alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Carol ROTHMAN, Appellant, v. Philip ROTHMAN, Appellee.

No. 77-2267.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 18, 1978.

Goodhart & Rosner and James F. Dough-erty, II, Miami, for appellant.

Richard B. Marx and Steven G. Glucks-man, Miami, for appellee.

Before HENDRY and HUBBART, JJ., and CHARLES CARROLL (Ret.), Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

In a judgment of dissolution of marriage entered January 14, 1977 from which no appeal was taken, incident to a provision for sale of the marital home of the parties it was provided that mortgage payments made by the respondent-husband from September 10, 1976 to the time of the sale should be credited to him and “shall be returned to the respondent in full prior to any division of the net proceeds from the sale or partition”.

The property was sold for a net of $36,-725.03. The credit the husband was to receive for the above-mentioned payments was $3,644.41. The court made a distribution order on September 26, 1977 by which he divided the net proceeds and then deducted from the share of the petitioner-wife, in favor of the respondent, the said amount due him of $3,644.41, with the result that the court fixed the petitioner’s share at $14,718.11. This appeal is by the wife from that order.

Appellant argues and we agree that the distribution as made by the trial court was not in accordance with the express direction in the judgment, under which the husband was entitled to receive the said amount of $3,644.41 from the net proceeds of the sale prior to equal distribution of the balance between the parties. On that basis the amount received by each party, following such credit to the respondent, was $16,-540.31. The order of distribution which is appealed from is hereby amended to so provide.

It is so ordered.
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and

Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors

so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS

No. 1 6

- BG

- 5 13

IN RE : ROBERT E. COUGHLIN, II,

Petitioner.

B ar Reg istration No. 480261 BDN: 61

- 16

BEFORE: Fisher and Thompson , Associate Judge s

, and Farrell , Senior Judge.

ORDER

(FILED

– July 7, 2016)

On consideration of Disciplinary Counsel’s report regarding petitioner’s

petition for reinstatement wherein Disciplinary Counsel informs the court that M r

. Coughlin has demonstrated that he is fit to resume the practice of law

, and it

appearing that petitioner is eligible to file the petition for reinstatement, see In re

Coughlin

, 23 A. 3 d 1 84 (D.C. 20 1 1 ), it is

ORDERED that petitioner ’s petition for reinstatement is granted

. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that Robert E. Coughlin, II, is hereby reinstated to

the Bar of the District of Columbia

.

PER CURIAM
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

January 8, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

135046 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 135046 

 COA: 263278 

St. Clair CC: 04-002502-FH 

COLEMAN WENDELL WALKER, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 21, 2007 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

KELLY, J., would grant leave to appeal for the reasons set forth in her dissenting 

statement in People v Conway, 474 Mich 1140 (2006). 

p1217 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

January 8, 2008 

 Clerk
EXHIBIT 32

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 of DOLPHIN PRODUCTIONS, INC., (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and 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 operation of the
Company.

           /s/ Richard H. Casper

           -----------------------------
           Richard H. Casper
           Chief Executive Officer



           /s/ Pamela Lindquist

           -----------------------------
           Pamela Lindquist
           Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 179 (Tuesday, September 16, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48662-48663]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24580]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the

[[Page 48663]]

standards in section 4 of the BHC Act. Unless otherwise noted, 
nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than October 10, 1997.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland (Jeffery Hirsch, Banking 
Supervisor) 1455 East Sixth Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44101-2566:
    1. F.N.B. Corporation, Hermitage, Pennsylvania, and Southwest 
Banks, Inc., Naples, Florida; to acquire 100 percent of the voting 
shares of Mercantile Bank of Southwest Florida, Naples, Florida.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 11, 
1997.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 97-24580 Filed 9-15-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEET AT JUNE 30, 2000 AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE
SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         165,244
<SECURITIES>                                    56,181
<RECEIVABLES>                                   13,904
<ALLOWANCES>                                        82
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               239,593
<PP&E>                                          11,399
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,973
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 609,586
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           28,581
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            47
<OTHER-SE>                                     580,737
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   609,586
<SALES>                                         11,760
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                16,694
<CGS>                                            2,041
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    7,707
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                82,621
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 300
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (68,124)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (68,124)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (68,124)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.58)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.58)


</TABLE>
#### CITY OF MIAMI, Appellant, v. Leonard L. GATES, Frank K. Palmer, James W. Rogers, and James C. Williams, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Appellees.

