alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Maria Bellingheri *vs.*Maria De Luca Aliosi.

Suffolk.

January 12, 1920.

February 28, 1920.

Present: Rugg, C. J., Bbaley, De Couecy, Carroll, & Jenney, JJ.

*Slander. Evidence,*Presumptions and burden of proof.

In the declaration in an action of tort for slander, the plaintiff alleged that the defendant “in the Italian language” called her “buttana,” which in the English language meant a whore. The plaintiff’s evidence tended to show that the word was used in the presence of others who understood its meaning and that it was in the Sicilian dialect. There was a finding for the plaintiff. *Held,*that the finding was warranted.

Tort for slander, the plaintiff alleging in substance that the defendant stated “of the plaintiff in the Italian language substantially as follows: ‘Maria Bellingherie e buttana’ (meaning in the English language that ‘Maria Bellingheri is a whore’).” Writ in the Municipal Court of the City of Boston dated September 3, 1918.

The material evidence at the trial in the Municipal Court is described in the opinion. At the close of the evidence, the defendant asked the judge to rule that, (1) on all the evidence the defendant was entitled to a finding, and that (2) a finding for the plaintiff could' not be made on the evidence.

The rulings were refused. The judge found for the plaintiff in the sum of $50, and, at the request of the defendant, reported the case to the Appellate Division, who denied the report. The defendant appealed.

*F. M. Zottoli,*for the defendant, submitted a brief.

*J. A. Vitelli,*for the plaintiff."

De Courcy, J.

In this action for speaking slanderous words in Italian concerning the plaintiff, the declaration properly set out the words as spoken in the foreign language and also their meaning in English. *Romano*v. *De Vito,*191 Mass. 457. There *147was evidence that the defendant called the plaintiff “Maria Bellingherie e buttana;” that “buttana” is a word in the Sicilian dialect meaning “whore” in English; and that it was spoken in the presence of others who understood its meaning.

The evidence on behalf of the defendant was that she called the plaintiff a “banniana;” meaning, in a Sicilian dialect, “either a she Town Crier or a she Hawker.” Apparently this was the only defence relied upon. It was a question for the trial judge to decide what words were used by the defendant, and what meaning they naturally conveyed to the understanding of the persons in whose presence they were uttered. In finding for the plaintiff he necessarily decided this and all the other issues of fact in her favor. *Downs*v. *Hawley,*112 Mass. 237. *Miller*v. *Parish, 8*Pick. 384. *Kenney*v. *McLaughlin, 5*Gray, 3. See *Whiting*v. *Smith,*13 Pick. 364; *Rutherford*v. *Paddock,*180 Mass. 289; 15 Ann. Cas. 1242 note.

*Order dismissing report affirmed.*
# Official Journal L 358/2016

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 358 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5929 December 2016 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 358

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5929 December 2016

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS |
| | * | Information relating to the entry into force of the Agreement between the European Union and the People's Republic of China on the short-stay visa waiver for holders of diplomatic passports | 1 |
| | * | Notice concerning the provisional application between the European Union and the Republic of Ecuador of the Protocol of Accession to the Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and Colombia and Peru, of the other part, to take account of the accession of Ecuador | 1 |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | * | Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2016/2392 of 19 December 2016 appointing a member of the Court of Auditors | 2 |
| | * | Commission Decision (EU) 2016/2393 of 4 July 2016 on the State aid SA.33754 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN) implemented by Spain for Real Madrid CF
  (notified under document C(2016) 4080)

   (
  1
  ) | 3 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS

*

Information relating to the entry into force of the Agreement between the European Union and the People's Republic of China on the short-stay visa waiver for holders of diplomatic passports

1

*

Notice concerning the provisional application between the European Union and the Republic of Ecuador of the Protocol of Accession to the Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and Colombia and Peru, of the other part, to take account of the accession of Ecuador

1

DECISIONS

*

Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2016/2392 of 19 December 2016 appointing a member of the Court of Auditors

