alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### ADELINE MANDEL ET AL., v. PUBLIC SERVICE TRANSPORTATION COMPANY.

Decided November 4, 1929.

Before Gummere, Chief Justice, and Justices Parker and Bodine.

*955Eor the rule, *Henry H. Fryling.*

Contra, *John J. Breslin, Jr.*

Píse Cubiam.

The plaintiff Mrs. Mandel brought suit to recover compensation for injuries received by her while alighting from a bus belonging to the defendant company and in which she was a passenger. Her husband joined to recover compensation for the expenses incurred by him by reason of his wife’s injuries and for the loss of her services and society. The jury found a verdict in favor of each of the plaintiffs and we are asked to set this verdict aside upon the ground that it is contrary to the weight of the evidence on the question of the defendant’s liability.

If the testimony submitted on the part of the plaintiffs was a true statement of the facts relating to the happening of the accident, the jury was entirely justified in its action; if the testimony submitted on the part of the defendant was true, no cause of action was proved against him. The jury saw the witnesses called by the respective parties and heard the testimony given by them. They believed the witnesses of the plaintiff and we cannot say that they were not warranted in doing so.

So, believing they were entirely justified in the verdict rendered, the rule to show cause will be discharged.
# Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed March 8, 2023

. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________
No. 3D22

- 1361 Lower Tribunal Nos. F20

- 6666 & F19

- 8825

________________


### Keschener Destin, Appellant,

vs.


### The State of Florida, Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.315(a) from the Circuit Court for Miami

- Dade County, Laura Shearon Cruz , Judge.

Keschener Destin, in proper person.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before LOGUE, GORDO, and LOBREE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The order denying the petition for writ of habeas corpus is affirmed.2 Upon the Court’s own motion, the appeal of the trial court’s order denying

appellant’s pro se motion t o dismiss is hereby dismissed as an appeal taken

from a non

- final, non

- appealable order. See Charlemagne v. State , 207 So.

3d 237 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015) (unpublished table decision)

. Affirmed in part; dismissed in part.
#### William D. Mead, Respondent, *v.*Thomas A. Shea, *Appellant*.

Ordered, that ease be sent back to be properly made and settled. No costs to be taxed for the printing-of this case. Neither party to have costs of November term. Opinion by

Eumsey, J.;

Osborn, J., not acting.
-88 -86 -84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

 36

 38

 40

 42

 44

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲

▲

▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 500

18 12 06 00

08/13

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 13 Aug 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.50 N 76.81 W Meters AGL
§ 194.10-30 Magazine sprinklers. ( a ) *Sprinkler system required.* ( 1 ) A manual control, hydraulic control, or automatic sprinkler system shall be installed in each magazine or magazine group. The control valve shall generally be in accordance with Specification MIL-V-17501 insofar as materials and test fittings are concerned. All systems shall be remotely operable from a control station on the freeboard deck and manually operable at the control valve location.
( 2 ) Where automatic systems are installed sprinkler heads shall be of the open head design so as to permit either manual or automatic operation.
( 3 ) Sprinkler systems shall be designed in accordance with the requirements of part 76 of Subchapter H (Passenger Vessels) of this chapter. Minimum total system capacity shall be based on 0.8 gallon per minute per square foot of overhead area.
( 4 ) The normally required fire pumps may be used for magazine sprinkling purposes. However, the use of the magazine sprinkling system shall not interfere with the simultaneous use of the fire main system.
( b ) *Magazine vans.* ( 1 ) A manual control sprinkler system shall be installed in each magazine van. The system shall be connected to the nearest fire main outlet by jumper hose. The hose shall be protected from physical damage by a grating or similar arrangement. The fire station valve shall serve as the sprinkler control valve.
( 2 ) Sprinkler systems shall be designed in accordance with the requirements of part 76 of Subchapter H (Passenger Vessels) of this chapter, except that the system capacity shall be sufficient to provide a coverage of 0.4 gallon per minute per square foot of overhead area.
[CGFR 67-83, 33 FR 1151, Jan. 27, 1968, as amended by CGD 82-063b, 48 FR 4783, Feb. 3, 1983]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS INCLUDED IN
THE REGISTRANT'S FORM 10-QSB FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                  JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          1,156,087
<SECURITIES>                                    1,970,407
<RECEIVABLES>                                   7,196,097
<ALLOWANCES>                                            0
<INVENTORY>                                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               11,082,006
<PP&E>                                            629,638
<DEPRECIATION>                                    432,498
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 27,342,906
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          11,270,186
<BONDS>                                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                        14,707
<COMMON>                                        4,831,749
<OTHER-SE>                                              0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   27,342,906
<SALES>                                         8,557,459
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               21,893,940
<CGS>                                          13,256,481
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  13,256,481
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                7,453,298
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                424,148
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   389,999
<INCOME-TAX>                                       42,031
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                     0
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                      347,948
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0.08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0.05


