alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CROMPTON & KNOWLES CORPORATION
            EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN
            STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
            DECEMBER 31, 1995 AND 1994
            PLAN ASSETS AND EQUITY

                                          1995
   Fixed         C&K         Equity      Advisers     Mortgage
  Income Fund   Stock Fund      Fund         Fund         Fund        Total
 Investments:

  Common stock of Crompton 
  & Knowles Corporation -
  2,110,683 shares at market
  value (cost $ 15,647,527)
  in 1995 and 1,978,585
  shares at market value
  (cost $ 12,378,799) in 1994
 $      -     $ 27,966,550 $      -     $      -     $      -     $ 27,966,550

  Hartford Life Insurance
  Company group annuity
  contract
 17,882,428        -        3,196,868      647,252      309,648    22,036,196

 Cash and short-term
 investments at cost,
 which approximates market
    -           26,164        -            -            -           26,164

 Contribution receivable
 from Crompton & Knowles
 Corporation
 67,233      297,111       34,216       15,525        7,501      421,586

 Plan Assets and Equity
$ 17,949,661 $ 28,289,825 $  3,231,084 $    662,777 $    317,149 $ 50,450,496


                                          1994
   Fixed         C&K         Equity      Advisers     Mortgage
 Income Fund   Stock Fund      Fund         Fund         Fund        Total
 Investments:

  Common stock of Crompton 
  & Knowles Corporation -
  2,110,683 shares at market
  value (cost $ 15,647,527)
  in 1995 and 1,978,585
  shares at market value
  (cost $ 12,378,799) in 1994
 $      -     $ 32,152,006 $      -     $      -     $      -     $ 32,152,006

  Hartford Life Insurance
  Company group annuity
  contract
 15,009,184        -        2,387,815      648,256      237,916   18,283,171

 Cash and short-term
 investments at cost,
 which approximates market
    -           35,644        -            -            -           35,644

 Contribution receivable
 from Crompton & Knowles
 Corporation
   55,080      288,372       23,920        9,869        1,619      378,860

 Plan Assets and Equity
$ 15,064,264 $ 32,476,022 $  2,411,735 $    658,125 $    239,535 $ 50,849,681



                            See accompanying notes to financial statements
#### STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Gregory Dean BRADLEY, Appellee.

No. II-438.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Aug. 1, 1978.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Richard W. Prospect, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.

Michael J. Minerva, Public Defender, and Janice G. Scott, Asst. Public Defender, for appellee.

BOYER, Judge.

The State (appellant here) appeals an order dismissing an information and case against defendant (appellee here) on the grounds that the case was a juvenile one not subject to indictment for adult prosecution.

A petition for detention was filed against defendant alleging shoplifting (case no. 77-710-CJ) and possession of more than five grams of cannabis (case no. 77-648-CJ). Subsequently, a delinquency petition was filed against defendant in case no. 77-648-CJ. The state moved to transfer the cause to circuit court and the motion was granted. Thereafter, the state filed an information against defendant charging him with possession of more than five grams of cannabis. However, the state did not seek to *1306have defendant tried as an adult on the shoplifting charge (case no. 77-710-CJ). In a separate proceeding, a juvenile judge adjudicated defendant delinquent on the shoplifting charge and committed him to the Youth Services Program. As a result of that adjudication of delinquency and com-mittment to the Youth Services Program, defendant moved to dismiss the cannabis charge against him on the grounds that implicit in the committment to the Youth Services Program was at least the belief or fact that the defendant was amenable to juvenile treatment and that therefore, the order waiving juvenile jurisdiction was improper and the case didn’t belong in circuit court. The trial court agreed and ordered the cannabis case dismissed on the grounds that the intervening juvenile referral divested the circuit court of jurisdiction over defendant as an adult. The state seeks reversal of that order.

We reverse.

