alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### MARYLAND CASUALTY COMPANY, Appellant, v. Erie PLANT, Appellee.

No. 1-57.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.

March 19, 1968.

*281Beggs, Lane, Daniel, Gaines & Davis, Pensacola, for appellant.

Campbell & Rice, Crestview, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The defendant in an action to recover medical expenses under an automobile insurance policy has appealed from an adverse final judgment entered by the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County.

The sole question presented for our determination in this appeal, as stated by the appellant in its brief, is whether a provision in an automobile medical payments policy subrogating the insurance company to the rights of recovery for medical expenses which the insured may have against another is invalid under the law of Florida, as held in the judgment appealed from herein.

This question has recently been answered in the negative by two of our sister district courts of appeal and by the Florida Supreme Court.

In DeCespedes v. Prudence Mutual Casualty Co., 193 So.2d 224 (1967) the District Court of Appeal, Third District of Florida, held that an insured was not entitled to a recovery under the medical payment coverage of an automobile policy containing a subrogation clause after the insured had settled his claim against the third-party tort-feasor and executed a full release. In the course of its opinion the district court of appeal said:

> “The plaintiffs argue that the subro-gation clause amounts to an attempt to assign a claim for personal injuries, such an assignment being invalid under the common law and not expressly sanctioned by statute. We disagree, noting that such a clause has been enforced or upheld in New York, New Jersey and Illinois, among other states. See Application of Maak, 30 Misc.2d 610, 222 N.Y.S.2d 845 (1961); Smith v. Motor Club of America Ins. Co., 54 N.J. Super. 37, 148 A.2d 37 (Ch.Div.1959), affirming 56 N.J.Super. 203, 152 A.2d 369 (App.Div.1959), cert. den. 30 N.J. 563, 154 A.2d 451 (1959); Bernardi [Bernardini] v. Home & Automobile Ins. Co., 64 Ill.App.2d 465, 212 N.E.2d 499 (1965); Damhesel v. Hardware Dealers Mutual Fire Ins. Co., supra [60 Ill.App.2d 79, 209 N.E.2d 876]; Travelers Ins. Co. v. Lutz, 3 Ohio Mise. 144, 210 N.E.2d 755 (1964).”

The foregoing decision of the Third District Court of Appeal was approved by the Supreme Court of Florida in DeCespedes v. Prudence Mutual Casualty Co., 202 So.2d 561 (1967), as correctly deciding the question involved. To the same effect see the decision of the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Shelby Mutual Ins. Co. v. Birch, 196 So.2d 482 (1967), which decision was likewise approved by the Florida Supreme Court in Birch v. Shelby Mutual Ins. Co., 202 So.2d 561 (1967).

Accordingly, upon the authority of the above-cited cases, the final judgment appealed from herein must be, and it is, reversed, and the cause remanded with directions for further proceedings consistent with the views above set forth.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

WIGGINTON, C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD, K. and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned,
certifies that to the best of his knowledge (1) this Quarterly Report of Corporate Capital Trust, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (this 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition of the Company as of June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010.



|                      |  |     |  |                              
|--------------------- |  | --- |  | -----------------------------
|Date: August 12, 2011 |  | By: |  | /s/ Paul S. Saint-Pierre     
|                      |  |     |  | PAUL S. SAINT-PIERRE         
|                      |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer      
|                      |  |     |  | (Principal Financial Officer)
#### Ardith COBB, Appellant, v. CITY OF MIAMI, Appellee.

No. 71-73.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 26, 1971.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 30, 1971.

*377Pelzner & Schwedock, P. A., Miami, for appellant.

Bradford, Williams, McKay, Kimbrell, Hamann & Jennings, P.A. and L. Kenneth Barnett, Miami, for appellee.

Before SWANN, C. J., and PEARSON and HENDRY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant-plaintiff Ardith Cobb seeks review of a judgment entered pursuant to a jury verdict in a trial as to damages only (liability having been determined by summary judgment) in an automobile negligence action.

