alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### CITY OF ST. PETERSBURG, Florida, a Municipal Corporation, Appellant, v. VINOY PARK HOTEL COMPANY, a Florida Corporation, et al., Appellees.

No. 77-617.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Jan. 25, 1978.

*137Michael S. Davis, Chief Asst. City Atty., and Larry D. Brown, Asst. City Atty., St. Petersburg, for appellant.

Charles P. Schropp of Shackleford, Farri- or, Stallings & Evans, Tampa, for appellees.

HOBSON, Acting Chief Judge.

The City of St. Petersburg (City) filed an action in eminent domain to condemn land owned by the Vinoy Park Hotel Company (Vinoy Park) for waterfront park purposes. Vinoy Park answered, contending that there was a lack of necessity to condemn the land for park purposes. After trial on this issue the circuit court held in favor of Vinoy Park and entered final judgment.

The City filed a notice of appeal of the final judgment. While that appeal was pending in this court the circuit court entered an order assessing costs and attorney fees in the case.

The City appeals the order awarding costs and attorney fees and contends that the circuit court lost jurisdiction of the cause when the notice of appeal was filed to review the final judgment entered on the merits of the case.

This court in *City of St. Petersburg v. Vinoy Park Hotel Co.,*352 So.2d 149 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977) reversed the final judgment, holding that the City did show a public necessity and remanded the cause for further proceedings.

In the instant appeal the award of attorney fees was substantially based on the fact that Vinoy Park was successful in defeating the condemnation by showing that there was no public necessity. In view of the fact that the City prevailed on the appeal and the cause was remanded for further proceedings, we do not have to reach the question of whether or not the trial court lost jurisdiction in this cause to enter the order appealed.

The order assessing costs and attorney fees is reversed and the cause remanded for an appropriate order taxing costs and attorney fees after the entry of final judgment of condemnation.

GRIMES and OTT, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 4 (Tuesday, January 7, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 986]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-216]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP97-202-000]


Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC 
Gas Tariff

December 31, 1996.
    Take notice that on December 23, 1996, Northern Natural Gas Company 
(Northern), tendered for filing to become part of Northern's FERC Gas 
Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, 
proposed to be effective January 23, 1997:

First Revised Sheet No. 135D
Fourth Revised Sheet No. 144

Reason for Filing

    Northern states that the purpose of this filing is to modify 
Northern's FDD and IDD Rate Schedules applicable to firm and 
interruptible storage services by providing increased service 
flexibility through the addition of eight (8) points available for 
receipt and delivery of storage services.
    Northern states that copies of the filing were served upon the 
company's customers and interested State Commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC, 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such petitions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. All 
protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken in this proceeding, but will not serve 
to make Protestant a party to the proceeding. Any person wishing to 
become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing 
are on file with the Commission and are available for inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-216 Filed 1-6-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
<PAGE>
 
                         RATIONAL SOFTWARE CORPORATION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                EXHIBIT 11.01
                STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS


<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 
                                                  Years Ending March 31,
                                         1997            1996            1995
                                         ----            ----            ----
<S>                                     <C>             <C>            <C> 
Net income (loss)                       $(42,954)       $(3,590)       $ 2,346

Computation of weighted average 
 common and common equivalent shares 
 outstanding (primary):

  Weighted average common shares
   outstanding                            43,702         35,938         29,047

  Common equivalent shares from stock
   options                                    --             --            696
                                        --------        -------         ------
Shares used in per share computation      43,702         35,938         29,745
                                        --------        -------         ------
Net income (loss) per share             $  (0.98)       $ (0.10)        $ 0.08
                                
Computation of weighted average
 common common equivalent shares
 outstanding (fully diluted):

  Weighted average common shares 
   outstanding                            43,702         35,938         29,049

  Common equivalent shares from
   stock options                              --             --             --
                                        --------        -------         ------
Shares used in per share computation      43,702         35,938         30,625
                                        --------        -------         ------
Net income (loss) per shares            $  (0.98)       $ (0.10)        $ 0.08
                                        --------        -------         ------
</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000723888
<NAME> JUNO LIGHTING, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1997
<CASH>                                            6806
<SECURITIES>                                     77139
<RECEIVABLES>                                    23440
<ALLOWANCES>                                       907
<INVENTORY>                                      22707
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                122508
<PP&E>                                           56336
<DEPRECIATION>                                   11887
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  187389
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            11632
<BONDS>                                           3385
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           186
<OTHER-SE>                                      170444
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    187389
<SALES>                                         139855
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                139855
<CGS>                                            71881
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    71881
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   929
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 244
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  31393
<INCOME-TAX>                                     11090
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              20303
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     20303
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.10
        

</TABLE>
### NUMBER 13 - 1 5 - 00238 - C V COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

IN RE GEORGE SIMO

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Longoria

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam 1
Relator , George Simo, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in t he above cause on May 22, 2015

. Through this original proceeding, relator seeks to compel the trial court
to: (1) vacate a September 11 , 2014 order excluding evidence; (2) vacate an April 22, 2015 order granting partial summary judgment ; and (3) grant relator’s plea to the jurisdiction.

