alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### H. J. KRONER, Olga A. de Kroner, his wife and Olga Kroner De La Campa, Appellants, v. Lawrence ESTEVES and Frances G. Esteves, his wife, Appellees.

No. 70-870.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 23, 1971.

Rehearing Denied March 26, 1971.

Robert J. Lewison, for appellants.

Walter E. Mackoul, Miami, for appellees.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and BARKDULL, JJ.

PEARSON, Chief Judge.

The plaintiffs appeal a final judgment dismissing their complaint for damages. The trial judge has carefully set forth the grounds for the judgment as follows:

> “1. That the suit filed by the Plaintiffs was for a breach of- contract for the sale of real property located within the State of Florida.

> “2. That the contract sued upon has been attached to the complaint and that the contract affirmatively shows on its face the signature of only one witness for the alleged purchaser and alleged seller.

> “3. That Florida Statute 689.01 requires that the contract for the sale of real property must be ‘signed in the presence of two subscribing witnesses. * * * *> »*

Although this may conflict with Radabaugh v. Ware, Fla.App.1970, 241 So. 2d 738, we believe that the trial judge has incorrectly stated that a contract for the sale of real property to be enforceable must be executed with the formality required by F.S. § 689.01, F.S.A. for a conveyance of real property. In Zimmerman v. Diedrich, Fla.1957, 97 So.2d 120, the Supreme Court of Florida said, “We think that Sec. 689.01, supra, applies to conveyances as distinguished from contracts to convey * * And in that opinion the court held:

>|< >[i >j< >|<

> “We conclude after an earnest effort to reconcile decisions with statutes and with each other that a contract for sale of realty must, to be enforceable, bear two witnesses if the property to be con*142veyed is homestead, or the separate property of a married woman, or if the relinquishment of dower is to be effected; that the two statutes first cited do not implement each other in all instances.”

The appellees have stated in their brief that the property described in the contract for sale is a homestead. The complaint does not show this to be true. If this fact appeared without issue upon a motion for summary judgment, then the law cited would be applicable to support a judgment for the defendants.

In addition appellees have in their brief relied upon many cases holding that a judgment dismissing a complaint for specific performance is proper where the contract is for the sale of real property and the contract is not executed in conformity with F.S. § 689.01, F.S.A. See Wexler v. Griffith, Fla.App.1958, 107 So.2d 147; Petersen v. Brotman, Fla.App. 1958, 100 So. 2d 821. These cases do not support a judgment dismissing an action for damages upon a breach of contract for the sale of real property where the contract is otherwise complete and lawful but does not have the requisite number of witnesses to conform to F.S. § 689.01, F.S.A.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
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 Quarterly Report of Audible Inc (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the “Report”), I, Andrew P. Kaplan, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and
belief:
 
 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.
  /s/
    Andrew
      P. KaplanName:
    Andrew
      P. KaplanDate:
    May
      9, 2005
 A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to Audible Inc and will be retained by Audible
Inc and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
#### In re BROOKLYN MACARONI COMPANY, Debtor. Appeal of GREGORY, STEWART & MONTGOMERY.

No. 215.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Feb. 2, 1937.

Gregory, Stewart & Montgomery and Charles Stevenson, all of New York City (W. Randolph Montgomery, of New York City, of counsel), for appellants.

Duberstein & Schwartz, of Brooklyn, N. Y. (S. C. Duberstein and Max Schwartz, both of Brooklyn, N. Y., on the brief), for appellee.

Before MANTON, AUGUSTUS N. HAND, and CHASE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Order affirmed in open court.
#### William SINGLETON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-203.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

April 10, 1970.

Appeal from Criminal Court of Record, Palm Beach County; Vaughn J. Rudnick, Judge.

Appeal quashed.
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 
 

Exhibit 10.14    
  


Commitment Letter From Bank One  


February 5,
2003 


Mr. George B.
Toma

Wells-Gardner Electronics Corporation

9500 West 55th Street

Suite A

McCook, Illinois 60525 


Dear
George: 


        The
purpose of this letter is to memorialize our telephone conversation of yesterday afternoon with respect to the maturity date on the obligations of Wells-Gardner Electronics
Corporation (the "Company") to Bank One, N.A., successor in interest to American National Bank & Trust Company of Chicago (the "Bank"). 


        The
current maturity of the obligations of the Company to the Bank is August 31, 2003. Please be advised that the Bank is hereby formally committing to extend said maturity date
on the Company's revolver and term obligations to March 31, 2004. All other existing terms, conditions and covenants of the existing loan and security agreement shall remain in effect. 



        Should
you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me directly. 