For reversal she claims that the $4,000.-00 jury verdict was unreasonable in view of special damages in the form of medical-hospital bills of $8,849.73, exclusive of pain and suffering. It is undisputed, however, that appellant had suffered injuries from several prior automobile accidents.

The test to be applied in determining the adequacy of a verdict is whether a jury of reasonable men could have returned the verdict. Boeck v. Diem, Fla.App.1971, 245 So.2d 687. Based on the record herein, we cannot say that the ver-diet awarded could not have been returned by a jury of reasonable men. One quite reasonable hypothesis is that the medical bills and pain and suffering were not wholly attributable to the accident then being litigated. Therefore, the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.
Table 1. National Summary of State Public

Employee Retirement System Finances:

Fiscal Year 2008

(Thousand dollars)

Item Amount Percent

Total receipts 56,645,613 100.0%

 Employee contributions 31,639,290 55.9%

 Government contributions 64,095,752 113.2%

 State government contributions 28,340,230 50.0%

 Local government contributions 35,755,522 63.1%

 Earnings on investments(1) -39,089,429 -69.0%

Total payments 157,459,093 100.0%

 Benefits 143,453,487 91.1%

 Withdrawals 3,260,178 2.1%

 Other payments 10,745,428 6.8%

Total cash and investment holdings 2,670,483,906 100.0%

Cash and short-term investments 66,321,984 2.5%

Total securities 2,237,097,553 83.8%

 Governmental securities 197,554,688 7.4%

 Federal government 196,302,107 7.4%

 United States Treasury 119,174,614 4.5%

 Federal agency 77,127,493 2.9%

 State and local government 1,252,581 0.0%

 Nongovernmental 2,039,542,865 76.4%

 Corporate bonds 431,406,612 16.2%

 Corporate stocks 951,034,623 35.6%

 Mortgages 9,476,389 0.4%

 Funds held in trust 58,585,393 2.2%

 Foreign and international 396,971,226 14.9%

 Other nongovernmental 192,068,622 7.2%

Other investments 367,064,369 13.7%

 Real property 79,794,658 3.0%

 Miscellaneous investments 287,269,711 10.8%

Pension Obligations 2,912,759,428 100.00%

Covered Payroll 535,940,463 100.00%

Data Created: February 25, 2011

Data Last Revised: April 22, 2011

(1) The total of "net earnings" is a calculated statistic (the item code in the data file 

is X08), and thus can be positive or negative. Net earnings is the sum of earnings 

on investments plus gains on investments minus losses on investments. The 

change made in 2002 for asset valuation from book to market value in accordance 

with Statement 34 of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board is reflected in 

the calculated statistics.

Source: 2008 Annual Survey of Public Employee Retirement Systems. Data users 

who create their own estimates using data from this report should cite the U.S. 

Census Bureau as the source of the original data only. The data in this table are 

based on information from public records and contain no confidential data. 

Although the data in this table come from a census of retirement systems and are 

not subject to sampling error, the census results do contain nonsampling error. 

Additional information on nonsampling error, and response rates may be found at 

http://www.census.gov/govs/retire/how_data_collected.html.
# CA2013293EN.01000101.xml

| 9.10.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CA 293/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.10.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CA 293/1

---

RESERVE LIST (1)

1

OPEN COMPETITION EPSO/AD/238/12 (GRADE AD 7)

ENGLISH LANGUAGE (EN) CONFERENCE INTERPRETERS

(2013/C 293 A/01)

| BELCHER | Mark |
| --- | --- |
| GIUSSANI | Cecilia Rachele |
| IMRAY | Reuben |
| LIPPA | Catherine Pamela |
| RAIKES | Felicity |

BELCHER

Mark

GIUSSANI

Cecilia Rachele

IMRAY

Reuben

LIPPA

Catherine Pamela

RAIKES

Felicity

The reserve list will be valid until 9 July 2016.

9 July 2016

---

(1)  A successful candidate may explicitly request her/his name not be published.

1

---
#### STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Robert L. COSSACK and David A. Hutchins, Appellees.

No. 67-83.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

Dec. 15, 1967.

