alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The Savannah, Dublin and Western Short Line Railway Company *vs.*Schieffelin & Company *et al.*

The evidence demanded the verdict.

April 9, 1888.

Evidence. Verdict. Before Judge Harden. City court of Savannah. May term, 1887.

*577Reported in the decision.

Denmark & Adams, for plaintiff in error.

R. R. Richards and Isaac Beckett, *contra.*

Blandford, Justice.

Schieffelin *&*Company brought their action against this company upon a draft accepted by it, which draft and acceptance were as follows:

> “ Savannah, Ga., Aug. Í, 1886.

> “ T. F. Johnson, Treasurer Savannah, Dublin & Western S. L. B. E.

> “ Please pay to Theo. Basch or order one thousand six hundred and ten -Afir dollars, and charge to the account of

> “ W. H. Ferguson & Co.

> By S. T. Ferguson.”

> “Accepted, payable when chief engineer estimates for grading done, if the amount found to he due Ferguson & Co. is not consumed by acceptances bearing prior date to this one.

> “T. F. Johnson, Treasurer.”

Tietjen brought his action upon a similar draft and acceptance, the amount of the draft being $930.45, and the date July 19th, 1886.

Both cases were submitted to the court below without the intervention of a jury, and the court found in favor of the plaintiffs. The defendant excepted in both cases, and they were submitted to us together. The only grounds of error assigned are that the finding of the court below was contrary to law and to the evidence. The testimony submitted to the court showed that, before the commencement of these actions, the engineer had made an estimate of the grading done by Ferguson & Co. (who were the contractors engaged in grading the road-bed of the Company), and according to his estimate, the company was indebted to them in some $16,000, while the prior drafts, amounted to some $10,000. The testimony clearly showed that the Company was indebted to Ferguson & Co. greatly more *578than the amount of these drafts. We think the evidence demanded the verdict; and the judgment of the court below is affirmed.-
# Official Journal C 309A/2011

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.CA2011.309.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 309A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5421 October 2011 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.CA2011.309.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 309A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5421 October 2011

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Parliament |
| 2011/C 309A/01 | Recruitment notice PE/141/S | 1 |
| 2011/C 309A/02 | Guide for candidates in selection procedures organised by the European Parliament | 6 |
| 2011/C 309A/03 | Recruitement notice PE/141/S | 17 |

Notice No

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Parliament

2011/C 309A/01

Recruitment notice PE/141/S

1

2011/C 309A/02

Guide for candidates in selection procedures organised by the European Parliament

6

2011/C 309A/03

Recruitement notice PE/141/S

17

---

REVIEW OF COMPETITION C A OJs

Please find below the list of C A published during the present year.

Unless otherwise indicated, OJs are published in all language versions.

| 19 | (PL) |
| --- | --- |
| 24 | |
| 35 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 37 | (PL/RO) |
| 60 | |
| 68 | |
| 76 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 82 | |
| 91 | |
| 98 | |
| 114 | (DA) |
| 121 | (DA) |
| 122 | |
| 135 | |
| 140 | (BG/ET/HU/MT/PL/SL/SV) |
| 142 | |
| 146 | |
| 147 | (EN/IT/MT/SV) |
| 155 | (EN/ES/ET/FR/NL/PL/PT/SK/SL/SV) |
| 156 | |
| 157 | |
| 162 | |
| 169 | (EN) |
| 177 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 180 | (BG/RO) |
| 181 | (DA) |
| 183 | (SL) |
| 185 | |
| 193 | (BG/RO) |
| 198 | (CS/HU/LT/MT/PL/SK) |
| 206 | (CS/ES/LV/MT/SV) |
| 208 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 221 | |
| 222 | (BG/RO) |
| 223 | |
| 229 | |
| 257 | |
| 258 | |
| 270 | |
| 271 | |
| 278 | (EN) |
| 279 | (FR) |
| 281 | (DA) |
| 284 | (DE) |
| 285 | (LT) |
| 286 | (NL) |
| 292 | (RO) |
| 294 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 303 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 304 | (DA/EN) |
| 307 | |
| 309 | (DE/EN/FR) |

19

(PL)

24

35

(DE/EN/FR)

37

(PL/RO)

60

68

76

(DE/EN/FR)

82

91

98

114

(DA)

121

(DA)

122

135

140

(BG/ET/HU/MT/PL/SL/SV)

142

146

147

(EN/IT/MT/SV)

155

(EN/ES/ET/FR/NL/PL/PT/SK/SL/SV)

156

157

162

169

(EN)

177

(DE/EN/FR)

180

(BG/RO)

181

(DA)

183

(SL)

185

193

(BG/RO)

198

(CS/HU/LT/MT/PL/SK)