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
        
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                              39
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   13,339
<ALLOWANCES>                                       265
<INVENTORY>                                      6,212
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                19,924
<PP&E>                                          46,917
<DEPRECIATION>                                  22,121
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  52,836
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,181
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        29,932
<OTHER-SE>                                       4,709
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    52,836
<SALES>                                         95,101
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                95,101
<CGS>                                           72,941
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   72,941
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,896
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,799
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,767
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,472
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,295
<DISCONTINUED>                                     379
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,916
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .76
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .76
        

</TABLE>
---

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER UNDER SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Trans-Orient Petroleum
Ltd. (the Company) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ending July 31, 2008 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Doug Lynes, 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, 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.

Doug Lynes ____________________________

Name: Doug Lynes Title: Chief Financial Officer October
27, 2008

---
# United States Court of Appeals **for the Fifth Circuit**

No. 20-40132 Conference Calendar

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee ,

versus

Jaime Azpeitia-Rodriguez,

Defendant—Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:19-CR-2012-1

Before King, Southwick, and Ho, Circuit Judges

. Per Curiam: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jaime AzpeitiaRodriguez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a br ief in accordance
with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Azpeitia-R odriguez has not filed a response. We

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED May 17, 2021
Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 20-40132 Document: 00515864598 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/17/2021No. 20-40132

2 have reviewed counsel’s brief and th e relevant portions of the record
reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appe llate review. Accordingly, counsel’s
motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED , counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED

. See
5th Cir. R. 42.2. Case: 20-40132 Document: 00515864598 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/17/2021
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

In accordance with the Court’s Opinion and Order dated December 6, 2016, and in light 

of Third-Party Plaintiff’s and Third-Party Defendant’s March 22, 2017 stipulation of dismissal of 

the sole remaining count in the Third-Party Complaint, the Court hereby enters judgment in 

favor of Defendants as to Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint and dismisses the Third-Party 

Complaint. 

GOMBA MUSIC, INC., and 

HARRY BALK, 

Plaintiffs, 

 

v. 

 

CLARENCE AVANT and 

INTERIOR MUSIC CORP., 

 Defendants. 

Case No. 14-cv-11767 

Honorable Laurie J. Michelson 

Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen 

INTERIOR MUSIC CORP., 

Third-Party Plaintiff, 

v. 

SIXTO RODRIGUEZ, 

Third-Party Defendant. 

JUDGMENT 

Case 2:14-cv-11767-LJM-RSW ECF No. 103, PageID.2573 Filed 03/23/17 Page 1 of 2
2 

Dated at Detroit, Michigan: March 23, 2017. 