Sincerely,




	

/s/  GERARD P. BROSNAN      
 Gerard P. Brosnan

First Vice President	
 	

 	
 	

 











QuickLinks



Exhibit 10.14
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 Annual Report of MTM Technologies, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Steven Stringer,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my 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: July
 14, 2009 |  | /s/ Steven Stringer            
|                     |  |                                
|                     |  | Steven Stringer                
|                     |  | Principal Executive Officer    
|                     |  | and Principal Financial Officer

---
SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY CONVERSION

INJURY CODE CONVERSION DEFINITIONS / INSTRUCTIONS / NOTES SOURCE LOCATION

Suspected Serious Injury 2005 - Present Investigator's Guide for Completing the VT 

Uniform Crash Report 2014

2. Injury – incapacitating A

Injury – Incapacitating: any injury, other than fatal, which prevents the injured person from 

walking, driving or normally continuing the activities which he was capable of performing 

prior to the motor vehicle traffic crash. Includes: Severe lacerations, broken or distorted 

limbs, skull fracture, crushed chest, internal injuries, unconscious when taken from the crash 

scene, unable to leave the scene without assistance. 

Excludes: Momentary unconsciousness. 

General: Determinations are made on the basis of the best information available. It is not 

necessary to consult with doctors or hospitals unless information is not otherwise available, 

apparent condition immediately after the crash does not govern classification because the 

person may recover from hysteria quickly or may begin to feel the effects of internal or other 

injuries between the time of the crash and the time of leaving the scene.

104. Injury codes & definitions found on 

Manual pg43-44 (PDF pg49-50).

PEDESTRIAN AND PEDALCYCLIST (NON-MOTORIZED) CONVERSION

PERSON TYPE CODE STATE DEFINITIONS / INSTRUCTIONS / NOTES SOURCE LOCATION

Pedestrian 2010 - Present

The Investigator's Guide for Completing the 

VT Uniform Crash Report 2010/2014,

VT Uniform Crash Report 2013

Pedestrian 3 No definition found. 100. Type code found on Manual pg42 (PDF 

pg48).

Pedalcyclist 2010 - Present

Bicyclist 4 No definition found. 100. Type code found on Manual pg42 (PDF 

pg48).

Vermont
<PAGE>   1

                                                                     Exhibit 4.6


                           [FLEET CAPITAL LETTERHEAD]



VIA FACSIMILE (412) 276-6201


June 25, 1997


Theresa Carlise
Chief Financial Officer
National Record Mart, Inc.
507 Forest Ave.
Carnegie, PA  15106-2873


RE: Amendment No. 6

Dear Theresa:

This letter will confirm our conversation of this morning. Effective as of the
date of this letter Fleet Capital Corporation (Lender) agrees to amend the Loan
and Security Agreement (Agreement) between Lender and National Record Mart
dated June 11, 1993 as amended from time to time as follows:

         Section 9.3(A) is deleted in its entirety.

         Section 9.3(C) is deleted in its entirety.

Except as specifically amended herein, the Agreement and all other documents,
instruments and agreements executed and/or delivered in connection herewith,
shall remain in full force and effect. The execution, delivery and
effectiveness of this Amendment No. 6 shall not operate as a waiver of any
other right, power or remedy of Lender, nor constitute a waiver of any other
provision of the Agreement, or any other documents, instruments or agreements
executed and/or delivered under or in connection therewith.


Very truly yours,

/s/ Walter P. Schuppe

Walter P. Schuppe
Vice President
June 12, 2015 

Mr. Brian Rippel 

George J Shaw Construction Co 

1601 Bellefontaine 

Kansas City, MO 64127 

Dear Mr. Shaw: 

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It 

explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days. 

Why We Can Not Process Your Request 

We entered your June 1, 2015, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-

2029), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does 

not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request 

any further, you must send us all of the following: 

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief. 

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole. 

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request. 

What You Should Do 

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. 
2 

If We Do Not Hear From You 

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Brenda Robeson 

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 201 (Friday, October 17, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 54103]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27560]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. TM98-1-52-000]


Western Gas Interstate Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

October 10, 1997.
    Take notice that on September 26, 1997, Western Gas Interstate 
Company (WGI) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, 
Fourth Revised Volume No. 1, Third Revised Sheet no. 10, to be 
effective October 1, 1997.
    WGI states that the purpose of this filing is to increase its 
Annual Charge Adjustment (ACA) unit rate from $0.0020 to $0.0022. The 
ACA rate is designed to recover the annual charge assessed by the 
Commission pursuant to Part 382 of the Regulations.
    WGI states that copies of the filing were served upon its customers 
and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C., in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed in 
accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make the 
protestants parties to the proceeding. Copies of this filing are on 
file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the 
Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-27560 Filed 10-16-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit 32.2

                           CERTIFICATE OF ANTHONY LEE
                           AS 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 Quarterly Report of Pacific Magtron International Corp.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Anthony Lee, 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; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.



/s/ Anthony Lee
-----------------------
Anthony Lee
Chief Financial Officer
May 15, 2006
SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY CONVERSION

INJURY CODE CONVERSION DEFINITIONS / INSTRUCTIONS / NOTES SOURCE LOCATION

Suspected Serious Injury 2012 - Present While definition is insufficient, the Note beneath the definitions in manual complies with ANSI 

definitions.

