alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

CURTIS C. PHILLIPS JR.,

Petitioner

v.

ERIC K. DOWDLE, ESQUIRE,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 418 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 1st day of November, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
#### STATE of Florida on the relation of RENBUR DRUGS, INC., a Florida corporation, d/b/a Don’s Drugs (but never known as Rebbur Drugs, an unknown entity, d/b/a Don’s Drugs), et al., Relators, v. Grady L. CRAWFORD, as Circuit Judge of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Dade County, Florida, and the Florida Board of Pharmacy, Respondents.

No. 71-828.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Aug. 10, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Mandamus denied.
EXHIBIT 32.1

906 CERTIFICATION

The undersigned certify pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350 as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

(1)   The
accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended February 29,
          2004, 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 accompanying Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
          Company.

|Date: April 14, 2004 | /s/ David H. Roche
                                                                                 President andChief Executive Officer                     
|-------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                     | /s/ Steven M. Caspers    
                                                                                Executive Vice President andChief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Iridium
LLC's financial statements for the quarter ended June 30, 1997 and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>0000948421
<NAME>IRIDIUM LLC
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         106,419
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               126,009
<PP&E>                                       2,715,291
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,007
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,934,545
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          227,748
<BONDS>                                        913,337
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     37,194
<COMMON>                                     1,968,366
<OTHER-SE>                                   (218,427)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,934,545
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                48,414
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (47,926)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (47,926)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (47,926)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.40)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.35)
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6570

THEODORE J. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MACK JARVIS; DANIEL L. STIENEKE; HATTIE PIMPONG; LINWOOD E. STANCILL; JOHN TAYLOR; HUGH MARTIN; CARL BATTLE; ZEB HEATH; HAROLD SMALLS; JOHN MILLS; ROOSEVELT STRICKLAND; JIM BEANE; DONALD PEACH; CAROL WHITAKER; PHIL HOLHOUSER; FRED B. MURCHISON; WILLIAM SOUTHERN; DAVID BOBO; MITCH JOHNSON, Defendants - Appellees.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-99-25-5-BO) Submitted: June 17, 1999 Decided: June 23, 1999 Before MURNAGHAN and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Theodore J. Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Theodore J. Williams appeals the district court’s order dismissing as frivolous his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Williams v. Jarvis , No. CA-99-25-5-BO (E.D.N.C. Apr. 5, 1999). We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### Peter MARTIN, a/k/a Pete Martino, a/k/a Peter Angelo Bartemio, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 602.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Feb. 14, 1967.

Joseph A. Varón, Hollywood, and Stead-man S. Stahl, Jr., Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Fred T. Gallagher, Asst. Atty. Gen., Vero Beach, for appellee.

SAMPLE, WALLACE, Associate Judge.

This is an appeal from a conviction of robbery.

At the commencement of the trial the trial judge denied a motion for continuance, the basis of which was a newspaper article which appellant believes inflammatory and prejudicial to his rights. Except for a copy of the news article, which appeared on page 7 of a local newspaper, this court has no record from which to draw any conclusion of fact or law. The news article itself, standing alone, does not justify a new trial under the decisions cited by appellant (Estes v. State of Texas, 1965, 381 U.S. 532, 85 S.Ct. 1628, 14 L.Ed.2d 543; Shepphard v. Maxwell, 1966, 384 U.S. 333, 86 S.Ct. 1507, 16 L.Ed.2d 600) in which the defendant, in each case, was subjected to nation-wide publicity prior to and during his trial and also harassment in and about the courtroom by television crews, radio broadcasters, reporters, columnists, photographers and the like.

We have no way of knowing what arguments were presented to the trial judge in support of the motion for continuance. We have no way of knowing what took place during voir dire examination of the jurors — whether any of them had read the article; whether any had formed opinions because of it; whether any difficulty was encountered in selecting impartial jurors; whether appellant used all his peremptory challenges; whether any juror, or jurors, should have been excused for cause because of the news article. The rulings of the trial judge came to this court with a presumption of correctness, and nothing appears in this record to overcome this presumption.

We have carefully examined the record concerning alleged improper conduct of the prosecutor in the examination of witnesses and in his summation and find no reversible error.

The other question brought here for review concerns the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict of guilty. The *10evidence against appellant, that is, the evidence connecting him with the robbery, is circumstantial.

A detailed recitation of the factual situation leading to appellant’s arrest and subsequent conviction would serve no worthwhile purpose. The record contains ample evidence to sustain the conviction. The trial judge properly charged the jury on the subject of circumstantial evidence, and it was within the province of the jury to reject the testimony of appellant and his witnesses by whom he sought to establish an alibi.

Affirmed.