The intervening juvenile referral in the shoplifting case did not automatically divest the circuit court of jurisdiction over defendant as an adult in the cannabis case. This court recognizes that the adult division of the circuit court may reconsider an order waiving juvenile jurisdiction where evidence is present to show reasonable prospects for rehabilitation in the juvenile system. However, the only evidence present in this case showing prospects for rehabilitation is the defendant’s committment as a juvenile on the shoplifting charge. Such evidence is relevant on reconsideration but such evidence does not require the adult division of the circuit court to divest itself of jurisdiction over defendant on a related charge.

Accordingly, this case is remanded to the circuit court with directions that it reconsider its decision in light of this court’s holding here that defendant’s committment as a juvenile on the shoplifting charge does not require the adult division of the circuit court to divest itself of jurisdiction over defendant on the cannabis charge.

It is so ordered.

McCORD, C. J., and MELVIN, J., concur.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**Certification of CEO and CFO Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of APAC CustomerServices, Inc. (the “Company”) for the fiscal quarter ended June 27, 2004,as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), Robert J. Keller, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, andMarc T. Tanenberg, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each herebycertifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

 

(1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

 

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

 
| /s/ Robert  J. Keller           |   |
|---------------------------------|--------|
| Name: Robert  J. Keller         |
| Title: Chief  Executive Officer |
| Date: August  4, 2004           |
|                            |
| /s/ Marc T. Tanenberg           |   |
| Name: Marc T. Tanenberg         |
| Title: Chief Financial Officer  |
| Date: August 4, 2004            |

 

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent requiredby the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposesof §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to beincorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made beforeor after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language insuch filing.

 

----
<PAGE>



                                   EXHIBIT 5.1

                           OPINION OF LATHAM & WATKINS

                          [LATHAM & WATKINS LETTERHEAD]

                               September 8, 2000

BARRA, Inc.
2100 Milvia Street
Berkeley, CA  94704-1113

                  Re:      REGISTRATION STATEMENT ON FORM S-8

Ladies and Gentlemen:

         This opinion is rendered in connection with the filing by BARRA,
Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), of a registration statement on
Form S-8 (the "Registration Statement") with the Securities and Exchange
Commission under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, with respect to the
offer and sale of up to 1,292,650 shares of the Company's Common Stock, par
value $.0001 per share (the "Shares"), pursuant to the 2000 Equity
Participation Plan of BARRA, Inc. (the "Plan"). We acted as counsel to the
Company in connection with the preparation of the Registration Statement.

         We are familiar with the proceedings taken and to be taken in
connection with the authorization, issuance and sale of the Shares.
Additionally, we have examined such matters of fact and question of law as we
have considered appropriate for purposes of rendering the opinion expressed
below.

         We are opining herein as to the effect on the subject transaction of
only the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, and we express no
opinion with respect to the applicability thereto or the effect thereon of any
other laws or as to any matters of municipal law or any other local agencies
within any state.

         Subject to the foregoing and in reliance thereon, we are of the opinion
that the Shares have been duly authorized, and upon the issuance and sale of the
Shares in the manner contemplated by the Registration Statement and in
accordance with the terms of the Plan, and subject to the Company completing all
action and proceedings required on its part to be taken prior to the issuance of
the Shares pursuant to the terms of the Plan and the Registration Statement,
including, without limitation, collection of required payment for the Shares,
the Shares will be legally and validly issued, fully paid and nonassessable
securities of the Company.

         We consent to your filing this opinion as an exhibit to the
Registration Statement.

                                Very truly yours,

                                /s/ Latham & Watkins
```

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                   CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT

     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, the undersigned, Richard A. Wisot, the chief
financial officer of Proliance International, Inc. (the "issuer"), does hereby
certify that the report on Form 10-Q accompanying this certification (the
"report") fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information
contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the issuer.

/s/ Richard A. Wisot
-------------------------------------
Richard A. Wisot
Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer (chief financial officer)
Proliance International, Inc.
November 14, 2005
```
#### FLORIDA FREIGHT FORWARDERS, INC., et al., Petitioners, v. William H. BEVIS, Chairman, et al., Respondents.

