alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Dr. THOMAS ADAMS’ Adm’r. *vs.*LEVIN STEWART.

A physician cannot recover a medical bill without proving his license to practice.

Sussex,

April term, 1849.

Action for a physician’s bill. Trial and verdict for plaintiff $80 00, subject, &c.

*145The question was, whether plaintiff could recover on a medical bill, without proving his license.

*Saulsbury,*for plaintiff.

*Cullen,*for defendant.

*Mr.*Cullen.

The act of 1822, § 6, provides that “no person who is not at the time of passing this act a practitioner of medicine and surgery in this State, or who is not residing in and regularly admitted to practice medicine and surgery, in some other State, shall hereafter practice medicine or surgery and receive or demand any fee or reward therefor in this State, without having first obtained a license,” &c. The act of 1835, [8 *vol.*355,] exempts Thompsonian doctors from the penalties of this act, but does not enable them to sue for fees; and the act of 1843, [9 *vol.*549,] exempts Homcepathic physicians, and allows them to sue:

Doctor Adams, without showing himself within the exceptions of the act of 1822, has no right to maintain suit. The question is, whether plaintiff shall be required to show his right to sue, or whether defendant shall be obliged to negative the qualifications. lion assumpsit puts in issue the plaintiff’s right, on the whole case, to recover. [1 *Ch. Pl.*469; 2 *Hall’s Rep. (N.*Y.) 465; 41 *Com. L. R.*155; 3 *Mees & Welsby*521; 14 *Johns. Rep.*369; 21 *Com. L. R.*395; 19 *Ib.*300.]

*Mr.*Saulsbury.

The matter relied on as a defence should have been pleaded, or proved by the defendant. [2 *Camp. R.*144,441; 2 *Harrison’s Dig.*15, 91. The cases cited are under a statute of 55 *Ceo.*3, *chap.*194, which enacts that the plaintiff shall prove at the trial his qualifications, &c. The old statute of 8 *Hen.*8*chap.,*under which the case in 2 *Campbell’s Reports*arose, was like our statute, and the court held that the defendant must prove the disqualification, to defeat the action.

*The Court,*

after a curia advisare, on the 18th of June, 1849, set

aside the verdict and ordered a nonsuit, on the ground that the plaintiff had not proved his license.

Judgment of nonsuit.
[No. 591-2.

Division Two.

May 24, 1972.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Donald Isaac Umbarger, *Appellant.*
#### Jimmy Wayne BYCE v. STATE.

6 Div. 218.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

Dec. 6, 1977.

*1161James H. Hard, IV, Birmingham, for appellant.

William J. Baxley, Atty. Gen., and James L. O’Kelley, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

BOWEN W. SIMMONS, Retired Circuit Judge.

Appellant, an indigent below and on this appeal, was indicted for robbery, convicted by a jury and sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment.

Appellant asserts that he was the victim of prejudicial argument on the part of the Deputy District Attorney and that the trial court erred in overruling his objections thereto. We advert seriatim to the argument.

According to the record the District Attorney stated to the jury:

> “MR. BLOCKER: Ladies and gentlemen, the testimony of Mrs. Bice (sic), I submit to you, was put on in part to draw sympathy from this jury.”

I

It appears that Mrs. Byce, wife of defendant and his witness, testified without objection that she did not work for a living, and was the mother of two children.

We cannot say that she was put on the witness stand solely to gain sympathy of the jury with respect to her marital status and dependency, but her evidence was reasonably calculated to draw some sympathy. We cannot see that this evidence, adduced by defendant, shed any light on his guilt or innocence. The ruling of the court was not in error.

II

A second assertion of error refers to the State’s argument as follows:

> “MR. BLOCKER: Wesley Cherry is the victim in this case, the technical victim. And I submit to you that you are all victims in this case. You are all the victim of this crime.”

We think the above comment is nothing more than an appeal for law enforcement and an assertion of trespass on the rights of society which is the ultimate and general victim. *Elston v. State,*56 Ala.App. 299, 321 So.2d 264(5). The ruling of the court was free from error.

So far as we have been able to find, the rulings of the court were free from error.

The judgment is affirmed.

The foregoing opinion was prepared by the Honorable Bowen W. Simmons, a retired Circuit Judge, serving as a Judge of this Court, under the provisions of § 6.10, of the new Judicial Article (Constitutional Amendment No. 328); his opinion is hereby adopted as that of the Court.