206

(CS/ES/LV/MT/SV)

208

(DE/EN/FR)

221

222

(BG/RO)

223

229

257

258

270

271

278

(EN)

279

(FR)

281

(DA)

284

(DE)

285

(LT)

286

(NL)

292

(RO)

294

(DE/EN/FR)

303

(DE/EN/FR)

304

(DA/EN)

307

309

(DE/EN/FR)

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
SM&A CORPORATION UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 1999.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                             442
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   29,173
<ALLOWANCES>                                       755
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                36,645
<PP&E>                                           5,836
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,473
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  86,415
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,142
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           154
<OTHER-SE>                                      54,377
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    86,415
<SALES>                                         79,424
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                79,424
<CGS>                                           47,429
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   65,341
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (278)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    75
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 522
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 13,764
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,681
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,083
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,083
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .50
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .49


</TABLE>
Case No. 7,745.

#### KEUTGEN v. LAWRENCE.

[1 Blatchf. 615.] 1

Circuit Court, S. D. New York.

Oct. Term, 1850.

Customs Duties — Patent Leather — Glazed Calf- Skin — Manufacture of Leather.

Glazed calf-skin, known to the trade.as “patent-leather” and unper leather, generally used for the upper part of boots and shoes, and invoiced as patent-leather, is liable, under the tariff act of July 30, 1846 (9 Stat. 42). to a duty of 20 per cent, ad valorem, under Schedule E, under the head of “leather, upper of all kinds,” and is not a manufacture of leather under Schedule C.

The plaintiff in this case [Charles Keutgen] sued [Cornelius W. Lawrence], the collector of the port of New York, to recover back an excess of duties paid on an article invoiced as patent leather. It was charged with a duty of 30 per cent, ad valorem, under Schedule C of the act of July 30. 1840 (9 Stat. 45), as a manufacture of leather. The plaintiffs claimed that it was liable to a duty of only 20 per cent, ad valorem, under Schedule E, as “leather, upper of all kinds.” It appeared on the trial that the article was glazed calfskin, and was known to the trade as “patent-leather” -and “upper leather,” and was generally used for the upper part of boots and shoes.

Francis B. Cutting, for plaintiff.

J. Prescott Hall, Dist. Atty.. for defendant

1

 [Reported by Samuel Blatchford, Esq., and here reprinted by permission.]

THE COURT

held that the article fell within Schedule E.
EXHIBIT 32

      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       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 Placer del Mar, Ltd. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the year ending June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Humberto Bravo, Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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 result of operations of
          the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
2nd day of October, 2007.


/s/ Humberto Bravo
-------------------------------
Chief Executive Officer &
Chief Financial Officer
No. 61205.

protest 288838-K (New York).

#### D. C. Andrews & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the issues are similar to those involved in Abstract 57104, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

Exhibit 10.62    
    


[AspenTechnology Letterhead/Logo]  


August 18,
2003 


C.
Steven Pringle

Senior Vice President, M/SC Business Unit 


Dear
Steve: 


This
letter amendment references the letter agreement between you and AspenTech dated June 24, 2003 (the "Agreement") regarding your FY04 Executive Compensation Plan. Under the terms of the
Agreement, AspenTech agreed that it would grant you an option to purchase the number of shares of AspenTech common stock specified in the Agreement, contingent upon stockholder approval of the Advent
transaction (the "Option"). As you know, the Advent transaction was approved by AspenTech stockholders and closed on August 14, 2003. 


AspenTech
acknowledges that you have voluntarily agreed to reduce the number of shares subject to the Option to which you were entitled in order to make more options available for the general employee
option pool. You hereby confirm, by execution of this letter amendment, that the option granted to you on August 18, 2003 for 245,008 shares of AspenTech common stock constitutes full
satisfaction of AspenTech's obligations under the Agreement to grant the Option and that the terms of the Agreement do not entitle you to any additional stock option grants. All other terms of the
Agreement, including those contingent upon the closing of the Advent transaction, remain in full force and effect. 



	Best regards,	 	 	 	 
	

/s/  HELEN MOYE      	
 	

/s/  C. STEVEN PRINGLE      	
 	

Sept. 26, 2003
	
	 	
	 	

	Helen Moye	 	C. Steven Pringle	 	Date
	Sr. VP Human Resources

Aspen Technology, Inc.	 	Senior Vice President, M/SC Business Unit	 	 











QuickLinks



Exhibit 10.62
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 Convera Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended January 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Matthew G. Jones, 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:  (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.
   By:/s/ Matthew G. Jones Matthew G. Jones Chief Financial Officer April 30, 2007
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Theundersigned, Robert K. Weiler, Chief Executive Officer of Phase ForwardIncorporated (the “Company”), in connection with the Company’s Quarterly Reporton Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2005 (the “Report”),as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, herebycertifies pursuant to the requirements of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that

 

•        the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

 

•        the information in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 

Thiscertification is being provided pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 and is not to bedeemed a part of the Report, nor is it to be deemed to be “filed” for any purposewhatsoever.