DAVID J. WEAVER 

CLERK OF THE COURT 

s/Keisha Jackson 

Case Manager and Deputy Clerk 

APPROVED: 

s/Laurie J. Michelson 

HON. LAURIE J. MICHELSON 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing document was served on the 

attorneys and/or parties of record by electronic means or U.S. Mail on March 23, 2017. 

s/Keisha Jackson 

Case Manager to 

Honorable Laurie J. Michelson 

Case 2:14-cv-11767-LJM-RSW ECF No. 103, PageID.2574 Filed 03/23/17 Page 2 of 2
# C_2016059EN.01001201.xml

| 15.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 59/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 59/12

---

Judgment of the General Court of 17 December 2015 — Orange Polska v Commission

(Case T-486/11) (1)

1

((Competition - Abuse of dominant position - Polish telecommunications market - Decision establishing an infringement of Article 102 TFEU - Conditions imposed by the incumbent operator for allowing paid access for new operators to the network and to wholesale broadband access services - Legitimate interest in finding that an infringement was committed - Fines - Obligation to state reasons - Gravity of the infringement - Mitigating circumstances - Proportionality - Unlimited jurisdiction - 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines))

(2016/C 059/11)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Orange Polska S.A. formerly Telekomunikacja Polska S.A. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented: initially by M. Modzelewska de Raad, P. Paśnik, S. Hautbourg, lawyers, A. Howard, Barrister, and C. Vajda QC, and subsequently by M. Modzelewska de Raad, P. Paśnik, S. Hautbourg, A. Howard and D. Beard QC)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented: initially by B. Gencarelli, K. Mojzesowicz and G. Koleva, and subsequently by K. Mojzesowicz, G. Koleva and M. Malferrari and finally by G. Koleva, M. Malferrari, É. Gippini Fournier and J. Szczodrowski, Agents)

Defendant:

Interveners in support of the applicant: Polska Izba Informatyki i Telekomunikacji (Warsaw, Poland) (represented: P. Rosiak and K. Karasiewicz, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the applicant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Competitive Telecommunications Association (represented: initially by P. Alexiadis and J. MacKenzie, and subsequently by J. MacKenzie, Solicitors)

Intervener in support of the defendant

Re:

Re:

Application for the full or partial annulment of Commission Decision C(2011) 4378 final of 22 June 2011 relating to a proceeding under Article 102 TFEU (Case COMP/39.525 — Telekomunikacja Polska) and for a reduction of the fine imposed by the Commission in Article 2 of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Orange Polska S.A. to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Commission; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Orange Polska S.A. to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Commission;

| 3. | Orders Polska Izba Informatyki i Telekomunikacji and the European Competitive Telecommunications Association to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Polska Izba Informatyki i Telekomunikacji and the European Competitive Telecommunications Association to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 340, 19.11.2011.

1

---
#### In the Matter of the Application of the New York, Lackawanna and Western Railway Company, *Respondent,*to Acquire a Crossing of the Avon, Geneseo and Mt. Morris Railroad Company and the New York, Lake Erie and Western Railroad Company over their Railroad in the Town of Mt. Morris, *Appellants*.

Order appealed from reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion to dismiss granted. *Held,*that a railroad company cannot maintain proceedings under section 28 of tlj.e general railroad act to acquire a crossing of the railroad of another company, until it has located its route.
<PAGE>
                                                                     Exhibit 4.1


For _________________ Shares                   From whom transferred

Issued to __________________                   ________________________________

Dated ______________________                   Dated ___________________________


       NO. ORIGINAL              NO. OF ORIGINAL              NO. OF SHARES
       CERTIFICATE                    SHARES                    TRANSFERRED






No.                       ORGANIZED UNDER THE LAWS OF                    SHARES
                             THE STATE OF DELAWARE


                               Odimo Incorporated

         300,000,000 Shares Common Stock, $0.001 Par Value

This Certificate that ______________________________________ is hereby issued
__________________________________________ fully paid and non-assessable Shares
of the Capital Stock of the above named Corporation transferable only on the
books of the Corporation by the holder hereof in person or by duly authorized
Attorney upon surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed.