No. 42726.

Supreme Court of Florida.

May 9, 1973.

John Crider, Jacksonville, and Thomas F. Woods, of Woods & Johnston, Tallahassee, for petitioners.

Prentice P. Pruitt and Donald R. Alexander, Tallahassee, for respondent Florida Public Service Commission.

Dan R. Schwartz and Norman J. Bo-linger, Jacksonville, for intervenor Florida Intrastate Rate Bureau.

PER CURIAM.

We have carefully reviewed this matter and conclude there is substantial competent evidence indicating there is a basis for some rate differential, as hereinafter indicated, between freight forwarders who provide pickup service for goods and commodities collected and distributed and those freight forwarders who do not provide such service.

We therefore sustain the present uniform tariffs and rates fixed by the Commission for freight forwarders, without prejudice, however, to Petitioner or any other freight forwarder making application for a separate pickup service rate, the same to reflect reasonable additional compensation for pickup service which would compensate them in a comparable manner as if they were providing warehouse services and receiving compensation therefor similarly as freight forwarders “grandfathered” under F.S., Section 323.64, F.S.A. It is not our intention that as among freight forwarders who provide pickup service and those who do not that either be given a competitive rate advantage over the other; instead, only that there be a balancing and equalizing differential in the rate structure as between them insofar as it is- reasonably possible to so provide, but not otherwise.

The Commission’s Orders, No. 10032 and No. 10228, are affirmed subject to the conditions hereinbefore stated.

It is so ordered.

CARLTON, C. J., and ERVIN, ADKINS, BOYD and DREW (Retired), JJ., concur.
#### Marvin BROWN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-1185.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 4, 1978.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Elliot H. Scherker, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Anthony C. Musto, John C. Moppert and Ronald A. Dion, Asst. Attys. Gen., for appellee.

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

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See: *Miles v. State,*160 Fla. 523, 36 So.2d 182, 183 (1948); *Miller v. State,*328 So.2d 544 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); *Bell v. State,*354 So.2d 1266 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); *White v. State,*324 So.2d 115 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); *Koontz*v. *State,*204 So.2d 224 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967).
#### UNITED BONDING INSURANCE COMPANY, an Indiana corporation, Appellant, v. SMITH & NEJAME PAINTING COMPANY, B. E. McCall Construction Co., Inc., B. E. McCall and Patricia A. McCall, his wife, Appellees.

No. 70-478.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 4, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We have issued our report dated April 11,2008 accompanying the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Phoenix Footwear Group, Inc. and subsidiaries (which report expressed an unqualified opinion and contains an explanatory paragraph relating to substantial doubt about theCompany’s ability to continue as a going concern) included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 29, 2007. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration Statements of PhoenixFootwear Group, Inc. and subsidiaries on Form S-8 (File No. 333-139788, effective January 3, 2007, File No. 333-139789 effective January 3, 2007, File No. 333-117245, effective July 8, 2004, File No. 333-116391,effective June 10, 2004 and File No. 333-69066, effective September 7, 2001). 

/s/ Grant Thornton LLP 

Irvine, California 

April 11, 2008
# C_2012402EN.01001201.xml

| 29.12.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 402/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.12.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 402/12

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

28 December 2012

2012/C 402/04

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3183 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 113,50 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4604 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,81695 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,5615 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2080 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,3375 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,140 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 290,79 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6978 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,0809 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4385 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,3584 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,2692 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3122 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,2191 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6053 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6124 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 407,37 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 11,2211 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,2172 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5500 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 705,29 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,0357 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 54,098 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 40,2300 |
| THB | Thai baht | 40,353 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,6928 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 17,1386 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 72,1835 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3183