 

 
| /s/ Robert K. Weiler       |   |
|----------------------------|--------|
| Robert K. Weiler           |
| *Chief Executive Officer*  |
| Phase Forward Incorporated |

 

 

November 14, 2005

 

1

----
Searched for **https://www2c.cdc.gov/podcasts/player.asp?f=10109**

 

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024

*Note:* This calendar view maps the number of captures of **https://www2c.cdc.gov/podcasts/player.asp?f=10109**, *not* how many times the site was actually updated.

Look Up URL in general Internet Archive web collection.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 55 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 55

To disapprove a rule relating to delivery of mail to a commercial mail 
     receiving agency, issued by the United States Postal Service.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 20, 1999

Mr. Paul introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred 
                 to the Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
To disapprove a rule relating to delivery of mail to a commercial mail 
     receiving agency, issued by the United States Postal Service.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the 
rule submitted by the United States Postal Service relating to delivery 
of mail to a commercial mail receiving agency (as published in the 
Federal Register on March 25, 1999), and such rule shall have no force 
or effect.
                                 <all>
```
IA

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 123

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2001, and for

other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 29, 2000

Mr. YOUNG of Florida introduced the following joint resolution; which was

referred to the Committee on Appropriations

JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year

2001, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That Public Law 106–275, is further amended by striking

4 the date specified in section 106(c) and inserting ‘‘Novem5 ber 3, 2000’’.

Æ
No. 68630.

protest 63/4466 (Seattle).

#### Close and Stewart *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with oral stipulation of counsel that the items, described on the invoice as one slice and four wafers of indium antimonide, are, in fact, metal articles suitable for producing, rectifying, modifying, controlling, or distributing electrical energy, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
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

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of PC Connection, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended June 30,
2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Patricia Gallup, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, 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.



|                     |  |  |  |                        
|-------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Date: August 6, 2010 |  |  |  | /s/    PATRICIA GALLUP 
|                     |  |  |  | Patricia Gallup        
|                     |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer
**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

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Mercer Insurance Group, Inc.  (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31,2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the datesindicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

 

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

 

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

 
|                 | /s/  Andrew R. Speaker            |   |
|----------------------|----------------------------------------|--------|
|                 | President  and Chief Executive Officer |
|                 |                                   |
|                 | /s/  David B. Merclean            |   |
|                 | Chief  Financial Officer               |
|                 |                                   |
| Dated: May  14, 2004 |                                   |

 

----
No. 66201.

#### Ace Import Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 61/12649 and 61/12651 (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of glass paperweights similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 64185, 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. 97-40773

Summary Calendar

 

ANTHONY WAYNE WHITE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

JON C. HOLSTON, Officer

Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 9:97-CV-149

- - - - - - - - - -

April 16, 1998

Before DUHE’, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Anthony Wayne White, Texas prisoner #541668, appeals the

dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint for failure to state

a claim upon which relief could be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). White argues that the presence of a female

guard during a body cavity search of his person violated his

Fourth Amendment right to privacy. We have reviewed the record

and White’s brief, and we conclude that White’s appeal is without

merit and therefore frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215,

219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). On three prior occasions White has 
No. 97-40773

-2-

brought actions or appeals that were dismissed as frivolous or

for failure to state a claim. In White v. Zeller, this court

dismissed as frivolous White’s appeal from the district court’s

dismissal of a § 1983 complaint as frvolous. No. 96-41215 (5th

Cir. Aug. 14, 1997) (two “strikes”); see Adepegba v. Hammons, 103

F.3d 383, 387 (5th Cir. 1996). In White v. Ferguson, this court

affirmed the district court’s dismissal of White’s § 1983

complaint for failure to state a claim. No. 97-40685 (5th Cir.

Dec. 15, 1997) (one “strike”). Accordingly, White is barred from

proceeding IFP in the district court or in this court on any

civil actions while he remains in prison, unless he is in iminent

danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

APPEAL DISMISSED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Balance
Sheet, Statement of Operations, Statements of Cash Flows and Notes thereto
incorporated in Part I, Item 1. of this Form 10-QSB and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,777
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        43,695
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,515
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,515)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,515)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
No. 64716.

#### Heeksuede, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 60/87, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of waterproof cotton cloth similar in all material respects to that the subject of *United States*v. *D. H. Grant & Co., Inc.*(47 C.P.A. 20, C.A.D. 723), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.