AFFIRMED.

All the Judges concur.
#### Edward Lee GAY and Alonzo Harrell, Appellants, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 71-837.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Jan. 17, 1972.

Appeal dismissed.
UNITED STATES
                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

                                    Form 6-K

       REPORT OF FOREIGN PRIVATE ISSUER PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-16 OR 15D-16
                    UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934




For the month of           April             , 2000
                 ----------------------------

                               DESC, S.A. DE C.V.
                           --------------------------
                 (Translation of registrant's name into English)


 PASEO DE LOS TAMARINDOS 400-B, BOSQUES DE LAS LOMAS, 05120 MEXICO, D.F., MEXICO
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     (Address of principal executive office)


Indicate by check mark whether the registrant files or will file annual reports
under cover of Form 20-F or Form 40-F.
Form 20-F [X]    Form 40-F [ ]


Indicate by check mark whether the registrant by furnishing the information
contained in this Form is also thereby furnishing the information to the
Commission pursuant to Rule 12g3-2(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Yes [ ]        No [X]


If "Yes" is marked, indicate below the file number assigned to the registrant in
connection with Rule 12g3-2(b): 82-___________.




NY2:\909256\03\JHL403!.DOC\41150.0012
<PAGE>
                                   SIGNATURES


           Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.



                                                     Desc, S.A. de C.V.
                                             ----------------------------------
                                                        (Registrant)



Date: May 5, 2000                         By /s/ Ernesto Vega Velasco
--------------------                         ----------------------------------
                                                    (Signature)*
                                             Name: Ernesto Vega Velasco
                                             Title: Chief Financial Officer





* Print the name and title under the signature of the signing officer.















                                                                            2
<PAGE>
                                  EXHIBIT INDEX


                                                                     Sequential
                              Item                                   Page Number
                              ----                                   -----------

1.     Press Release announcing first quarter results for the
       period ended March 31, 2000, together with comparative
       figures for the prior year period .............................    4

2.     Press Release announcing resolutions of registrant's
       general ordinary and extraordinary shareholders meeting
       held April 27, 2000 ...........................................    15











                                                                           3
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                                           5


<S>                                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                  12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                         DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                            JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                              DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                                          9,805
<SECURITIES>                                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                9,805
<PP&E>                                                         60,118
<DEPRECIATION>                                                 30,395
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                 39,528
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                       1,637,033
<BONDS>                                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                               0
<PREFERRED>                                                         0
<COMMON>                                                       13,427
<OTHER-SE>                                                 (1,860,932)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                   39,528
<SALES>                                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                    0
<CGS>                                                               0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                 491,369
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                              411,249
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                             80,120
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                     0
<INCOME-TAX>                                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                 0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                     0
<CHANGES>                                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                                 (491,369)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                   (0.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                       0



</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-6789

CHRISTOPHER LEONARD HAMLIN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

GENE M. JOHNSON, Director of the Virginia

Department of Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, Magistrate

Judge. (3:05-cv-00446-MHL)

Submitted: November 15, 2006 Decided: November 21, 2006

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam.

Christopher Leonard Hamlin, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Christopher

Galanides, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond,

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
*

The parties consented the magistrate judge’s jurisdiction

under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000).

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Christopher Leonard Hamlin seeks to appeal the magistrate

judge’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000)

petition.*

 The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or

judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue

absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional

right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that

any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court

is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hamlin has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Hamlin’s motion

to proceed in forma pauperis, deny a certificate of appealability,

and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### MARLER HOLDING CO., Inc., a corporation, Louis P. Leri, “Gus” Rubino, Sol Feldman and Robert Taylor, Appellants, v. RUTTGER HOTEL CORP., a corporation, Donald W. Ruttger, Max J. Ruttger and Rosie S. Ruttger, Appellees.

No. 69-188.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 14, 1970.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Broward County; Stewart F. LaMotte, Jr., Judge.

Dismissed as to Appellant-Louis P. Leri only.
EXHIBIT 23.1








                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration
statements of Foodbrands America, Inc. on Form S-8 (file No's.
33-45974, 33-59331, and 33-62611) of our report dated February
12, 1996, on our audits of the consolidated financial statements
of Foodbrands America, Inc. as of December 30, 1995, and December
31, 1994, and for the years ended December 30, 1995, December 31,
1994, and January 1, 1994, which report is included in the
Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K.






