alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Doyle B. MALONE v. Dickie Lee Parris MALONE.

No. 9129.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.

Dec. 26, 1972.

Andrew J. Bennett, Jr., Baton Rouge, for appellant.

J. Randolph Smith and J. Carl Parker-son, Monroe, for appellee.

Before LOTTINGER, ELLIS and CU-TRER, JJ.

CUTRER, Judge.

This case was consolidated with Doyle R. Malone v. Dickie Lee Parris Malone, 271 So.2d 598 in which a separate judgment is rendered by us this date. For the reasons stated in our decision in the companion case, the judgment appealed is affirmed.

The costs of this appeal are assessed against plaintiff-appellant.

Affirmed.
#### John LUCYSZYN, Appellant, v. Teodore LUCYSZYN and Anna Lucyszyn, his wife, Appellees.

No. 2038.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Sept. 13, 1968.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Broward County; L. Clayton Nance, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
**Exhibit        32.1**

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

|   | 1. | The                  Report 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 report fairly presents, in all material                  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of                  the                  Company. |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                    |                                                                                     |                                    |
|-----------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
|                                    | **Tradequest                International, Inc.**                                        |
|                               |                                                                                |                               |
| Date: June                15, 2005 | By:                                                                            | /s/ Ash                Mascarenhas |
|                                    | Ash Mascarenhas                                                                          |
|                                    | Title:                Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial                Officer |
#### THE FLORIDA BAR, Complainant, v. Benjamin COHEN, Respondent.

No. 35049.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 21, 1968.

Richard C. McFarlain, Tallahassee, for The Florida Bar, complainant.

Marion E. Sibley, Miami Beach, for respondent.

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the judgment of the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar, dated April 1, 1967, filed herein April 5, 1967 and duly served upon the respondent finding him guilty of violation of Title 26, U.S.Code, Section 7201, a felony, and suspending him from the practice of law in Florida until July 1, 1967 and thereafter until he shall demonstrate his rehabilitation, and it now appearing from the records in this cause that the said respondent was released from the United States Department of Justice Bureau of Prisons on January 11, 1968 at the expiration of his sentence less good time credits, and the Court further finding that disciplinary proceedings referred to in this Court’s suspension order of January 6, 1967 have been concluded by the judgment heretofore referred to and the Court being advised of its judgment in the premises, it is

Ordered that the suspension of the said Benjamin Cohen from the practice of law entered January 6, 1967 be and the same is hereby continued in full force and effect until such time as he shall demonstrate to the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar and this Court, in appropriate proceedings, his rehabilitation and entitlement to be reinstated to the practice of law in this State.

It is so ordered.

CALDWELL, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS, DREW and THORNAL, JJ., concur.
#### Lewis JACKSON, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 76-1531.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 5, 1978.

Jack 0. Johnson, Public Defender, and Susan G. Sexton, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Mary Jo M. Gallay, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant/defendant Lewis Jackson, Jr. was found guilty of attempted robbery with a firearm and aggravated assault with intent to commit a felony, to wit: robbery on July 20,1976 and sentenced on each offense to consecutive terms of five years imprisonment. We affirm both the judgments, but the sentences must be reversed and vacated since the offenses were facets of the same transaction.

The state introduced evidence at trial that appellant and his codefendant, Ernest Weeks, rang J. Martin Burkholder’s doorbell late one night. When Burkholder opened the door, appellant and Weeks entered the house saying that it was a stickup, to give them his money, and to get on the floor. Before Burkholder could respond appellant began hitting him on the head with a gun. While this was going on another member of the household, Sandra Daugh-tery, entered the room, and Weeks grabbed and held her while appellant and Burkhold*1352er scuffled. Appellant tried to take Burk-holder’s wallet but was unable to get it out of his pocket. The two men eventually left without the wallet.

Under these facts the aggravated assault and the attempted robbery were facets of the same transaction, and appellant may be sentenced only for one of the offenses. *Nowlin v. State,*320 So.2d 468 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975), *rev’d on other grounds,*346 So.2d 1020 (Fla.1977). We find no error in any of the other points raised by appellant.

Accordingly, the judgments are affirmed, the sentences are vacated, and the cause remanded for resentencing of appellant on the greater of the two charges, the attempted robbery.