2

*

Commission Decision (EU) 2016/2393 of 4 July 2016 on the State aid SA.33754 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN) implemented by Spain for Real Madrid CF
  (notified under document C(2016) 4080)

   (
  1
  )

(notified under document C(2016) 4080)

1

3

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
Exhibit
32.2



CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED

PURSUANT
TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In
connection with the annual report of Organic Alliance, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Barry Brookstein,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:



|(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: June 3, 2013 | Organic
     Alliance, Inc.                  
|------------------ | ---------------------------------------------
|                   | By: /s/ Barry
     Brookstein                
|                   | Barry
     Brookstein Chief Financial Officer





A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Organic Alliance, Inc. and will be retained
by Organic Alliance, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.1




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




The undersigned, Ross Lavnikevich, the President and Chief Executive Officer of iGenii, Inc. (the “Company”), certifies, under the standards set forth and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in that Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Dated: July 9, 2012By:
/s/ Ross LavnikevichName: Ross LavnikevichTitle: President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: 2013-NM-084-AD

Costs:

Labor per airplane (20 work hours x $85/hour) $ 1,700

Parts per airplane $ + n/a

Cost per airplane $ 1,700

Number of U.S.-registered airplanes 

x

 5

Total fleet cost $8,500

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific 

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of 

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
Reap. Dec. 10567.

#### Bruce Duncan Co., Inc., a/c Goliath Distributors, Inc. *v.*United States,

Reappraisement abandoned May 17, 1963.

Entered at Los Angeles, Oalif. (Not published.) (Initial No. R59/10333.) Motion by plaintiff.
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTIONS 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACTS OF 2002











In connection with the Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report of AmeriResource Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended September 30, 2008 (the "Report"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, on the date hereof (the “Report), the undersigned, Delmar Janovec, Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 18 U.S.C., Section 1350, 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.








Dated: September 9, 2009
/s/ Delmar A. JanovecDelmar A. JanovecChief Executive Officer
Prepared by MERRILL CORPORATION www.edgaradvantage.com


Exhibit 10.17


Summary of Jim Taylor consulting agreement:


	1.
	Engagement
changed to part-time with responsibility to work at Iomega direction a minimum of "8Days" per month. Compensation shall amount to $200,000 per annum under this agreement.
Should hours requested exceed the base of this agreement a mutually acceptable remuneration will be agreed between the parties.



	2.
	Responsibilities
as written by the Chief Executive Officer (Jodie Glore).



	3.
	This
agreement shall be effective until cancellation by either party (Iomega—or—Jim Taylor) following a 30 day notification.






Should
cancellation by the company occur on or before:


1/1/2000—A
special one-time payment of $400,000 (gross) will be made to Mr. Taylor


1/1/2001—A
special one-time payment of $200,000 (gross) will be made to Mr. Taylor


1/1/2002—There
is no additional compensation


If
at any time Mr. Taylor chooses to end this consulting relationship there will be no monies due to him.



	4.
	Mr. Taylor
will remain eligible for the 1999 Incentive bonus Plan (IBP) at a 50% reduced target of $150,000. Any payment of this bonus will be directly tied to the plan
provisions of both company financial (50%) and non-financial (50%) performances as determined by the Compensation committee of the Board of Directors.






Mr. Taylor's
eligibility under this plan will cease after the 1999 plan year.



	5.
	Mr. Taylor
will continue to vest in all stock options previously issued so long as this consulting arrangement remains in effect. He will also be eligible for any additional
grants that may be contemplated based upon performance and contribution to the Corporation.



	6.
	Mr. Taylor
remains bound by all non-competition, non-solicitation, and non-disparagement provisions of his employment agreement.






The
below signatures acknowledge agreement with the above provisions and negate any future and/or past claims based on any prior agreements between the Company and Mr. Taylor.



	 

 	 
 	 

 	 
 	 

 
	/s/ James Taylor
 James Taylor	 	/s/ Jodie Glore
 Jodie Glore, CEO	 	/s/ Kevin O'Connor
 Kevin O'Connor VP—HR
No. 57050.

protests 134248-K, etc. (Seattle).