JPY

Japanese yen

113,50

DKK

Danish krone

7,4604

GBP

Pound sterling

0,81695

SEK

Swedish krona

8,5615

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2080

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,3375

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,140

HUF

Hungarian forint

290,79

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6978

PLN

Polish zloty

4,0809

RON

Romanian leu

4,4385

TRY

Turkish lira

2,3584

AUD

Australian dollar

1,2692

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3122

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,2191

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6053

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6124

KRW

South Korean won

1 407,37

ZAR

South African rand

11,2211

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,2172

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5500

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 705,29

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,0357

PHP

Philippine peso

54,098

RUB

Russian rouble

40,2300

THB

Thai baht

40,353

BRL

Brazilian real

2,6928

MXN

Mexican peso

17,1386

INR

Indian rupee

72,1835

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
# C_2011313EN.01000601.xml

| 26.10.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 313/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/6

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

25 October 2011

2011/C 313/03

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3918 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 105,98 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4452 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,87010 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,1110 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2253 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,6855 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,906 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 297,07 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7040 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3815 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,3236 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,4955 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,3285 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3926 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,8235 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7356 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,7565 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 568,10 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 10,9862 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,8528 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4844 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 313,19 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,3525 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 60,063 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 42,4215 |
| THB | Thai baht | 42,923 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,4241 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 18,5666 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 68,9080 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3918

JPY

Japanese yen

105,98

DKK

Danish krone

7,4452

GBP

Pound sterling

0,87010

SEK

Swedish krona

9,1110

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2253

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,6855

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,906

HUF

Hungarian forint

297,07

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7040

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3815

RON

Romanian leu

4,3236

TRY

Turkish lira

2,4955

AUD

Australian dollar

1,3285

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3926

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,8235

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7356

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,7565

KRW

South Korean won

1 568,10

ZAR

South African rand

10,9862

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,8528

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4844

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 313,19

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,3525

PHP

Philippine peso

60,063

RUB

Russian rouble

42,4215

THB

Thai baht

42,923

BRL

Brazilian real

2,4241

MXN

Mexican peso

18,5666

INR

Indian rupee

68,9080

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
EXHIBIT 99.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF THE 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 on Form 10-Q of Vodavi  Technology,
Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly  period ended September 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, David A. Husband, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that:

     (3)  The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934 (15  U.S.C.  78m(a) or
          78o(d)); and

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


/s/ David A. Husband
--------------------------------
David A. Husband
Chief Financial Officer
November 12, 2002
#### Zophia KNAPOWSKA aka Sophia Knapowski, Appellant, v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY and Trudy Heaver, Appellees.

No. 69-25.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

Oct. 3, 1969.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 17, 1969.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
No. 11555.

#### The Wheeling & Lake Erie Railroad Co., by Worthington, Receiver, *v.*Peck, Admx.

Decided February 15, 1910.

Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

*Mr. Charles A. Seiders,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. George C. Bryce*and *Messrs. Marshall & Fraser,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Summers, C. J., Spear, Shauck and Price, JJ., concur.
#### STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Frederick Robert SMITH, Appellee.

No. 52248.

Supreme Court of Florida.

May 11, 1978.

James A. Gardner, State’s Atty., and R. John Cole, II, First Asst. State’s Atty., Sarasota, for appellant.

*1360No appearance, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *State v. Lee,*356 So.2d 276 (Fla.1978).

OVERTON, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, ENGLAND, SUNDBERG, HATCHETT and ALDERMAN, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS AND STATEMENTS OF CONSOLIDATED EARNINGS, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                               2,102
<SECURITIES>                                        53,096
<RECEIVABLES>                                       70,725
<ALLOWANCES>                                        (1,644)
<INVENTORY>                                         38,986
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   173,279
<PP&E>                                             144,477
<DEPRECIATION>                                     (58,234)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     294,791
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               52,480
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                               170
<OTHER-SE>                                         227,617
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       294,791
<SALES>                                            298,800
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   298,800
<CGS>                                              116,557
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      116,557
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      21
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     47,848
<INCOME-TAX>                                        14,773
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 33,075
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                        33,075
<EPS-BASIC>                                           2.18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         2.06



</TABLE>