BOARDMAN, C. J., and GRIMES and RYDER, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3559 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3559

To amend the Dayton Aviation Heritage Preservation Act of 1992, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 19, 1993

 Mr. Hall of Ohio introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                   the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Dayton Aviation Heritage Preservation Act of 1992, and for 
                            other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 201(b) of 
the Dayton Aviation Heritage Preservation Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-
419, approved October 16, 1992), is amended as follows:
            (1) In paragraph (2), by striking ``from recommendations'' 
        and inserting ``after consideration of recommendations''.
            (2) In paragraph (4), by striking ``from recommendations'' 
        and inserting ``after consideration of recommendations''.
            (3) In paragraph (5), by striking ``from recommendations'' 
        and inserting ``after consideration of recommendations''.
            (4) In paragraph (6), by striking ``from recommendations'' 
        and inserting ``after consideration of recommendations''.
            (5) In paragraph (7), by striking ``from recommendations'' 
        and inserting ``after consideration of recommendations''.

                                 <all>
```
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Joyce Lynn CARPENTER v. J. D. MIDDLEBROOKS, Superintendent of L. C. I. W., Elayn Hunt, Director of Dept. of Correction.

No. 54322.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 1, 1974.

In re: Joyce Lynn Carpenter applying for Remedial Writs of Certiorari, Mandamus, Prohibition and Habeas Corpus.

Granted. A hearing on the application is ordered unless respondents show cause to the contrary within IS days.

BARHAM, J.,

concurs. The hearing should develop whether adequate and equal legal services are afforded at St. Gabriel Institute. If the respondent stipulates with relator a differentiation and the extent of it, a hearing may not be required.

SUMMERS, J., is of the opinion the showing made does not warrant the exercise of this Court’s supervisory jurisdiction.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                        Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 33-55547, 33-55657 and 333-42019) of Coram Healthcare Corporation
of our report dated March 27, 1998 with respect to the consolidated financial
statements and schedule of Coram Healthcare Corporation included in this Annual
Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1997.

We also consent to the incorporation by referenced in Amendment No. 3 to the
Registration Statements (Form S-3 No. 33-59661 and 33-60959) and Amendment No. 1
to the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-12955) and related Prospectuses
of Coram Healthcare Corporation for the registration of 3,526,325, 2,686,656 and
184,444 shares, respectively, of its common stock, of our report dated March 27,
1998, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of
Coram Healthcare Corporation included in the above-referenced Form 10-K.


                                             ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Denver, Colorado
March 27, 1998
250 La. 535

#### Marie Josephine COURVILLE, individually and on behalf of her minor children v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY and Succession or unknown heirs of Lawrence Peilerin.

No. 48633.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 14, 1967.

In re: Marie Josephine Courville, individually and on behalf of her minor children applying for certiorari or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Lafayette. 194 So.2d 797.

Writ refused.

There appears no error of law in the judgment of the Court of Appeal.
---

Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATIONPursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 (Section
302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Avenue
South Ltd. (the Company) for the quarter ended September 30, 2010, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Irina Goldman, President (Principal Executive Officer) and Principal Accounting
Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

|Date: January 20, 2011 | By: /s/ Irina
      Goldman                                         
|---------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------
|                       | Name: Irina Goldman                                                 
|                       | Title: President and Principal Accounting
      Officer             
|                       | (principal executive officer and principal
      accounting officer)

---
#### STATE of Florida ex rel. J. G. McDANIELS, Petitioner, v. The Honorable Murray GOODMAN, as Judge of the Criminal Court of Record In and For Dade County, Florida, Respondent.

No. 40299.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 24, 1971.

Michael A. Masin, of Prebish & Masin, Miami, for petitioner.

PER CURIAM.

The writ of certiorari issued in this cause is discharged and the petition is dismissed on authority of Clawson et al. v. Baker, 245 So.2d 223 (Fla.1971).

It is so ordered.

ROBERTS, C. J., and ERVIN, CARLTON, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3599

To provide for the transfer of certain tuna fishing vessels documented in

the United States to foreign registry.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOVEMBER 20, 1993

Ms. SCHENK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries

A BILL

To provide for the transfer of certain tuna fishing vessels

documented in the United States to foreign registry.

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

3 SECTION 1. TRANSFER OF REGISTRY FOR CERTAIN FISH4 ING VESSELS.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The transfer of registry of a tuna

