alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Jesus O., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant.

[655 NYS2d 363]

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Alma Cordova, J.), entered on or about March 7, 1996, which, upon a fact-finding determination, by admission, that respondent committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, adjudicated *171him a juvenile delinquent, and placed him in the custody of the Division for Youth for 18 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Respondent’s suppression motion was properly denied. We see no reason to disturb the court’s credibility determinations. Concur—Wallach, J. P., Nardelli, Rubin and Williams, JJ.
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-5454

_____________________________

ROBERT SAGER,

Petitioner,

v.

FLORIDA COMMISSION ON 

OFFENDER REVIEW,

Respondent.

_____________________________

Petition for Writ of Certiorari—Original Jurisdiction.

January 22, 2019

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied on the merits.

ROBERTS, KELSEY, and WINSOR, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Robert Sager, pro se, Petitioner.

Rana Wallace, General Counsel, and Mark Hiers, Assistant 

General Counsel, Florida Commission on Offender Review, 

Tallahassee, for Respondent.
#### Julius Bernard WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, Respondent.

No. 36994.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June 26, 1968.

Julius Bernard Williams, in pro. per.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and George R. Georgieff, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The return to the writ of habeas corpus herein raises issues of fact concerning whether Petitioner was duly and timely notified by his court appointed counsel (the Public Defender for the First Judicial Circuit) that he had been permitted by the District Court of Appeal, First District, to withdraw as counsel for Petitioner in presenting Petitioner’s appeal from his conviction in the Court of Record of Escambia County, *7Florida, prior to the dismissal of said appeal.

An evidentiary hearing appears in order; therefore the Honorable Woodrow Melvin, a Circuit Judge of the First Judicial Circuit of Florida, is appointed Commissioner to take such testimony as shall be deemed necessary for a determination of said issues and thereafter with all convenient speed report the same, together with his findings and recommendations to this Court. See Hollingshead v. Wainwright (Fla.), 188 So.2d 788; Hollingshead v. Wainwright (Fla.), 194 So.2d 577.

The Petitioner is authorized to proceed in forma pauperis. The Commissioner is authorized to appoint an attorney to represent Petitioner in those proceedings.

It is so ordered.

CALDWELL, C. J., and ROBERTS, THORNAL, ERVIN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE AUDITED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF RWB MEDICAL INCOME PROPERTIES 1 LIMITED PARTNERSHIP FOR
THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       4,849,227
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  349,106
<ALLOWANCES>                                   191,707
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,044,762
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,044,762
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,649,883
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,364,517<F1>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,044,762
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,382,374
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,344,392
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (274,628)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              32,844
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,720,234)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,720,234)
<DISCONTINUED>                                (181,065)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              8,793,924
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 6,892,675
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>REPRESENT TOTAL PARTNERSHIP CAPITAL INCLUDING NET INCOME NET OF
DISTRIBUTIONS.
</FN>


</TABLE>
Ronald Rosenzweig                                       15 March 2002
19509 Planters Point Drive
Boca Raton, FL 33434

Subject: Amendment - Agreement June 1, 1999

Dear Ron,

This is to confirm the extension of the Agreement dated June 1, 1999 between you
and ANADIGICS, Inc. regarding your employment by the Company as detailed below.

1.       Your employment is extended for the period from July 2, 2002 through
         July 2, 2003 at 25% time as ANADIGICS employee.

2.       Your total cash compensation shall be at the annual rate of $75,000
         paid biweekly.

3.       All terms of your agreement dated June 1, 1999 remain intact as part of
         this extension.

If you are in agreement with the foregoing, please sign and return to us a copy
of this letter.

Very truly yours,



Bami Bastani
President & Chief Executive Officer
ANADIGICS, Inc.




Accepted and agreed to stated.



-------------------------------
Ronald Rosenzweig












ANADIGICS, Inc. / 35 Technology Drive / Warren, New Jersey 07059 / 908-668-5000
/ Fax: 908-668-5068
#### Grady A. BARNARD, a minor, by his next friend and natural guardian Clara Irene Barnard, and Clara Irene Barnard, Individually, Petitioners, v. David John CREWS, Respondent.

No. 36278.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Nov. 15, 1967.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 13, 1967.

Victor E. Raymos, Blalock & Holbrook, Lewis, Paul & Bennett, Jacksonville, for petitioners.

Howell, Kirby, Montgomery, Sands & D’Aiuto and Borden R. Hallowes, Jacksonville, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari reflected probable jurisdiction in this Court. After argument and upon further consideration, we have determined the writ was improvidently issued. The writ must be and is discharged and the petition is dismissed.

It is so ordered.

CALDWELL, C. J., and DREW and THORNAL, JJ., concur.

WHITE, Circuit Judge (Retired), concurs specially with Opinion.

ERVIN, J., concurs with WHITE, Circuit Judge (Retired).

WHITE, JOSEPH S., Circuit Judge, Retired

(concurring specially).