#### Odom & Company et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was' sustained.
NEWMAN & NEWMAN, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, LLP

505 Fifth Ave. S., Ste. 610

Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 274-2800

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

The Honorable John C. Coughenour

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

JAMES S. GORDON, Jr., a married

individual, d/b/a ‘GORDONWORKS.COM';

OMNI INNOVATIONS, LLC., a

Washington limited liability company,

Plaintiffs,

v.

VIRTUMUNDO, INC, a Delaware

corporation d/b/a

ADNOWLEDGEMAIL.COM;

ADKNOWLEDGE, INC., a Delaware

corporation, d/b/a

ADKNOWLEDGEMAIL.COM; SCOTT

LYNN, an individual; and JOHN DOES,

1-X,

Defendants.

NO. CV06-0204JCC

DECLARATION OF MICHAEL

GEROE IN SUPPORT OF 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

NOTE ON MOTION CALENDAR: 

February 16, 2007

I, Michael R. Geroe, swear under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United

States to the following:

1. I am General Counsel of Defendant Adknowledge, Inc. (“Adknowledge”),

am over age 18, and competent to be a witness. I am making this Declaration based on

facts within my own personal knowledge.

2. The domain name <my-freemail.com> is registered to Adknowledge’s

customer, Venture Direct. The messages using that domain name were sent by Venture

Case 2:06-cv-00204-JCC Document 100 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 1 of 2

Gordon v. Virtumundo Inc et al Doc. 100

Dockets.Justia.com
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

I

9

10

l l

t2

13

t4

15

16

t7

18

19

20

2t

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Direct through Adknowledge's network pursuant to agreement.

DATED this 22nd day of January, 2007 at Kansas City, Missouri.

DECL. OF'M. GEROE RE:

DEFS.. l:v$T. FOR SUMM. J.

I

ttrmru&N-rwrrrary- | {9.T.ft**[?*^*1949

Case 2:06-cv-00204-JCC Document 100 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 2 of 2
Case No. 6,558.

#### HODGE v. HIGGS.

[2 Cranch, C. C. 552.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

April Term, 1825.

Evidence — Original Entries.

If the clerk who made the original entries in the testator's books, be made executor, those entries are competent evidence in an action by the executor for goods sold and delivered by the testator to the defendant.

Assumpsit by the plaintiff, as executor of Hodge, for goods sold and delivered to the defendant in the testator’s lifetime. The original entries in the testator’s books had been made by the plaintiff while he was the clerk of the testator, and having proved them to be in his handwriting, and made in the testator’s lifetime, and that he was then his clerk, he now offered them as evidence of the sale and delivery of the goods.

Mr. Mason, for defendant,

objected that it was his voluntary act to qualify as executor; he might have refused to act.

THE COURT,

however (nem. con.), was inclined to the opinion that the original entries, under those circumstances, were competent evidence for the plaintiff, and permitted them to be read to the jury, saying that they would grant a new trial if satisfied that the opinion was wrong.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

FRANCESCA HARON, 

Plaintiff,

v.

ALBERTO GONZALES, MICHAEL

CHERTOFF,

Defendants.

Case No. 06-5040RJB

ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on the Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma

Pauperis (Dkt. 1) and on the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge J. Kelley Arnold

(Dkt. 4). The Court has reviewed the Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, the

Report and Recommendation, and the file herein.

The Report and Recommendation urges the matter be dismissed because the proposed

Complaint fails to state a cognizable claim. Dkt. 4. Plaintiff has been given an opportunity to

correct the deficiencies in the complaint, and has failed to do so. Dkt. 2. Under 28 U.S.C.

1915(e)(2)(B), “the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that . . . the

action is frivolous or malicious or fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted.” The Court

should adopt the Report and Recommendation. 

Case 3:06-cv-05040-RJB Document 5 Filed 04/10/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER - 2

Therefore, it is now ORDERED that 

• the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 4) is ADOPTED and this action is DISMISSED

WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 

• Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Dkt.1) is DENIED AS MOOT.

