alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### MORRIS AND COMPANY, BRANCH OF THE NORTH AMERICAN PROVISION COMPANY, PLAINTIFF, v. JOHN HOURIHAN AND EDWARD J. KEYS, DEFENDANTS.

Decided November 9, 1929.

Before Gummere, Chief Justice, and Justices Kalisoh and Campbell.

Eor the rule, *Jacob W. & Edgar A. De Yoe.*

*Contra,*no brief.

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff brought its action against the defendants, Hourihan as the principal debtor, and Keys as guarantor, to recover the sum of $4,002.48, for goods, wares and merchandise, sold by it to John Hourihan, between March 2-3d, 1928, up to and including April 9th, 1928, upon a general guarantee executed in writing on the 22d day of September, 1927, by the defendant Keys, which general guarantee was without any limitation as to the amount of credit to be extended by the plaintiff to Hourihan, nor as to any period of time during which the guarantee was to run. The jury found a verdict for the defendant.

The defendant Hourihan filed no answer in the action and neither defendant has filed a brief in the case. The defendant *1011Keys who filed an answer, does not deny therein that he signed the guarantee, but inferentially admits that he did, for he sets up that it was misrepresented to him that it was a reference slip, and in another part of the answer, the defendant Keys further sets up the following: “Contrary to the general usage and custom of the trade, a larger credit was extended for a longer period than that explained to the defendant by an agent of the plaintiff company.”

The defendant Keys, in his testimony, at the trial, admitted that the guarantee bore his signature and says that he did not read it, and thought he was signing a reference slip. Upon the reference slip being produced, which also bore his signature, the witness said that he did not remember .signing the guarantee.

There is no testimony in the case that tends to show that the signature to the guarantee was obtained by any false representation made by the plaintiff, or its authorized agent.

The verdict of the jury was both against the law and the . evidence, and therefore is set aside.

Rule is made absolute.
#### THOMAS MELIA, PLAINTIFF, v. MALICKE BUS COMPANY, A CORPORATION, AND LOUIS GRASO, DEFENDANTS.

Submitted January 25, 1929

Decided October 14, 1929.

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

For the plaintiff, *Robert II. Doherty.*

For the defendants, *Alexander M. MacLeod*and *George L. Record.*

Per Curiam.

As we read the evidence in this case, a rule to show cause should have been refused by the trial court. The facts are very simple and are established in large measure by the evidence of the defendants’ servant who was operating the bus that injured the plaintiff.

Plaintiff was crossing Exchange Place, Jersey City, from south to north on a crosswalk and had almost reached the northerly curb line. As he was crossing, the defendants’ bus under the management and control of defendants’ driver named Graso was standing at the northerly curb of Exchange Place about where it joins Montgomery street and facing *860west. As the plaintiff approached the curb, his route carried him to the rear of this bus, which backed down upon him and injured him.

The défendant claims there is no proof as to how the accident happened; but we think there was ample proof, and that a large portion of it came from the lips of Graso himself. As to the law, it is only necessary to quote the language of the Traffic act *(Paviph. L.*1915, *p.*288, § 3), reading as follows:

“Before backing, ample warning shall be given, and while backing, unceasing vigilance shall be exercised not to injure those behind.”

The driver testified that although he blew his horn perhaps once before moving, nevertheless, he failed to look back on his left side as he was backing, and the, testimony of the plaintiff was that no signal of any kind was given. In view of the drastic language of this statute, the defendants’ negligence seems clear.

It is claimed that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence. We think this claim altogether unsubstantial. A pedestrian crossing such a street has about all he can do to see vehicles moving forward on his left and other vehicles moving forward on his right without pa3dng special attention to a standing bus pointed awa3r from him, and with respect to which he was entitled to assume that in case it was backed up the mandatory provisions of this statute would be reasonably obeyed.

The rule to show cause will be discharged.
Exhibit 10.9

                                Martin D. Ruikka
                            d.b.a. PRX Geographic(TM)

January 1, 2005
                                             Net Due Upon Receipt

Barry Ellsworth
Green Plains Renewable Energy, Inc.
9635 Irvine Bay Court
Las Vegas, NV 89147

                             INVOICE NO. 2005-C01101

Full Ethanol Feasibility Study - Iowa
Origination Analysis & Basis Impact Study
Risk Management Plan & Cost Comparison Analysis
Feasibility Study and Financial Pro Forma
Complete billing of study                                          $29,750.00
                                                                   ----------


Total Amount Due                                                   $29,750.00

                  Please make check payable to Martin D. Ruikka
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the
undersigned officer of National Penn Bancshares, Inc. (the "Company") hereby
certifies that the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2009 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.








Date:
              May
      8, 2009
              
              By:
              /s/ Glenn E. MoyerName:
              Glenn
      E. MoyerTitle:
              President
      and
                Chief
      Executive Officer








The foregoing certification is being
furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and not for any other
purpose.





63
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 244 

To provide for the security of critical energy infrastructure. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 7, 2009 

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To provide for the security of critical energy infrastructure. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. EVACUATION PLAN REVIEW. 