I disagree with the statement of the District Court of Appeal regarding the application of the “Last Clear Chance” doctrine, Barnard v. Crews, Fla.App.1967, 194 So.2d 44, however, I can find nothing in the record indicating that petitioner, plaintiff in the trial court, presented instructions upon the subject to the trial judge, and, in addition, only a portion of the testimony taken during the trial has been brought here, making it impossible to determine whether or not the doctrine was applicable.

ERVIN, J., concurs.
#### Ruth W. VOGEL, Appellant, v. Frank N. VOGEL, Appellee.

No. 69-236.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 1, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 23.1

                             CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
                          CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


The Board of Directors
NeoRx Corporation:


We consent to incorporation  by reference in the  registration  statements (Nos.
33-60029, 33-64992, 33-63169,  333-05661,  333-00785, and 333-25161) on Form S-3
and in the  registration  statements (Nos.  33-43860,  33-46317,  33-87108,  and
333-32583)  on Form S-8 of NeoRx  Corporation,  of our report dated  January 30,
1998,  relating to the balance  sheet of NeoRx  Corporation  as of December  31,
1997, and the related  statements of operations,  shareholders'  equity and cash
flows for the year then ended,  which  report  appears in the  December 31, 1997
annual report on Form 10-K of NeoRx Corporation.


                                                           KPMG Peat Marwick LLP


Seattle, Washington
March 30, 1998
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1246 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1246

         To extend the temporary suspension of the duty on 2,5-
                         dimethoxyacetanilide.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                July 15 (legislative day, June 30), 1993

  Mr. Chafee introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
         To extend the temporary suspension of the duty on 2,5-
                         dimethoxyacetanilide.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. 2,5-DIMETHOXYACETANILIDE.

    Heading 9902.29.52 of subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by striking ``12/31/
92'' and inserting ``12/31/94''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    (a) In General.--The amendment made by this Act applies with 
respect to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
    (b) Reliquidation.--Notwithstanding section 514 of the Tariff Act 
of 1930 or any other provision of law, upon proper request filed with 
the appropriate customs officer on or before the 90th day after the 
date of the enactment of this Act, any entry of an article described in 
subheading 9902.29.52 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 
States that was made--
            (1) after December 31, 1992, and
            (2) before the date which is 15 days after the date of the 
        enactment of this Act,
shall be liquidated or reliquidated as though such entry occurred on or 
after the date that is 15 days after the date of the enactment of this 
Act.