The Clerk of the Court is instructed to send uncertified copies of this Order to all counsel

of record and to any party appearing pro se at said party’s last known address.

DATED this 10th day of April, 2006.

ARobert J. Bryan

United States District Judge 

Case 3:06-cv-05040-RJB Document 5 Filed 04/10/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 66581.

#### Advance Brokers, Ltd. *v.*United States,

protests 60/13499, etc. (Boston).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of fish blocks similar in all material respects to those the subject of *The Lee Herrmann Co., a/c The Coldwater Seafood Corp.*v. *United States*(43 Cust. Ct. 49, C.D. 2101), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 99-40061

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

KARL GAYWIN ACLESE,

Defendant-Appellant.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:94-CR-81-2

--------------------

December 15, 1999

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Karl Gaywin Aclese (# 04913-078) appeals from the denial of

a motion filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) and a motion for

reconsideration. This court must examine the basis of its

jurisdiction on its own motion if necessary. Mosley v. Cozby,

813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987). A motion filed pursuant to

§ 3582(c)(2) is a further motion filed by a defendant in a

criminal case, and a notice of appeal in a criminal case must be

filed within ten days of the judgment or order appealed. See
No. 99-40061

-2-

§ 3582(c)(2); Fed. R. App. P. 4(b). A timely filed motion for

reconsideration extends the time for taking an appeal so that the

period begins to run when the motion is denied. United States v.

Lewis, 921 F.2d 563, 564 (5th Cir. 1991). 

Although Aclese’s timely filed motion for reconsideration

extended the period for filing a notice of appeal, orders issued

by the magistrate judge are not appealable directly to this

court. See Mendes Junior Int'l Co. v. M/V SOKAI MARU, 978 F.2d

920, 924 (5th Cir. 1992)(entry of judgment by magistrate judge

without the appropriate consent and reference or special order of

designation results in a lack of jurisdiction); see also Trufant

v. Autocon, Inc., 729 F.2d 308, 309 (5th Cir. 1984)(orders issued

by magistrate judge are not appealable to this court).

Accordingly, Aclese’s appeal is DISMISSED for lack of

jurisdiction.

APPEAL DISMISSED.
CERTIFICATION OFCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Kenneth Edmunson, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Claridge Ventures, Inc.. (the “Company”), hereby 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: (i)the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company, for the period  ended July 31, 2012, and to which this certification is attached as Exhibit 32 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and(ii)the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  By:/s/Kenneth EdmundsonName:Kenneth EdmundsonTitle:Chief Executive Officer and ChiefFinancial OfficerDate:November 15, 2012 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. This certification accompanies the Form 10-K to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-K), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
IIA

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 28

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States granting

the President the authority to exercise an item veto of individual appropriations in an appropriations bill.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

APRIL 24, 1997

Mr. ALLARD introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice

and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United

States granting the President the authority to exercise

an item veto of individual appropriations in an appropriations bill.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two3 thirds of each House concurring therein), That the follow4 ing article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitu5 tion of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents

6 and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by

7 the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States with8 in 7 years after the date of its submission by the Congress:
2

•SJ 28 IS

1 ‘‘ARTICLE—

2 ‘‘SECTION 1. The President shall have the power to

3 disapprove any appropriation of an appropriations bill at

4 the time the President approves the bill. The appropria5 tions in the bill not disapproved shall become law upon

6 approval by the President.

7 ‘‘SECTION 2. If the President disapproves an appro8 priation pursuant to this article, in signing the bill con9 taining the appropriation, the President shall return a

10 copy of the disapproved appropriation, with a statement

11 of the reasons for the disapproval, to the House in which

12 the appropriations bill originated. The House in which the

13 appropriations bill originated may then reconsider the dis14 approved appropriation in a bill as provided for a bill re15 turned by the President under section 7 of article I. If

16 the bill is approved as provided under section 7 of article

17 I it shall become law.’’.

Æ