4 Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment 

5 of this Act, the Secretary of Energy shall transmit to the 

6 Congress a report of the Secretary’s review of the fuel sup7 ply plan components of State evacuation plans and the 

8 National Capitol region. Such report shall determine the 

9 sufficiency of such plans, and shall include recommenda10 tions for improvements thereto. Annually after the trans11 mittal of a report under this section, the Secretary shall 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
2 

HR 244 IH 

1 transmit a report to the Congress assessing plans found 

2 insufficient under previous reports. 

3 SEC. 2. DISASTER ASSISTANCE. 

4 (a) AUTHORITY.—During any federally declared 

5 emergency or disaster, the Secretary of Energy may pro6 vide direct assistance to private sector entities that oper7 ate critical energy infrastructure, including refineries. 

8 (b) ASSISTANCE.—Assistance under this section may 

9 include emergency preparation and recovery assistance, in10 cluding power generation equipment, other protective or 

11 emergency recovery equipment, assistance to restore ac12 cess to water, power, or other raw materials, and transpor13 tation and housing for critical employees. The Secretary 

14 may request assistance from other Federal agencies in 

15 carrying out this section. 

16 SEC. 3. CRITICAL ENERGY ASSURANCE ACCOUNT. 

17 There is established in the Treasury an account 

18 known as the Critical Energy Assurance Account. The 

19 Secretary of Energy shall deposit into this account 

20 amounts appropriated to the Secretary for the purpose of 

21 carrying out this Act and payments paid to the Secretary 

22 by any non-Federal source for the purpose of carrying out 

23 this Act. The Secretary may receive and accept payments 

24 from any non-Federal source, and amounts deposited into 

25 the account, whether appropriated or received from a nonVerDate Nov 24 2008 03:45 Jan 13, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H244.IH H244

rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
3 

HR 244 IH 

1 Federal source, shall be available to the Secretary, without 

2 further appropriation, for carrying out this Act. 

3 SEC. 4. REGULATIONS. 

4 The Secretary of Energy may issue regulations nec5 essary or appropriate to carry out this Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
Exhibit 32.2





Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





In connection with the filing of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarter Ended March 31, 2010 (the "Report") by American Medical Alert Corp. ("Registrant"), the undersigned hereby certifies 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 Registrant.





Date:  May 16, 2011


/s/ Richard RalloRichard RalloChief Financial Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to American Medical Alert Corp. and will be retained by American Medical Alert Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# C_2013123EN.01000702.xml

| 27.4.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 123/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.4.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 123/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 7 March 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Székesfehérvári Törvényszék — Hungary) — Gábor Fekete v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Közép-dunántúli Regionális Vám- és Pénzügyőri Főigazgatósága,

(Case C-182/12) (1)

1

(Community Customs Code - Article 137 - Regulation implementing the Customs Code - Article 561(2) - Conditions for total relief from import duties - Importation into a Member State of a vehicle whose owner is established in a third country - Private use)

2013/C 123/10

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Referring court

Székesfehérvári Törvényszék (Hungary)

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Gábor Fekete

Applicant:

Defendant: Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Közép-dunántúli Regionális Vám- és Pénzügyőri Főigazgatósága,

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Székesfehérvári Törvényszék — Interpretation of Article 561(2) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1993 L 253, p. 1) — Total relief from import duty — Private use of a means of transport — Concept of employment relationship — Importation into a Member State of a vehicle belonging to a foundation established in a third country by the chairman of the board of that foundation — Authorisation of the foundation in question for the chairman of the board to use and drive the vehicle concerned

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 561(2) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 993/2001 of 4 May 2001 must be interpreted as meaning that the total relief from import duties provided for by that provision for a means of transport used privately by a person established in the customs territory of the European Union may be granted only if such use is provided for in a contract of employment between that person and the owner of the vehicle established outside that territory.

---

(1)  OJ C 217, 21.07.2012.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE 
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF ABLE TELCOM FOR THE YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31, 1995, AND 
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1994
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1995
<CASH>                                       2,952,239
<SECURITIES>                                   571,875
<RECEIVABLES>                               11,065,038
<ALLOWANCES>                                   535,914
<INVENTORY>                                  3,535,622
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            18,572,647
<PP&E>                                       8,571,425
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,451,817
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              32,482,216
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       11,174,750
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,193
<OTHER-SE>                                  17,458,318
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                32,482,216
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            35,407,581
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               27,719,750
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             7,574,579
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,117,932
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (332,082)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (368,105)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            309,429
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (281,166)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.03)
        

</TABLE>
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S CONSENT


We consent to the  incorporation by reference in previously  filed  Registration
Statements  of Aura  Systems,  Inc. on Form S-3 (File Nos.  333-1315,  33-75160,
333-41509,  333-46773  and  333-57824)  and Form S-8 (File No.  33-66982) of our
report dated April 12, 2001, which contains an emphasis paragraph relating to an
uncertainty  as to  the  Company's  ability  to  continue  as a  going  concern,
appearing  in this Annual  Report on Form 10-K/A of Aura  Systems,  Inc. for the
year ended February 28, 2001.