No. 77-1499.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Nov. 22, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 21, 1977.

George F. Knox, Jr., City Atty. and Sherman Bennett Mayor, Asst. City Atty., for appellant.

Paul & Thomas and Sanford L. Bohrer, Edmond J. Gong, Miami, for appellees.

Before PEARSON, HUBBART and KE-HOE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See *City of Miami*v. *Carter,*105 So.2d 5 (Fla.1958).
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsFlight Training Technology for Regional/Commuter Airline Operations:  Regional Airline Association/NASA Workshop ProceedingsPrograms which have been developed for training commercial airline pilots and flight crews are discussed. The concept of cockpit resource management and the concomitant issues of management techniques, interpersonal communication, psychological factors, and flight stress are addressed. Training devices and simulation techniques are reported.Document ID19850009700Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeConference ProceedingsAuthorsLee, A. T.*(NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA, United States)*Lauber, J. K.*(NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 5, 2013Publication DateDecember 1, 1984Subject CategoryAir Transportation And SafetyReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.55:2348NASA-CP-2348A-9863Accession Number85N18009Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 505-35-31Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19850009700.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsIDRelationTitle19850009707WorkUse of simplifier scenarios for CRM training19850009705WorkIntegrated Approach to Flight Crew Training19850009706WorkVideo concepts in CRM training19850009702WorkLow-cost training technology19850009709WorkDynamic training devices in CRM training19850009711WorkSafety awareness, pilot education, and incident reporting programs19850009719WorkInnovative approaches to recurrent training19850009715WorkSimulation19850009703WorkCaptain Development Training at US Air19850009712WorkThe aviation safety reporting system19850009713WorkCockpit resources management and the theory of the situation19850009714WorkCockpit resource management training19850009718WorkInitiative uses of aircraft for flight training19850009716WorkLow cost training aids and devices19850009708WorkCommunications skills for CRM training19850009704WorkManagement training for cockpit crews at Piedmont flight19850009717WorkPilot education and safety awareness programs19850009701WorkFlight crew training technology:  A review19850009710WorkUse of airplanes for loft trainingvisibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                            2204
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  2204
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   13209
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          1600
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     13209
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     8291
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   225
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (8291)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### Carolyn HAYES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. M-118.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.

Feb. 17, 1970.

Richard W. Ervin, III, Public Defender, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., Horace A. Knowlton, III, Asst. Atty. Gen., for ap-pellee.

PER CURIAM.

This cause having been considered by the court, and the briefs and record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and it appearing that no error was committed by the court below in the rendition of its judgment, the said judgment appealed from herein is affirmed.

CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and WIGGINTON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
Jack 

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

February 19, 2015

No. 04-13-00897-CV

Lynn Noble HAWTHORNE a/k/a Lynn Hawthorne,

Appellant

v.

Jack GUENTHER,

Appellee

From the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2011-CI-20197

Honorable Antonia Arteaga, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The Appellant’s Unopposed Motion to Extend Time to File Motion for Rehearing and 

Motion for En Banc Reconsideration is GRANTED. The deadline is extended to March 6, 2015.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 19th day of February, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
#### Sydney E. COON and Norma S. Coon, his wife, and Syd-Nor, Inc., Appellants, v. L. Pharr ABNER, Trustee, Appellee.

No. 70-1171.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 9, 1971.

Rehearing Denied April 21, 1971.

Ralph & Boyd, Miami, for appellants.

Russell Troutman, Winter Park, for ap-pellee.

Before CHARLES CARROLL, BARK-DULL and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs below have taken an interlocutory appeal from an order which dismissed their complaint because of improper venue.

