department on Aging and U.S. Administration on Aging are recognized 

for their support of AgeOptions. Neither is responsible for the content of this brochure. 

Food & Your Health 

Did you know that what 

you eat or not eat can 

impact your health? 

Talk to Your Health Care Team 

Your health care team may not always 

ask you about food. But, help may be 

available to you. 

You should ask them about nutritional 

services in your community. Your health 

care team can make a referral to 

AgeOptions to help you get the food you 

need. 

Connecting Older Adults with Community-based Resources and Options 

The ATea Agency on Aging ofSuhuTban Cu<.1k County 
 

- Are you skipping meals? - Concerned about your next

meal?

- Worried your food will run out

before you have money to buy

more?

- Are you eating the right foods

for your health condition(s)?

If you are 60 or older and answered 

"yes" to any of these questions, talk 

to your doctor, nurse, social worker, 

care coordinator or other member of 

your health care team. They can tell 

you about community programs to 

help you get the nutrition you need to 

stay healthy! Other resources are 

available too. 

AGE0PTIONS. 

Connecting Older Adults with Cnmmunity-based Resources and Options

The Area Agency on Aging of Suburban Cook County 

Programs & Services 

There are programs and services to help 

everyone, but especially for persons 60 

years of age and over. Many of these 

programs are right in the community 

where you live. 

AgeOptions or your local Area Agency 

on Aging can link you with community 

resources aimed at food. They can also 

help you obtain other government 

programs, benefits and health 

education. 

I Possible Options for Food & Information 

• Meals near where you live and where you can

also talk with neighbors and learn about nutrition • Meals delivered to your home • Local food pantries in your neighborhood • Farmer's markets • Groceries delivered to your home • Education & wellness programs • SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance

Program - Food Stamps)
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 21

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

Banco Santander Puerto Rico and Subsidiaries is a commercial banking entity
incorporated under the laws of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and is a 100%
owned subsidiary of the Registrant.

Santander Mortgage Corporation is a mortgage banking entity incorporated under
the laws of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and is a 100% owned subsidiary of
Banco Santander Puerto Rico.

Santander Securities Corporation is a registered broker-dealer incorporated
under the laws of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and is a 100% owned subsidiary
of the Registrant.

Santander Asset Management provides portfolio management and advisory services.
It is incorporated under the laws of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and is a
100% owned subsidiary of Santander Securities Corporation.

Santander Insurance Agency is an insurance and general agent incorporated under
the laws of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and is a 100% owned subsidiary of
the Registrant.

Santander International Bank is an international banking entity incorporated
under the laws of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and is a 100% owned subsidiary
of Banco Santander Puerto Rico.
Exhibit 10.4

      

      

    

    
      Amendment No. 3 to Employment Agreement

      

      

      WHEREAS Galaxy Gaming, Inc. (the “Company”) and Harry C. Hagerty (“Employee”) are parties (the “Parties”) to an Employment Agreement dated May 1, 2017 as amended and modified by Amendment No.1 on January 11, 2017 and Amendment No. 2 on February 21, 2019 (the
          Employment Agreement and Amendment No.1 and Amendment No. 2 are hereinafter collectively referred to as the “ Agreement”); and

       

      WHEREAS the Company and Employee desire to modify certain terms of the Agreement;

       

      NOW THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows:

       

      
        
          	

                	1.	
                  The Base Salary listed under the Compensation and Benefits section of Exhibit A to the Agreement shall be remain at the annual rate of $200,000.00.

                


        

      

       

      
        
          	

                	2.	
                  The Employee shall be granted 200,000 Nonqualified options to purchase shares of common stock of the Company that will vest in the following installments 66,666 shares on October 22, 2020, 66,666 shares on
                    October 22, 2021, and 66,668 shares on April 30, 2022. The options shall have a strike price equal to the closing price of the Company’s common stock on the date this Amendment No. 3 is executed. The options shall be subject to the
                    terms of the standard form Galaxy Gaming, Inc. Nonqualified Stock Option Agreement and the Galaxy Gaming, Inc. 2014 Equity Incentive Plan.

                


        

      

       

      
        
          	

                	3.	
                  Section l(a) of the Employment Agreement shall be modified to extend the end date of the term of employment of the Employee from April 30, 2020 to a new end date of April 30, 2022.

                


        

      

      

      

      This Amendment No. 3 shall become part of and subject to the terms of the Agreement which, except as modified hereby, remains unchanged and in full force and effect. To the extent that the
        terms and conditions expressly set forth in this Amendment No. 3 conflict with the terms and conditions of the Agreement, the terms and conditions expressly set forth in this Amendment No. 3 shall prevail. Unless otherwise defined in this Amendment
        No. 3, capitalized terms used herein shall have the same meanings assigned to such terms in the Agreement.

       

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Amendment No. 3 with an effective date of October 22, 2019.

      

      

      
        	GALAXY GAMING, INC.	
                 