SINGER LEWAK GREENBAUM & GOLDSTEIN LLP

Los Angeles, California
August 3, 2001
AMENDED AND RESTATED 

 

CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION

 

OF

 

AURA SYSTEMS, INC.

 

 

Aura Systems, Inc., a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware (the “Corporation”), hereby certifies as follows:

 

1. The name of the Corporation is “Aura Systems, Inc.” The Corporation was originally incorporated under the same name, and the original Certificate of Incorporation of the Corporation was filed with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware on March 2, 1987.

 

2. Pursuant to Sections 242, 245 and 303 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, this Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Corporation was authorized by the Debtor’s First Amended Plan of Reorganization (the “Plan”) under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, Case No. LA 05-24550 SB. The Plan was confirmed on January 18, 2006 by order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, Los Angles Division, which court has jurisdiction of the proceeding In re: Aura Systems, Inc., for purposes of reorganization of the Corporation. 

 

3. This Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation restates and integrates and further amends the provisions of the Certificate of Incorporation of the Corporation.

 

4. The text of the Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation as heretofore amended or supplemented is hereby restated and further amended to read in its entirety as follows:

 

First: The name of the corporation is Aura Systems, Inc. (the “Corporation”).

 

Second: The address of the registered office of the Corporation in the State of Delaware is 2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400, City of Wilmington, County of New Castle, Delaware 19808. The name of the registered agent of the Corporation at such address is Corporation Service Company.

 

Third: The purpose of the Corporation is to engage in any lawful act or activity for which corporations may be organized under the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

 

Fourth: The total number of shares of stock which the Corporation is authorized to issue is 50,000,000 shares of common stock with a par value of $0.0001 per share.

 

Fifth: The Corporation is to have perpetual existence.

 

Sixth: The business and affairs of the Corporation shall be managed by the board of directors, and the directors need not be elected by ballot unless required by the bylaws of the Corporation.

 

Seventh: In furtherance and not in limitation of the powers conferred by the laws of the State of Delaware, the board of directors is expressly authorized to adopt, amend or repeal the bylaws, except as otherwise provided therein.

 

----
Exhibit
31.1 CEO Certification
 
 I, Jon
Fullenkamp, certify that:
 
 1.  I have
reviewed this Amendment Numer 1 to Form 10-QSB of Victory Capital Holdings
Corporation:
 
 2.  Based on
my knowledge, this 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 report;
 
 3.  Based on
my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report;
 
 4.  The small
business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and
have:
 
 (a)
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the small business issuer, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;
 
 (b)
Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
 
 (c)
Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and
 
 5.  The small
business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business
issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
 
 (a) All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal control over
financial reporting.
 
 
 Date: June
6, 2005
 
 /s/
Jon Fullenkamp
 Jon
Fullenkamp
 Chief
Executive Officer
en. 133

cs. 161

Ch. 183

cs. 192

Ch. 459

ce, 468

en, 484

Ch. 756

Ch. 761

Ch. 767

HB 2145

SB 138

TABLE OF CONTmTS

STATUTES (ORS) -'''0l u '(V\. e, 2

Search and Seizure

Offenses Against Persons and Property

Administrative Procedure

Public and Private Recorda

Solid WaSte Control

Pollution Control

Traffic Offenses, Traffic Safety

PUC, General

Rail Carriers

Motor Carriers

Oregon Law 1985, C. 735

Oregon Law 1985, C. 670

'•.,

/9;

ADMINISTRATIVE RULES (OAR) • '5.e..~ Vo l 0 \

en, 340, Div. 12 Civil Penalties -

Ch. 340, Div. 100

to 110 Hazardous Waste Management

en. 860, mv. 46 Rail Transport

Ch. 860, Div. 66 Motor Vehicle Transport

ZB4956 (8/30/85)
e--,

Ch. 133

Ch. 161

Ch. 183

Ch. 192

Ch. 459

Ch. 468

Ch. 484

Ch. 756

en, 761

Ch. 767

HB 2238

SECTION E STATUTES AND RULES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

STATUTES (ORS)

Search and Seizure

Offenses Against Persons and Property

Administrative Procedure

Public and Private Records

Solid Waste Control

Pollution Control

Traffic Offenses, Traffic Safety

PUC, General

Rail Carriers

Motor Carriers

Oregon Law 1983, Ch. 703

ADMINISTRATIVE RULES (OAR)-

Ch. 340, Div. 12 Civil Penalties

Ch. 340, Div. 100

to 110 Proposed Hazardous Waste Management

Ch. 860, Div. 46 Rail Transport

cs. 860, Div. 66 Motor Vehicle Transport

Revised 8/1/84
#### § 503.12 Effect of nonpublication.

Except to the extent that a person has actual and timely notice of the terms thereof, no person shall in any manner be required to resort to, or be adversely affected by any matter required to be published in the Federal Register and not so published.