*345Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Robert R. Crittenden, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lakeland, for appellant.

John J. Duffy and Mosley & Donahey, Clearwater, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The State of Florida appeals from an order quashing an indictment filed against ap-pellees charging them with assault with intent to commit rape.

The quashed indictment charged that ap-pellees

> “in and upon one MARY JEAN MITCHELL, a female person over the age of ten years, an assault did make, and her, the said MARY JEAN MITCHELL, did then and there forcibly and against her will attempt to ravish and carnally know, in that the said ROBERT COSSACK did then and there remove the slacks and underwear from the said MARY JEAN MITCHELL and the said DAVID A. HUTCHINS did hold her head and prevent her from screaming while the said ROBERT COSSACK did expose his sexual organ and lay on top of the said MARY JEAN MITCHELL and the said ROBERT COSSACK did attempt to effect sexual intercourse until he concluded he was physically unable to consummate the act of sexual intercourse * ***

The court below quashed the indictment on the ground that

> “the specific overt acts alleged in the indictment beginning with the phrase, ‘In that the said ROBERT COSSACK did’, in the body of the indictment, qualify in specific terms the general" conclusions of the substantive offense theretofore alleged; and said specific overt acts are hereby held to be insufficiently alleged to support the general conclusions that the offense was committed forceably and against the will of the alleged victim.”

The only purpose of an indictment is fairly to apprise the defendant of the offense with which he is charged. Drozewski v. State, Fla.1955, 84 So.2d 329, 330. No indictment should be quashed “unless the court shall be of the opinion that the indictment * * * is so vague, indistinct and indefinite as to mislead the accused and embarrass him in the preparation of his defense or expose him after conviction or acquittal to substantial danger of a new prosecution for the same offense.” Fla.Stat., Sec. 906.25 (1965), F.S.A. The indictment quoted above clearly advised appellees of the crime with which they were charged and was not so vague as to mislead them and embarrass them in the preparation of their defense or to expose them to possible double jeopardy.

Consequently, the order quashing the indictment is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.

ALLEN, Acting C. J., and SHANNON and PIERCE, JJ., concur.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3159

To amend title 38, United States Code, to codify the addition by the Secretary

of Veterans Affairs of certain additional diseases to the list of diseases

occurring in veterans that are considered to be service-connected.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 28, 1993

Mr. EVANS (for himself, Mr. KENNEDY, and Mr. FILNER) introduced the

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

A BILL

To amend title 38, United States Code, to codify the addition

by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs of certain additional

diseases to the list of diseases occurring in veterans

that are considered to be service-connected.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. CODIFICATION OF ADDITIONAL SERVICE-CON4 NECTED PRESUMPTIONS.

5 Section 1116(a)(2) of title 38, United States Code,

6 is amended by adding at the end the following new sub7 paragraphs:
2

•HR 3159 IH

1 ‘‘(D) Cancer of the lung, of the larynx, or of

2 the trachea.

3 ‘‘(E) Multiple myeloma.’’.

4 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

5 The amendment made by section 1 shall take effect

6 on the date on which a final regulation prescribed by the

7 Secretary of Veterans Affairs as required by section

8 1116(c) of title 38, United States Code, takes effect estab9 lishing a presumption of service connection for the disabil10 ities specified in that amendment.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          23,595
<SECURITIES>                                     6,994
<RECEIVABLES>                                   29,701
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,964)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                68,713
<PP&E>                                          29,261
<DEPRECIATION>                                (10,415)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 257,337
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,960
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       240,321
<OTHER-SE>                                    (17,047)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   257,337
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                71,601
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   39,936
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                63,345
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   573
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (30,852)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (925)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (29,402)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (29,402)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.99)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.99)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                       9,746,244
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,623,053
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (441,208)
<INVENTORY>                                  7,613,256
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            26,073,905
<PP&E>                                       4,585,628<F1>
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              46,320,945
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,047,720
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       136,654
<OTHER-SE>                                  36,475,264
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                46,320,945
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            12,100,834
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,887,163
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             8,640,284
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (5,008,591)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (5,008,591)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (5,008,591)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.70)<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.70)<F2>
<FN>
<F1>PP&E IS SHOWN NET OF ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION AS REPORTED WITHIN THE QUARTERLY
REPORT ON FORM 10-Q ON THE BALANCE SHEET
<F2>IN ACCORDANCE WITH SFAS NO. 128 "EARNINGS PER SHARE - BASIC" IS REPORTED AS THE
VALUE OF (EPS-PRIMARY) TAG AND "EARNINGS PER SHARE - DILUTED" IS REPORTED AS
THE VALUE FOR (EPS-DILUTED) TAG
</FN>