1 See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 52.8(d) ( “ When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required to do so. ” ); T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions).2

To be entitled to the extraordinary relief of a writ of mandamus, the relator m ust show that the trial court committed a clear abuse of discretion for which the relator has no adequate remedy at law. In re Frank Motor Co ., 361 S.W.3d 628, 630 (Tex. 2012) (orig. proceeding); In re Olshan Found. Repair Co., LLC , 328 S.W.3d 883, 887 (T ex. 2010) (orig. proceeding); In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am ., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135

– 36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding) ; Walker v. Packer , 827 S.W.2d 833, 839 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). The relator has the burden of establishing both prerequisites to m andamus relief. In re CSX Corp ., 124 S.W.3d 149, 151 (Tex. 2003) (orig. proceeding). This burden is a heavy one. Id. ; Canadian Helicopters Ltd. v. Wittig , 876 S.W.2d 304, 305 (Tex. 1994) (orig. proceeding). A trial court abuses its discretion if it reaches a decision so arbitrary and unreasonable that it amounts to a clear and prejudicial error of law or if it clearly fails to correctly analyze or apply the law. In re Olshan Found. Repair Co., LLC , 328 S.W.3 d at 888; Walker

, 827 S.W.2d at 840. The second requirement for mandamus relief, that the relator has no adequate remedy by appeal, “has no comprehensive definition” and is decided on a case

- by

- case basis. See In re Ford Motor Co. , 165 S.W.3d 315, 317 (T ex. 2005) (orig. proceeding) (citing In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. , 148 S.W.3d at 136). The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus and the applicable law, is of the opinion that relator has not met his burden to obtain mandamus relief. See In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am ., 148 S.W.3d at 135

– 36

. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.8(a). PER CURIAM
D elivered and filed th e 26th day of Ma y , 201 5

.
Exhibit 99.1

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
---------------------

Espey Increases 3rd Quarter Dividend ...

Saratoga Springs, NY; February 19, 2007- The Board of Directors of Espey Mfg. &
Electronics Corp., (AMEX:ESP) has raised the Company's quarterly cash dividend
by 15 percent to $.15 from $.13 per share for the third quarter of the fiscal
year ending June 30, 2007. The dividend will be payable on March 23, 2007, to
all shareholders of record as of March 2, 2007.

Espey's primary business is the development, design, and production of
specialized military and industrial power supplies/electronic equipment. The
Company's web site can be found on the Internet at www.espey.com.
                                                   --------------

For further information, contact Mr. Howard Pinsley or Mr. David O'Neil at (518)
245-4400.

Certain  statements in this press release are  "forward-looking  statements" and
are made  pursuant  to the safe  harbor  provisions  of the  Private  Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These  forward-looking  statements  represent the
Company's current  expectations or beliefs concerning future events. The matters
covered by these statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties  that
could  cause  actual  results to differ  materially  from those set forth in the
forward-looking  statements.  The Company wishes to caution readers not to place
undue reliance on any such  forward-looking  statements,  which speak only as of
the date made.

                        #################################









                                       3
Opinion issued April 30 , 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals

For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01

- 19

- 00192

- CV

——————————— IN RE MAX F. STOVALL AND MAX F. STOVALL, P.C. , Relator s

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator s , Max F. Stovall and M ax F. Stovall, P.C., ha ve filed a petition for
writ of mandamus challenging the trial court’s March 5, 2019 order denying their

motion for protective order and to quash discovery subpoena

. 1 We deny the petition

and lift the stay imposed by our March 20 , 201 9 order.

1 The und erlying case is Jerome O. Fjeld PLLC v. Max F. Stovall and Max F. Stovall, P.C. , cause number 2017

- 34723 , pending in the 1 33rd District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Jaclanel McFarland presiding.2 PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Higley, and Landau.
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 S&K Famous Brands, Inc. (the
Company) Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ending January 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert E. Knowles, 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |     |  |                             
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | ----------------------------
|Date: April 12, 2004 |  | By: |  | /s/ Robert E. Knowles       
|                     |  |     |  | Robert E. Knowles           
|                     |  |     |  | Executive Vice President and
|                     |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer     



A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to S&K Famous Brands, Inc. and will be retained by S&K Famous Brands, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<PAGE>
   
                                                                      Exhibit 23

                         INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the below scheduled Form S-8
registration statements of our report dated January 26, 1996, and appearing on 
page 62 of the Annual Report to Shareholders, on the consolidated financial 
statements of CNB Bancshares, Inc. incorporated by reference in the Annual 
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1995.