__________________________                             _______________________
       SECRETARY                                            PRESIDENT


NOTICE. THE SIGNATURE OF THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME AS
WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE, IN EVERY PARTICULAR, WITHOUT
ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER.

         For value Received, _____ hereby sell, assign and transfer
____________________________________________________________________ Shares
represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and
appoint _______________________________________________________________________
to transfer the said shares on the books of the within named Corporation with
full power of substitution the premises.

Dated _______________________
        In presence of
124 STAT. 2482 PUBLIC LAW 111–228—AUG. 11, 2010 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 5872: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 156 (2010): 

July 28, considered and passed House. 

Aug. 4, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 111–228 

111th Congress 

An Act 

To provide adequate commitment authority for fiscal year 2010 for guaranteed 

loans that are obligations of the General and Special Risk Insurance Funds 

of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘General and Special Risk Insurance Funds Availability Act of 2010’’. 

SEC. 2. ADEQUATE COMMITMENT AUTHORITY. 

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for fiscal year 

2010 the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development may enter 

into commitments to guarantee loans, as authorized by sections 

238 and 519 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z–3 and 

1735c), in an amount not exceeding $20,000,000,000 in total loan 

principal, any part of which is to be guaranteed. 

SEC. 3. BUDGETARY EFFECTS. 

The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of complying 

with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, shall be determined 

by reference to the latest statement titled ‘‘Budgetary Effects of 

PAYGO Legislation’’ for this Act, submitted for printing in the 

Congressional Record by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, provided that such statement has been submitted prior 

to the vote on passage. 

Approved August 11, 2010. 

General and 

Special Risk 

Insurance Funds 

Availability Act 

of 2010. 

Aug. 11, 2010 

[H.R. 5872] 


kgrant on DSKHRRP4G1PROD with PUBLAW
Record of Discussion Docket No. FAA- Directorate Identifier: -AD



### With whom outside the FAA has this AD action been discussed (i.e., Design Approval Holder, manufacturer, ATA, NBAA, RAA, AOPA, ALPA, GAMA, etc)?

ORGANIZATION PERSON CONTACTED DATE TOPICS DISCUSSED Boeing Various 2009 to Present Other. List below.

Other /Add itional Information : Discussions with Boeing to investigate and to 

### fix the unsafe condition.
2004 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

10-7-2004

USA v. Wright

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 03-4711

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2004

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2004 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"USA v. Wright" (2004). 2004 Decisions. Paper 244.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2004/244
NOT PRECEDENTIAL

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT 

OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

 

NO. 03-4711

 

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

RASEEN WRIGHT,

a/k/a/ Rasheem Wright,

a/k/a Rasheen Wright,

Raseen Wright,

Appellant

 

On Appeal From the United States 

District Court

For the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

(D.C. Crim. Action No. 03-cr-00200)

District Judge: Hon. John R. Padova

 

Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)

October 5, 2004

BEFORE: SLOVITER, BECKER and STAPLETON, Circuit Judges

(Filed October 7, 2004)

 
2

 

OPINION OF THE COURT

 

STAPLETON, Circuit Judge:

Appellant Raseen Wright was indicted for possession of a firearm by a convicted

felon. He was convicted by a jury and sentenced to 78 months of imprisonment. This

appeal followed.

Officer Poliard saw Wright, whom he had known for approximately five years,

firing a handgun. Wright dropped the handgun and fled. Officer Poliard saw him drop

the handgun and then gave chase. He ultimately overtook Wright, arrested him, and

returned to the original site to take custody of the firearm. At the time of his arrest,

Wright had been convicted of a felony.

Appellant’s counsel has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386

U.S. 738 (1967), and requested permission to withdraw. Our review of the record has

found no non-frivolous ground that could be urged as a basis for reversal. The evidence

provided ample support for the jury’s verdict.

We will affirm the judgment of the District Court and grant counsel’s motion to

withdraw.