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3165 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3165

  To authorize a foreign-built launch barge to transport an offshore 
 drilling platform jacket in the coastwise trade of the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 28, 1993

  Mr. Tauzin introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
               Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To authorize a foreign-built launch barge to transport an offshore 
 drilling platform jacket in the coastwise trade of the United States.

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

SECTION 1. COASTWISE TRADE AUTHORIZATION.

    Notwithstanding section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920 (46 
App. U.S.C. 883), or any other provision of law restricting the 
operation of a foreign-flag vessel in the coastwise trade of the United 
States, the foreign-flag vessel H-851 may engage in the coastwise trade 
of the United States to transport an offshore drilling platform jacket 
from a place near Aransas Pass, Texas, to a site on the Outer 
Continental Shelf known as Viosca Knoll 989.

                                 <all>
```
#### BELK LINDSEY COMPANY OF TAMPA, Florida and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Appellants, v. Susanne SANDERS and Harold L. Sanders, her husband, Appellees.

No. 73-211.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Nov. 7, 1973.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Willmon H. MAGEE v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY.

No. 53348.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 27, 1973.

JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS

On joint motion of petitioner and defendant through their undersigned counsel of record and upon suggesting to the Court that the above entitled and numbered cause has been compromised and settled; and accordingly, movers desire that said proceedings be dismissed, 276 So.2d 752.

Ordered that the above entitled and numbered cause be and the same is hereby dismissed.
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 USC, SECTION
1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with
the Quarterly Report of InterCore Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2012, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the “Report”), I, James F. Groelinger,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:



(1)       The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



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



|Dated:  August 20, 2012 |     |                                
|----------------------- | --- | -------------------------------
|                        |     | /s/         James F. Groelinger
|                        | By: | James F. Groelinger            
|                        |     | Chief Executive Officer        



A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to InterCore Energy, Inc. and will be retained by InterCore Energy, Inc. and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Arthur M. BOBRICK and Charlotte Bobrick, Appellants, v. TOWER VALLANDRY OF IBIS ISLE ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellee.

No. 73-495.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Dec. 28, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
# C_2013143EN.01000201.xml

| 23.5.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 143/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.5.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 143/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

22 May 2013

2013/C 143/02

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2923 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 133,26 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4535 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,85570 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,5451 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2599 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,4650 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 26,069 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 289,06 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7002 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1784 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,3479 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,3791 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,3253 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3315 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,0301 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,5923 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6314 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 440,76 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 12,2836 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,9232 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5745 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 619,13 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 3,9047 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 53,254 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 40,3220 |
| THB | Thai baht | 38,511 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,6344 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 15,9251 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 71,8070 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2923

JPY

Japanese yen

133,26

DKK

Danish krone

7,4535

GBP

Pound sterling

0,85570

SEK

Swedish krona

8,5451

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2599

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,4650

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

26,069

HUF

Hungarian forint

289,06

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7002

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1784

RON

Romanian leu

4,3479

TRY

Turkish lira

2,3791

AUD

Australian dollar

1,3253

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3315

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,0301

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,5923

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6314

KRW

South Korean won

1 440,76

ZAR

South African rand

12,2836

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,9232

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5745

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 619,13

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

3,9047

PHP

Philippine peso

53,254

RUB

Russian rouble

40,3220

THB

Thai baht

38,511

BRL

Brazilian real

2,6344

MXN

Mexican peso

15,9251

INR

Indian rupee

71,8070

---

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

1

Source

---