                                                               Commission 
                                                                  File
                                                                 Number
                                                              -------------

Indiana Bancshares, Inc. 1985 Non-Qualified 
  Stock Option Plan and Indiana Bancshares, Inc.
  1990 Stock Option Plan                                         33-47898 


CNB Bancshares, Inc. 1992 Incentive Stock
  Option Plan                                                    33-45929

Citizens Incentive Savings Plan                                  33-41514

Valley Bank Stock Option Plan                                    33-38651

King City Federal Savings Bank 1986 Stock Option and
  Incentive Plan                                                 33-89658

King City Federal Savings Bank 1993 Stock Option and
  Incentive Plan                                                 33-89722

UF Bancorp, Inc. 1991 Stock Option and Incentive Plan            33-61685

CNB Bancshares, Inc. 1995 Stock Incentive Plan                   33-60431


/s/ Geo. S. Olive & Co. LLC
---------------------------

Evansville, Indiana
March 26, 1996
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

      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of Ronson
Corporation (the "Company"), certifies that:

      (1)   the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly
            period ended June 30, 2006 (the "Report") fully complies with the
            requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
            Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78 m or 78 o(d)); 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:  August 11, 2006         /s/ Louis V. Aronson II
                                ------------------------------------------------
                                Louis V. Aronson II
                                President and Chief Executive Officer


Dated:  August 11, 2006         /s/ Daryl K. Holcomb
                                ------------------------------------------------
                                Daryl K. Holcomb
                                Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

      This certification is made solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, subject to the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other
purpose.


                                       25
**EXHIBIT
      99.1**











**55
      Union Boulevard, P.O. Box 269, Totowa, NJ 07511-0269**


**(973)
      942-1111 Fax (973) 942-9816**


**www.greatercommunity.com**





**FOR
      IMMEDIATE RELEASE**







**Greater
      Community Bancorp Announces Resignation of President and Chief Operating
      Officer**




TOTOWA,
      NJ—July 10, 2006—Greater Community Bancorp (Nasdaq: GFLS) (the “Company”) today
      announced that C. Mark Campbell, Director, President and Chief Operating Officer
      of the Company and its subsidiary bank, Greater Community Bank, will resign
      effective July 31, 2006 to pursue other interests. In order to help with any
      transition issues, Mr. Campbell will remain available to provide services to
      the
      Company on an as-needed basis through July 31, 2007.








About
      the
      Company




Greater
      Community Bancorp is a financial holding company headquartered in Totowa, New
      Jersey. The Company operates fifteen full-service branches in the northern
      New
      Jersey counties of Bergen, Passaic and Morris through its state-chartered
      commercial bank subsidiary, Greater Community Bank. Greater Community Bank
      provides traditional commercial and retail banking services to small businesses
      and consumers, and operates an equipment leasing and financing subsidiary,
      Highland Capital Corp. Greater Community Financial, a division of Greater
      Community Bank, provides a wide range of investment products and services
      exclusively through Raymond James Financial Services, Inc., member NASD/SIPC.
      (Securities are not FDIC insured or bank- guaranteed, and are subject to risk
      and may lose value). The Company also offers traditional insurance products,
      title insurance and settlement services and personal income tax return
      preparation services through its various operating subsidiaries.







CONTACT
      at Greater Community Bancorp:


Anthony
      M. Bruno, Jr.


973-942-1111
      x 1001


anthony.bruno@greatercommunity.com





SOURCE:
      Greater Community Bancorp
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman

, Chief Justice

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

March 7, 2017

t0227 

# Order

Clerk March 7, 2017

153609 (16)

JOSEPH CONSTANT,

Plaintiff,

v SC: 153609

AGC: 1770

- 15

ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION,

Defendant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s November

18, 2016 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order

was entered errone ously.
**EXHIBIT
      23.01**

















**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**





We
      hereby
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
      Form
      S-8 (No. 333-122183 and No. 333-27271) of Nestor, Inc. of our report dated
      March
      30, 2007 relating to the 2006 consolidated financial statements and financial
      statement schedule, which appears in this Form 10-K.











/s/Carlin
                  Charron & Rosen LLPCarlin
                  Charron & Rosen LLPWestborough,
                  MassachusettsMarch
                  30, 2007
No. 99-7798.

#### Bradley *v.*United States.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.