VA Police Crash Report 2012, 

VA Crash Report Manual 2016

2. Serious Injury A

Suspected Serious Injury which is any injury other than fatal, resulting in one or more of the 

following: a. Severe laceration resulting in exposure of underlying tissues, muscle, organs, or 

resulting in significant loss of blood; b. Broken or distorted extremity (arm or leg); c. Crush 

injuries; d. Suspected skull, chest, or abdominal injury other than bruises or minor 

lacerations; e. Significant burns (second and third degree burns over 10 percent or more of 

the body); f. Unconsciousness when taken from the crash scene; g. Paralysis

8 Injury Type codes & definitions found on 

Manual pg76

PEDESTRIAN AND PEDALCYCLIST (NON-MOTORIZED) CONVERSION

PERSON TYPE CODE STATE DEFINITIONS / INSTRUCTIONS / NOTES SOURCE LOCATION

Pedestrian 2007 - Present

VA Crash Report Training Manual FR300 M 

Crash Report Manual 2016

VA Police Crash Report 2012

Pedestrian PAR has pedestrian 

data section

A pedestrian is a person who is not an occupant of a motor vehicle in transport.

A pedestrian includes: a person who is adjacent to the motor vehicle regardless of their 

actions a person riding a segway or a low speed vehicle that serves as a personal motorized 

conveyance

a person walking, running, jogging, hiking, sitting or lying within the trafficway, persons in 

buildings

18 Type of Collision (C18) code found on Manual pg58,

definition found on Manual pg75.

Pedalcyclist 2007 - Present Information for bicycle riders is collected in 

Driver information.

Bicycle 9 A bicycle, mini-bike, trail bike, or animal-drawn vehicle when involved with a motor vehicle 

should be recorded as a vehicle in the crash report. 11 Vehicle Body Type (V3)

code found on Manual pg33,Note 

found on Manual pg13 (Other 

Vehicles).

Virginia
Exhibit No. 11 


                Statement re:  Computation of Per Share Earnings


                                                           Fiscal Year Ended
                                                             March 31, 1997  

   1.     Net Income                                           $2,440,000

   2.     Weighted average common shares outstanding            2,357,465

   3.     Common stock equivalents due to dilutive      
          effect of stock options                                  51,991

   4.     Total weighted average common shares and
          equivalents outstanding                               2,409,456

   5.     Primary earnings per share                                $1.01

   6.     Total weighted average common shares and
          equivalents outstanding                               2,409,456

   7.     Additional dilutive shares using end of 
          period market value versus average market    
          value for the period when utilizing the 
          treasury stock method regarding stock options             9,016

   8.     Total outstanding shares for fully diluted
          earnings per share computation                        2,418,472

   9.     Fully diluted earnings per share                          $1.01
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 10.6


                           Wire One Technologies, Inc.
                                 225 Long Avenue
                           Hillside, New Jersey 07205

                                                          As of January 1, 2003
Mr. Michael Brandofino
c/o Wire One Technologies, Inc.
225 Long Avenue
Hillside, NJ 07205

Dear Mike:

         This letter, when accepted by you, shall constitute an amendment to the
employment agreement (the "Agreement"), dated January 2, 2001, as amended to
date, between Wire One Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") and you. The Company
and you hereby agree as follows:

         1. The Company has requested that, to contribute to an improvement in
the Company's financial condition and for no other reason, you agree, as an
amendment to paragraph 2(a) of the Agreement, to reduce your base salary
compensation thereunder so as to be payable at the rate of $185,250 per annum
during the period commencing as of the date hereof through December 31, 2003. In
consideration of the agreement by several other of the Company's executives to
salary reductions similar in nature, you hereby agree to the salary reduction
set forth in the preceding sentence.

         2. Except as modified hereby, the Agreement remains in full force and
effect.


                                             Yours very truly,

                                             WIRE ONE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

                                             By: /s/
                                                 ------------------------------

ACCEPTED:

/s/
----------------------------------
Michael Brandofino
STEAM ELECTRIC

C B I R E P L AC E M E NT P A G E

EPA

- HQ

- OW

- 20 09

- 0819

DCN:

________________________________________

T H E FO LL OW ING H AS BEE N R E M O V E D BE CAUSE IT

C O N T AINS C O N F ID E N T IAL B USIN E SS IN FO RMA T I O N

(C B I) P E R 4 0 C F R P ART 2

, SU B P ART B

. SE 04 331A020
Exhibit 4.2


              Notice appearing on the acknowledgement of ownership
         of shares of the preferred stock of Wellstone Communities Inc.




         A statement of the rights,  preferences,  privileges  and  restrictions
granted to or imposed upon the  respective  classes or series of shares of stock
of the Corporation,  and upon the holders thereof as established by the Articles
of Incorporation or by any certificate of determination of preferences,  and the
number of shares constituting each series or class and the designations thereof,
may be obtained by any shareholder of the  Corporation  upon request and without
charge from the  Secretary of the  Corporation  at the  principal  office of the
Corporation.
#### Billy FILES v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 50212.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Feb. 1, 1978.

Thomas A. Coleman, Ackerman, for appellant.

A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen. by Frankie Walton White, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Webster County; Clarence E. Morgan, Jr., Judge.

Before PATTERSON, C. J., and ROBERTSON and BROOM, JJ.

AFFIRMED.
No. 00-7283.

#### Childs *v.*Danzig, Secretary of the Navy.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.