                                    COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.


Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
February 26, 1996
Exhibit 12Alliance One International, Inc. and SubsidiariesRATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGESYears Ended March 31,(in thousands)20112010200920082007Pretax income from continuing operations$  32,849$  74,192$ 109,332$    2,046$ 13,086Distributed income of equity investees-430-311109Fixed charges107,975118,603102,545106,457109,834Earnings$140,824$193,225$211,877$108,814$123,029Interest98,561109,41097,854102,866103,436Amortization of charges and other9,4149,1934,6913,5916,398Fixed Charges$107,975$118,603$102,545$106,457$109,834Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges1.301.632.071.021.12Coverage DeficiencyN/AN/AN/AN/AN/A
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 286 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                 House Calendar No. 106

103d CONGRESS

  1st Session

                              H. RES. 286

                          [Report No. 103-309]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 334) to provide for the 
 recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of Cheraw Indians of North Carolina, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            October 27, 1993

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

                                                 House Calendar No. 106
103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 286

                          [Report No. 103-309]

 Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 334) to provide for the 
 recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of Cheraw Indians of North Carolina, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 27, 1993

 Mr. Hall of Ohio, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 
resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 334) to provide for the 
 recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of Cheraw Indians of North Carolina, 
                        and for other purposes.

    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution 
the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule XXIII, declare the 
House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of 
the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 334) to provide for the 
recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of Cheraw Indians of North Carolina, 
and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be 
dispensed with. Points of order against consideration of the bill for 
failure to comply with clause 2(l)(2)(B) of rule XI are waived. General 
debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour 
equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Natural Resources. After general debate the 
bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. Each 
section shall be considered as read. At the conclusion of consideration 
of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill 
to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted. The 
previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and 
amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except 
one motion to recommit.
```
**Figure 91. Natural gas production by source, 1990-2040 (trillion cubic feet)**

Source: http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/MT_naturalgas.cfm

Accessed: 1/10/14

Alaska Coalbed

Methane Lower 48

Offshore Lower 48

Onshore

Conventio

nal Tight gas Shale Gas

1990 0.38 0.27 5.33 9.50 2.13 0.20

1991 0.41 0.35 5.08 9.32 2.38 0.15

1992 0.41 0.56 4.95 9.60 2.15 0.17

1993 0.40 0.75 5.09 9.22 2.42 0.22

1994 0.52 0.86 5.39 9.50 2.32 0.23

1995 0.43 0.96 5.33 9.02 2.58 0.28

1996 0.44 1.11 5.53 8.06 3.55 0.16

1997 0.43 1.18 5.51 7.89 3.66 0.24

1998 0.43 1.31 5.45 7.73 3.85 0.26

1999 0.42 1.39 5.37 7.60 3.78 0.27

2000 0.42 1.51 5.17 7.73 4.03 0.32

2001 0.44 1.60 5.33 7.63 4.25 0.36