WALDEN, C. J., and ANDREWS, J., concur.
Exhibit 23.3 - Report of Independent Accountants


To The Board of Directors and Shareholders
Congoleum Corporation

   We have audited the balance sheet of Congoleum Corporation  as
of  December  31, 1995 and the related statements of  operations,
changes in stockholders' equity and cash flows for the years then
ended December 31, 1995 and 1994, which financial statements  are
included  on  pages 10 through 23 of the 1996  Annual  Report  to
Shareholders   of  Congoleum  Corporation  and  incorporated   by
reference  herein.  We have also audited the financial  statement
schedule  listed in the Index as Item 14(a) for the  years  ended
December  31,  1995  and  1994.  These financial  statements  and
financial  statement  schedule  are  the  responsibility  of  the
Company's  management.   Our  responsibility  is  to  express  an
opinion  on  these  financial statements and financial  statement
schedule based on our audits.

   We  conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted
auditing  standards.  Those standards require that  we  plan  and
perform  the  audit to obtain reasonable assurance about  whether
the  financial statements are free of material misstatement.   An
audit  includes  examining, on a test basis, evidence  supporting
the  amounts  and  disclosures in the financial  statements.   An
audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used  and
significant  estimates made by management, as well as  evaluating
the  overall  financial statement presentation.  We believe  that
our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

   In  our  opinion, the financial statements referred  to  above
present  fairly, in all material respects, the financial position
of Congoleum Corporation as of December 31, 1995, and the results
of its operations and its cash flows for the years ended December
31,   1995  and  1994,  in  conformity  with  generally  accepted
accounting   principles.   In  addition,  in  our  opinion,   the
financial  statement schedule referred to above, when  considered
in  relation to the basic financial statements taken as a  whole,
presents   fairly  in  all  material  respects,  the  information
required to be included therein.



/S/COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.
---------------------------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
February 20, 1996
aae00n >

8
:
Ne
i
t
Ss

|
}
|

r
NX

>
Zz.
S
>

| eae | Coed ee | |
Se ea | Sb Shel tae be se i as P| 4 t I

Historic census records are maintained and released by the National Archives and Records Administration, not the U.S. Census Bureau.

va

x
<
~

Visit http://www.archives.gov for more information about publicly available records like the one shown here.
|

cemnes1-1+171 [| ig ane Ss | eae
‘ : | 4 / || bi
fea is ne tC ale eB
bat } ; Bt * Best FR ok

li] ake AW

17

BS
x
x
EXHIBIT 99.2

FIRST INVESTORS FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, INC.

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In
connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of First Investors Financial Services Group, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended
July 31, 2002 (the "Report"), I, Bennie H. Duck, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify that to my knowledge:



|Dated: September 16, 2002 |  |  |  | /s/BENNIE H. DUCKBennie H. Duck Chief Financial Officer
|------------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------------------------

The
above certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and is not being filed as part of the
Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure document.

---

QuickLinks
** EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

 

I,David G. Zahka, Chief Financial Officer of Talk America Holdings, Inc., havereviewed Talk America Holdings, Inc.'s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for thequarterly period ended June 30, 2004 and, based on the inquiries I have made orcaused  to  be  made  in  the  fulfillment of  my responsibilities as the Chief Financial Officer of  Talk America  Holdings,  Inc.,  I  hereby certifythat:

 

(i) the Talk America Holdings, Inc. Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004 fully complies with therequirements  of  Section  13(a)  of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, as amended; and (ii)  the  information contained  in  such  Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operation of Talk America Holdings, Inc.

 

Thiscertificate is being made for the exclusive purpose of compliance by the ChiefFinancial Officer of Talk America Holdings, Inc. with the requirements ofSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and may not be used for any otherpurposes.  A signed original of this written statement required by Section906 has been provided to Talk America Holdings, Inc.

 

/s/ David G.Zahka

David G. Zahka

Chief Financial Officer

April25, 2005
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 16

- 4878

_____________________________ S TEVEN M ORGAN , Appellant,

v.

S TATE O F F LORIDA , Appellee.

___________________________ On appeal from the Circuit Court for Nassa u County

. Robert M. Foster, Judge

. February 6, 2018

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

. B.L. T HOMAS , C.J.
, and M AKAR and W INO KUR , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.3 30 or 9.331

.