              	HARRY C. HAGERTY	 


        	
                 

              	
                 

              	
                 

              	 
	By:	/s/ Todd P. Cravens	
                 

              	By:	/s/ Harry C. Hagerty	 


        	
                Name:

              	Todd P. Cravens, CEO
§ 153.305 Methods and procedures for the removal of discharged oil. Each person who removes or arranges for the removal of a discharge of oil from coastal waters shall: ( a ) Use to the maximum extent possible mechanical methods and sorbents that: ( 1 ) Most effectively expedite removal of the discharged oil; and
( 2 ) Minimize secondary pollution from the removal operations; Note:
The Federal OSC is authorized by the provisions of the National Contingency Plan to require or deny the use of specific mechanical methods and sorbents. Sorbent selection considerations of the OSC include hydrographic and meteorological conditions, characteristics of the sorbent, and availability of a mechanical method for containment and recovery.
( b ) Control the source of discharge, prevent further discharges, and halt or slow the spread of the discharge by mechanical methods or sorbents or both to the maximum extent possible;
( c ) Recover the discharged oil from the water or adjoining shorelines by mechanical or manual methods or both to the maximum extent possible;
( d ) Use chemical agents only in accordance with the provisions of Subpart H of the National Contingency Plan and with the prior approval of the Federal OSC; and
( e ) Dispose of recovered oil and oil contaminated materials in accordance with applicable State and local government procedures.
[CGD 73-185, 41 FR 12630, Mar. 25, 1976, as amended by CGD 84-067, 51 FR 17966, May 16, 1986]
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.4

                                  CERTIFICATION

In connection with the Quarterly Report of K-Tron International, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 28, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ronald
R. Remick, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, hereby certify,
based on my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: August 6, 2003

                                                     /s/ Ronald R. Remick
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Ronald R. Remick
                                                     Senior Vice President and
                                                     Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to K-Tron International, Inc. and
will be retained by K-Tron International, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# Tyler Smith – ADR.gov

Federal Government's Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
#### Homer Richard CLINTON, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 17105.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

Nov. 19, 1958.

*825Homer Richard Clinton, in pro. per.

William B. West, III, U. S. Atty., Heard L. Floore, U. S. Atty., Cavett S. Binion, Asst. U. S. Atty., Fort Worth, Tex., for appellee.

Before TUTTLE, JONES and BROWN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the denial of appellant’s motion to vacate a sentence to life imprisonment following his conviction under the Federal kidnapping statute, 18 U.S.C.A. § 1201(a). The ground for the motion to vacate is that the indictment on which appellant was tried and convicted failed to allege all the ingredients of the crime as set out in the statute. The indictment was in the following language:

> “did unlawfully and knowingly transport in interstate commerce from Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, to Fort Worth, Texas, in the Fort Worth Division of the Northern District of Texas, a person, to wit, one Charles R. Questa, who had theretofore been unlawfully kidnapped and carried away by the said defendants and held.”

The statute under which appellant was charged and convicted reads:

> “(a) Whoever knowingly transports in interstate or foreign commerce, any person who has been unlawfully seized, confined, inveigled, decoyed, kidnaped, abducted, or carried away and held for ransom or reward or otherwise, except, in the case of a minor, by a parent thereof, shall be punished (1) by death if the kidnaped person has not been liberated unharmed, and if the verdict of the jury shall so recommend, or (2) by imprisonment for any term of years or for life, if the death penalty is not imposed.” 18 U.S.C.A. § 1201 (a).

Appellant complains that, although he was charged with unlawfully kidnapping and holding the victim, he was not charged with holding him “for ransom or reward.” The statute does not make this an ingredient of the crime. It requires only that the person charged with transportation be shown to have “unlawfully * * * kidnaped * * * or carried away and held for ransom or reward *or otherwise”*the victim. An allegation that appellant unlawfully and knowingly transported in interstate commerce the victim who had theretofore been unlawfully kidnapped and carried away by the said defendants and held is entirely adequate to withstand this motion. It is difficult to see how the addition of the words “for ransom or reward or otherwise” would have added anything to the indictment because obviously “otherwise” comprehends any purpose at all. If appellant desired to know more of the purpose the government intended to prove for his unlawful holding, he could have made a proper motion before trial to that end. His failure to do so waived his right to raise the point after conviction. Knight v. Hudspeth, 10 Cir., 112 F.2d *137;*Knight v. United States, 8 Cir., 137 F.2d 940.

The judgment is affirmed.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 22-cv-21691-BLOOM

VICTOR ARIZA, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

GLOTTMAN ANTEPRIMA, INC.,

a Florida for-profit corporation,

Defendant.

________________________________/

PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 

Plaintiff VICTOR ARIZA, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure, hereby voluntarily dismisses all his claims in this action with prejudice, with each party 

to bear his/its own attorney’s fees and costs. 

Dated: June 30, 2022. 

Respectfully submitted,

RODERICK V. HANNAH, ESQ., P.A. LAW OFFICE OF PELAYO

Counsel for Plaintiff DURAN, P.A.

4800 N. Hiatus Road Co-Counsel for Plaintiff

Sunrise, FL 33351 4640 N.W. 7th Street

T. 954/362-3800 Miami, FL 33126-2309

954/362-3779 (Facsimile) T. 305/266-9780 

Email: rhannah@rhannahlaw.com 305/269-8311 (Facsimile)

Email: pduran@pelayoduran.com 

By____s/ Roderick V. Hannah __ By ___s/ Pelayo M. Duran ______

RODERICK V. HANNAH PELAYO M. DURAN

Fla. Bar No. 435384 Fla. Bar No. 0146595

Case 1:22-cv-21691-BB Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/30/2022 Page 1 of 2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 30th day of June, 2022, a true and correct of the foregoing 

was electronically filed and served via e-mail counsel or parties of record on the Service List 

below:

Glottman Anteprima, Inc.

c/o Douglas Schapiro, Esq.

7301 A West Palmetto Park Road, Suite 100A

Boca Raton, FL 33433

(954) 326-7762

(561) 807-7388

Schapiro@schapirolawgroup.com

/s/ Roderick V. Hannah

 Roderick V. Hannah

Case 1:22-cv-21691-BB Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/30/2022 Page 2 of 2