2002 0.43 1.65 4.75 7.21 4.44 0.45

2003 0.46 1.70 4.76 6.97 4.68 0.52

2004 0.44 1.72 4.22 6.52 5.09 0.60

2005 0.46 1.73 3.37 6.32 5.43 0.75

2006 0.42 1.76 3.10 6.40 5.82 1.00

2007 0.41 1.78 2.98 6.34 6.26 1.50

2008 0.37 1.99 2.68 6.44 6.43 2.25

2009 0.37 1.72 2.70 5.55 6.80 3.47

2010 0.35 1.69 2.44 5.65 6.34 4.86

2011 0.35 1.71 2.11 5.12 5.86 7.85

2012 0.32 1.67 2.19 5.83 5.76 8.13

2013 0.31 1.69 1.92 5.59 5.89 8.60

2014 0.30 1.67 1.83 5.54 5.85 8.66

2015 0.30 1.64 1.89 5.50 5.85 8.85

2016 0.29 1.70 2.09 5.60 6.08 9.37

2017 0.29 1.71 2.03 5.38 6.21 9.79

2018 0.29 1.73 2.03 5.29 6.31 10.28

2019 0.28 1.73 2.05 5.17 6.37 10.70

2020 0.28 1.71 2.07 5.11 6.40 11.05

2021 0.27 1.70 2.12 5.04 6.44 11.38

2022 0.27 1.70 2.20 4.97 6.49 11.77

2023 0.27 1.69 2.22 4.86 6.54 12.18

2024 0.50 1.67 2.18 4.73 6.56 12.52

2025 0.73 1.66 2.19 4.60 6.56 12.84

2026 0.97 1.67 2.19 4.43 6.59 13.10

2027 1.20 1.67 2.25 4.23 6.61 13.39

2028 1.20 1.68 2.26 4.06 6.61 13.66

2029 1.19 1.69 2.29 3.86 6.65 13.92

2030 1.19 1.69 2.34 3.74 6.67 14.172031 1.19 1.69 2.42 3.65 6.71 14.41

2032 1.19 1.70 2.57 3.57 6.75 14.62

2033 1.19 1.70 2.72 3.50 6.79 14.81

2034 1.18 1.71 2.76 3.42 6.87 15.05

2035 1.18 1.73 2.81 3.33 6.96 15.33

2036 1.18 1.78 2.71 3.25 7.07 15.68

2037 1.18 1.87 2.60 3.17 7.16 16.02

2038 1.18 1.96 2.59 3.09 7.23 16.33

2039 1.18 2.04 2.78 3.01 7.28 16.52

2040 1.18 2.11 2.85 2.96 7.34 16.70
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
OF FOREST OIL CORPORATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and in connection with the accompanying report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 that is being filed concurrently
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned officer of Forest Oil Corporation (the "Company") hereby certifies that:



|               |  | /s/DAVID H. KEYTE                     
|-------------- |  | --------------------------------------
|August 7, 2008 |  | David H. Keyte
Chief Financial Officer

---



QuickLinks
DAVI D H , BRADFOR D COUNCI L MEMBERS : fvlAYO R JAME S HOLU^N D JERR YKNIGH T RICK YwimAM s ;-p::°- ^ CIT YCLERK-TREASURE R NEA L WILLI S Februar y31 , 201 1 U.S . Departmen t o fTransportatio n Essentia l Ai rServic e Division : Roo m 640 1 . ^o^ ^ 40 0 Sevent h Street , S.W . 3^§ : Washingto n D.C . 2059 0 x rO^ ^ o n 'J 5 Dea rChie fDevany , Than k yo u fo rcontinuin g t o worl ; wit h ou rcommunit yo n thi s vita l service . I t i s on e o fth e highes t prioritie s fo rou rentir e are a o fNorthwes t Alabama . Yo u an d you rstaf fhave always bee n availabl e fo r ou rvisit s an d questions . W e believ e tha t wit h th e Robert Tren t Jone s Gol fTrail , ou rMusi cHeritag e an d th e continuin g growt h o fmanufacturin g industr yi n th e Shoal s Researc h Airpari cmake Essentia l Ai r Servic e ke yt o th e continue d growt h o fou rcommunity . W e ar e sa d an d disappointe d tha t Delt a wil l n o longe rb e providin g thi s service . Northwes t an d Delt a hav e alway s worke d wit h loca l leadershi p an d ou r <5ommunity . ^

als o believ e ou rcommunit yhas bee n 4oya ] t o them . Afte rreviewin g al l th e proposal s an d speakin g wit h Shoal s Chambe ro fCommerc e Presiden t Steve Hol t an d Northwes t Shoal s Airpor t Directo rl\^atthe wHea , I believ e Gul fStrea m Internationa l Airline s wit h servic e t o Memphis , TN . offer s th e bes t viabl e airlin e servic e o fth e approve d proposal s fo rth e Northwes t Alabam a Regiona l Airport . I t i s m yhop e tha t Gulfstrea m wil l b e abl e t o develo p ticke t an d baggag e cod e shar e wit h Delt a Airline s an d als o wor k towar d returnin g flight s t o Atlanta , GA . i n th e nea r future . I a m requestin g tha t th e U.S . Departmen t o fTransportatio n approv e Gulfstrea m internationa l Airline s a s ou rservic e carrier . SirwKcly , Davi d H , Bradfor d Mayo r

POS TOFFIC E BO X 262 4 • MUSCL E SHOALS , ALABAM A3566 2 • (256 ) 383-567 5 • FAX (256 ) 386-920 1