_____________________________ A ndy Thomas, Public Defender, Laurel Cornell Niles, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee
, for Appellant.2 Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Daniel Krumbholz, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appell ee.
Table 2.  Rental and Homeowner Vacancy Rates, by Area:  First Quarter 2001 



                                    Rental vacancy rates


                           First        First      Standard     Standard
Area                      quarter      quarter     error on     error on
                           2001         2000       2001 rate   difference


United States..........         8.2          7.9          0.2          0.3

  Inside MAs...........         7.8          7.7          0.2          0.3
    In central cities..         8.3          8.1          0.3          0.4
    Not in central cities
    (suburbs)..........         7.3          7.1          0.3          0.4
  Outside MAs..........        10.2          9.1          0.5          0.7

 Northeast.............         5.1          5.6          0.4          0.5
 Midwest...............         8.9          8.5          0.5          0.6
 South.................        11.3         10.2          0.4          0.5
 West..................         5.8          6.0          0.3          0.5



                                    Homeowner vacancy rates


                           First        First      Standard     Standard
Area                      quarter      quarter     error on     error on
                           2001         2000       2001 rate   difference


United States..........         1.5          1.6          0.1          0.1

  Inside MAs...........         1.4          1.5          0.1          0.1
    In central cities..         1.9          2.0          0.1          0.2
    Not in central cities
    (suburbs)..........         1.2          1.3          0.1          0.1
  Outside MAs..........         2.2          1.9          0.1          0.2

 Northeast.............         1.2          1.2          0.1          0.2
 Midwest...............         1.5          1.4          0.1          0.2
 South.................         1.9          1.8          0.1          0.1
 West..................         1.3          1.8          0.1          0.2
Exhibit 99.2

                                  CERTIFICATION
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
           AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

           I, Victoria M. Lynch, as Chief Financial Officer of Giga Information
Group, Inc. ("Giga") certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted by
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

           (1) the accompanying Form 10-Q report for the period ending June 30,
2002 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report")
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

           (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Giga.


Dated:  August 14, 2002


                                            VICTORIA M. LYNCH
                                            --------------------------------
                                            Victoria M. Lynch,
                                            Chief Financial Officer of Giga
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

Daniel Cedillos,

 Appellant,

v.

The State of Texas,

 State.

§

§

§

§

§

§ 

No. 08-14-00180-CR

Appeal from the

346th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 20130D02144)

ORDER

The Court previously abated the above styled and numbered cause pending the final 

resolution of 08-14-00248-CR, styled The State of Texas v. Daniel Cedillos. The opinion 

and judgment issued in that cause number on May 6, 2016 and the mandate issued on January 

30, 2017. Therefore, the instant appeal is REINSTATED. 

Further, on the Court’s own motion, the Appellant’s brief is now due in this Court no 

later than March 10, 2017.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 8th day of February, 2017.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez and Palafox, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          17,771
<SECURITIES>                                    22,243
<RECEIVABLES>                                   82,336
<ALLOWANCES>                                    17,649
<INVENTORY>                                     14,406
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               197,630
<PP&E>                                         420,697
<DEPRECIATION>                                 109,862
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 772,832
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          163,868
<BONDS>                                        491,057
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       224,472
<OTHER-SE>                                   (175,985)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   772,832
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               493,106
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  455,254
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                38,321
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              31,034
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (230,683)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (76,186)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (154,497)
<DISCONTINUED>                                (70,995)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (7,724)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (233,216)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (5.95)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (5.95)
        

</TABLE>
#### Dorothy G. RESTREPO v. FOURTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL.

No. 38644.

Supreme Court of Florida.

July 1969.

Certiorari Denied Nov. 10, 1969.

See 90 S.Ct. 243.

Certiorari denied without opinion.
#### Henry F. JAEGER, Executor, etc., v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.

No. 5885.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

Nov. 19, 1936.

Gerard A. Connor, of Chicago, 111., for petitioner.

Morton K. Rothschild, of Washington, D. C., for respondent.

Before EVANS and SPARKS, Circuit Judges, and BRIGGLE, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Now this day come the parties by their counsel, and this cause now comes on to be heard on the printed record and briefs of counsel and on oral arguments. On consideration whereof it is now here ordered and adjudged by this court that the decision entered in this cause on January 31, 1936, by the United States Board of Tax Appeals be, and the same is hereby, affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1

906 CERTIFICATION

The undersigned certify pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350 as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

(1)  
          The accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended November 30,
          2005, 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 accompanying Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
          Company.

|Date:  January 13, 2006 | /s/ David H. Roche                                 
|----------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------
|                        |                                                    
|                        | President andChief Executive Officer               
|                       
|                        | /s/ Steven M. Caspers                              
|                        |                                                    
|                        | Executive Vice President andChief Financial Officer

---
Exhibit 32.1





Written Statement of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350



Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we, the undersigned Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer and Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Midwest Air Group, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation (the Company), hereby certify, based on our knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





/s/ Timothy E. Hoeksema

Timothy E. Hoeksema

Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer



/s/ Curtis E. Sawyer

Curtis E. Sawyer

Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer



Date: July 26, 2006







A signed original of this written statement required by 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Jorge VASSEUR and Olga Vasseur, et ux., Appellants, v. Betsy STOINOFF and Elizabeth Stoinoff, Appellees.

No. 68-1009.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Nov. 4, 1969.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.