Plaintiffs maintain their complaint sought a declaratory decree that a promissory note and mortgages given by them to the defendant were usurious and void and they prayed for cancellation of the note and mortgages and injunctive relief against a foreclosure. They contend that the property in litigation is located in Dade County, Florida, because one of the mortgages given as security for the note is on real property located in Dade County, *144Florida. See § 47.011, Fla.Stat., F.S.A. A deed of trust on real property in California was also allegedly given as security for the challenged note. The promissory note was attached as an exhibit to the complaint but the mortgages were not so attached and are not in the record on appeal. The record on appeal indicates that the note was executed and made payable in Winter Park, Florida and that all prior payments and performances have been in Winter Park, Orange County, Florida, where the defendant resides.

The defendant argues that the complaint sounded in equity as a suit to cancel a note and mortgages because they were alleged to be usurious. Defendant contends that this action did not involve title to, or the removal of a cloud or lien upon, real property in Dade County, Florida, but that it was simply an action in personam to cancel a promissory note alleged to be usurious, together with the mortgages which secured the note.

A careful examination of the complaint shows that it does not allege or seek removal of a cloud or a lien on real property located in Dade County, Florida and that it did not seek to determine title to such property.

This action sounds in equity as an action for the cancellation of an alleged usurious note. We affirm the ruling that venue in Dade County, Florida, was improper. See Baum v. Corn, Fla.App.1964, 167 So.2d 740; 56 Am.Jur. Venue § 21; and 13 Am.Jur.2d Cancellation of Instruments § 53.

The order dismissing the cause for improper venue is

Affirmed.

BARKDULL, Judge

(dissenting).

I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion in this cause and would reverse the order under review.

The plaintiffs alleged by verified complaint that they were the owners of the real property located in Dade County, Florida; that they executed a note payable to the defendant and, at the same time, did execute and deliver a second mortgage covering property in Dade County, Florida; and sought, among other things, that the mortgage be cancelled and discharged of record. I think this is sufficient proof that venue would lie in Dade County, Florida.
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 97-3458WA

_____________ Richard Stephenson Jarrett, * * Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Western * District of Arkansas. Charles Kelly; Stephen Cox; Brian * Fuller; Brandon McCaslin; Gary * [UNPUBLISHED] Grimes; Jim Rush, * * Appellees. *

_____________ Submitted: April 30, 1998

Filed: May 5, 1998

_____________ Before FAGG, BEAM, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM. Richard Stephenson

Jarrett appeals the district court's denial of Jarrett's motion for a new trial in his civil rights suit. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties' bri efs, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion. Se e McKnight ex rel. Ludwig v. Johnson Controls, Inc. , 36 F.3d 1396, 1400 (8th Cir. 1994) (standard of review). We affirm the district court. See8th Cir. R. 47B.-2-

A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Stanley JOHNSON.

Nos. 58708, 58709 and 58710.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

July 1, 1977.

Rehearings Denied Sept. 2, 1977.

William D. O’Regan, III, Laplace, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Melvin P. Barre, Dist. Atty., Roland J. St. Martin, Asst. Dist. Atty., Abbott J. Reeves, Director, Regina C. Cooper, Research Atty., Research and Appeals Division, Metairie, for plaintiff-appel-lee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from The
     Consolidated  Balance Sheets and Statements of Income filed as part of this
     Form 10-K and is qualified  in its entirety by reference to such  financial
     statements on this form 10-K
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 Jan-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   Dec-31-1996
<CASH>                                         33,067
<SECURITIES>                                   84,256
<RECEIVABLES>                                  14,220
<ALLOWANCES>                                      899
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              146,240
<PP&E>                                         16,713
<DEPRECIATION>                                  7,784
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                156,103
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          30,263
<BONDS>                                             0
<COMMON>                                            3
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<OTHER-SE>                                    124,820
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  156,103
<SALES>                                        82,134
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              106,087
<CGS>                                           2,512
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   9,781
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               50,624
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  454
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                23,436
<INCOME-TAX>                                   10,952
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            12,484
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                   12,484
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0.47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.47





</TABLE>
#### Ex parte Ray EARLEY.

77-455.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

May 19, 1978.

BLOODWORTH, Justice.

WRIT DENIED.

TORBERT, C. J., and FAULKNER, AL-MON and EMBRY, JJ., concur.