                                 <all>
```
IV 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 728 

Expressing support for the designation of a ‘‘Small Business Saturday’’ 

and supporting efforts to increase awareness of the value of locally 

owned small businesses. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 16, 2014 

Mr. GRAVES of Missouri submitted the following resolution; which was 

referred to the Committee on Small Business 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing support for the designation of a ‘‘Small Business 

Saturday’’ and supporting efforts to increase awareness 

of the value of locally owned small businesses. 

Whereas, there are 28,200,000 small businesses in the 

United States; 

Whereas small businesses represent 99.7 percent of all businesses with employees in the United States; 

Whereas small businesses employ over 48 percent of the employees in the private sector in the United States; 

Whereas small businesses pay over 42 percent of the total 

payroll of the employees in the private sector in the 

United States; 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 728 IH 

Whereas small businesses constitute 98 percent of firms exporting goods; 

Whereas small businesses are responsible for more than 46 

percent of private sector output; 

Whereas small businesses generated 63 percent of net new 

jobs created from 1993 through 2013; and 

Whereas November 29, 2014, is an appropriate day to designate as ‘‘Small Business Saturday’’: Now, therefore, be 

it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) supports the designation of a ‘‘Small Busi3 ness Saturday’’; and 

4 (2) supports efforts— 

5 (A) to encourage consumers to shop lo6 cally; and 

7 (B) to increase awareness of the value of 

8 locally owned small businesses and the impact 

9 of locally owned small businesses on the econ10 omy of the United States. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
Attendees EPA CRP Meeting 20 Jan. 2010 25 People

Tom Lewandowski adientcorp

Hans Hammer Audi

Michael Schneider BMW Group

Pankaj Mahajan Chrysler

Juergen Wertenbach Daimler

Mary Koban Dupont

Tanner Dupont

Margaret Sheppard EPA

Yaidi V. Cancel EPA

Steve Lepper Ford

Curt Vincent GM

Fred Sciance GM

Curt Vincent GM

Harry Eustice GM

Chris Seaton Honeywell

David P. Wilson Honeywell

Ryan Fortier Hyundai-Kia 

Enrique.peral-antunez Renault

James.Hebden Toyota

Julie He Toyota

T.Ikegami Toyota

Peter Nickles VW

Bill Hill

Sasa.Vulinovic

Ward Atkinson
#### William H. WOODHAM v. COUNTY OF BREVARD.

No. 38879.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Sept. 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 223 So.2d 344.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 742 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 742

    Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that it is 
unconstitutional for the President of the United States to continue to 
 provide deferred action for childhood arrivals in enforcement of the 
                           immigration laws.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 18, 2014

Mr. Olson submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that it is 
unconstitutional for the President of the United States to continue to 
 provide deferred action for childhood arrivals in enforcement of the 
                           immigration laws.

    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
it is unconstitutional for the President of the United States to 
continue to provide deferred action for childhood arrivals in 
enforcement of the immigration laws.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          43,282
<SECURITIES>                                    73,209
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,695
<ALLOWANCES>                                       958
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               127,261
<PP&E>                                           9,412
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,979
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 158,760
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           36,260
<BONDS>                                            400
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            97
<OTHER-SE>                                     122,003
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   158,760
<SALES>                                         48,150
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                48,150
<CGS>                                           29,653
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   29,653
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 21,455
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,509
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             13,946
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    13,946
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.46
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.45


</TABLE>
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Sherman BRAXTON v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 53192.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 1, 1973.

In re: Sherman Braxton applying for writs of habeas corpus, certiorari, mandamus and prohibition.

Writ denied. The complaint of incompetent retained counsel raises the same issue asserted in #52,485 our docket, which was denied.
PROMISSORY NOTE





From:  LBO CAPITAL INC.





To:    AMERICAN PLASTICS PROCESSING PRODUCTS INC



Effective Date: 12/31/2007



Amount: $337,654.00



Interest: $904,702.00







LBO Capital Inc. promises to pay to the order of American Plastics Processing Products, Inc Three Hundred Thirty Seven Thousand Six Hundred Fifty Four dollars and no cents ($337,654.00) at 10.5% interest rate per annum and Nine Hundred  Four Thousand Seven Hundred Two dollars and no cents ($904,702.00) of accrued interest.  This note is secured by LBO Capital, Inc.s present and future goods, including (but not limited to) equipment and inventory, and all of debtor's present and future intangible collateral, including (but not limited to) pure intangibles, and semi-intangibles, i.e. documents, instruments, and chattel paper.



LBO Capital Inc.



By:
/s/ Majlinda Xhuti    CFO





Due Date: on demand

Lbo-ap3.doc





PROMISSORY NOTE





From:  LBO CAPITAL INC.





To:    AMERICAN PLASTICS PROCESSING PRODUCTS INC



Effective Date: 12/31/2008



Amount: $30,000.00



Interest: $192.74







LBO Capital Inc. promises to pay on demand to the order of American Plastics Processing Products, Inc Thirty Thousand dollars and no cents ($30,000.00) at 7% interest rate per annum and One Hundred Ninety Two dollars and 74 cents ($192.74) of accrued interest.  This note is secured by LBO Capital, Inc.s present and future goods, including (but not limited to) equipment and inventory, and all of debtor's present and future intangible collateral, including (but not limited to) pure intangibles, and semi-intangibles, i.e. documents, instruments, and chattel paper.

LBO Capital Inc.



By: /s/ Tatsiana Husarava,

Corporate Secretary



Accepted and Agreed  to

This  31st 
day of December  2008



By:
/s/ Name:  Mario DiNello

Title: President
**Exhibit 31.2****Certifications**I, Thomas J. Koenig, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Day International Group, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:   a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;   b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and   c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):   a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and   b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.     Date:October 4, 2006 By: /s/ Thomas J. Koenig       Thomas J. Koenig  Vice President and Chief Financial Officer  (Principal Financial Officer and Principal  Accounting Officer)
1The Honorable Dean Whipple, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 98-1843

___________

Joseph Scott Blackburn, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. *

* Appeal from the United States

Steve Whitney, Sheriff; Joe Nelson, * District Court for the

Commissioner; Bill Barnett, * Western District of Missouri.

Commissioner; Tom Chudomelka, *

Commissioner; James Eiffert, Judge; * [UNPUBLISHED]

Mark Orr, Prosecuting Attorney, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: February 7, 2000

 Filed: February 15, 2000

___________

Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, BOWMAN, and BEAM.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Joseph Scott Blackburn appeals from the district court’s1 dismissal of his 42

U.S.C. § 1983 action without prejudice for failure to comply with the court’s order to

address Sheriff Steve Whitney’s dismissal motion. Having reviewed the record and the
-2-

parties’ briefs, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion. See

Rodgers v. Curators of Univ. of Missouri, 135 F.3d 1216, 1219 (8th Cir. 1998)

(standard of review); Edgington v. Missouri Dept. of Corrections, 52 F.3d 777, 779-80

(8th Cir. 1995) (fact that dismissal for failure to comply with orders was without

prejudice militates against finding abuse of discretion).

We deny Blackburn’s pending motions, as the arguments he raises in them were

not presented to the district court. See Schafer v. Moore, 46 F.3d 43, 45 (8th Cir.

1995).

Accordingly, we affirm.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.