6 fishing vessel which is an agreement vessel documented

7 under the laws of the United States to foreign registry

8 shall not be treated, for purposes of the Merchant Marine

9 Act, 1936, or any other law of the United States, as—

10 (1) a disposition of such vessel, or
2

•HR 3599 IH

1 (2) a failure to meet any substantial obligation

2 under an agreement entered into between the owner

3 or operator of the vessel and the Secretary,

4 if the vessel continues to be owned, directly or indirectly,

5 by a United States person and to be operated in compli6 ance with the first section 307 of the Marine Mammal

7 Protection Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1417).

8 (b) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this section—

9 (1) any term defined in section 607(k) of the

10 Merchant Marine Act, 1936 (46 App. U.S.C.

11 1177(k)) that is used in this section shall have the

12 meaning given that term in that section; and

13 (2) the term ‘‘United States person’’ has the

14 meaning given that term in section 7701(a)(30) of

15 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C.

16 7701(a)(30)).

17 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section shall apply to

18 any transfer of registry effected before January 1, 1996.

Æ
# C_2014234EN.01000101.xml

| 19.7.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 234/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.7.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 234/1

---

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION

concerning the quantity not applied for to be added to the quantity fixed for the subperiod 1 October to 31 December 2014 under certain quotas opened by the Union for pigmeat products

2014/C 234/01

Commission Regulation (EC) No 442/2009 (1) opened tariff quotas for imports of pigmeat products. The import licence applications lodged during the first seven days of June 2014 for the subperiod 1 July to 30 September 2014 do not, for quotas 09.4038, 09.4170 and 09.4204, cover the quantities available. Pursuant to the second sentence of Article 7(4) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006 (2), the quantities that were not applied for are to be added to the quantity fixed for the quota subperiod 1 October to 31 December 2014; they are set out in the Annex to this notice.

1

2

---

(1)  OJ L 129, 28.5.2009, p. 13.

1

(2)  OJ L 238, 1.9.2006, p. 13.

2

---

ANNEX

| Quota order number | Quantities not applied for, to be added to the quantity fixed for the subperiod 1 October to 31 December 2014
  (in kg) |
| --- | --- |
| 09.4038 | 8 586 250 |
| 09.4170 | 1 230 500 |
| 09.4204 | 1 156 000 |

Quota order number

Quantities not applied for, to be added to the quantity fixed for the subperiod 1 October to 31 December 2014

(in kg)

09.4038

8 586 250

09.4170

1 230 500

09.4204

1 156 000

---
#### CITY OF ST. PETERSBURG, Florida, Petitioner, Cross-Respondent, v. Jack BARROW et al., Respondents, Cross-Petitioners.

No. 43244.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 27, 1973.

Certiorari denied.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3330 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3330

  To amend title 18, United States Code, with respect to civil rights 
                            related crimes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 21, 1993

 Mr. Conyers introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend title 18, United States Code, with respect to civil rights 
                            related crimes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Civil Rights Crimes Act of 1993''.

SEC. 2. REVISION OF SECTION 242.

    (a) In General.--Section 242 of title 18 of the United States Code 
is amended to read as follows:
``Sec. 242. Interfering with civil rights
    ``(a) Offense.--Whoever--
            ``(1) under color of law, intentionally engages in conduct 
        and thereby recklessly deprives another person of a right, 
        privilege, or immunity secured or protected by the Constitution 
        or laws of the United States; or
            ``(2) intentionally injures, oppresses, threatens, or 
        intimidates another person because of such other person's 
        having exercised a right, privilege, or immunity secured or 
        protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States;
or attempts to do so, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b) 
of this section.
    ``(b) Punishment.--The punishment for an offense under this section 
is--
            ``(1) a fine under this title or imprisonment for life or 
        for any term of years, or both such fine and imprisonment, if 
        the defendant intends to produce bodily injury and recklessly 
        causes the death of any person;
            ``(2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not 
        longer than 10 years, or both such fine and imprisonment, if 
        the defendant intentionally causes bodily injury to another 
        person; and
            ``(3) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not 
        longer than 1 year, or both such fine and imprisonment, in any 
        other case.
    ``(c) Question of Law.--In a prosecution under this subsection, it 
is a question of law (as to which no state of mind need be proved) 
whether what the victim was deprived of or exercised was a right, 
privilege, or immunity secured or protected by the Constitution or laws 
of the United States.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of 
chapter 13 of title 18 of the United States Code is amended so that the 
item relating to section 242 reads as follows:

``242. Injuries and deprivations of rights under color of law.''.

                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3454 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3454

  To amend the provisions of title 39, United States Code, to provide 
 that certain periodical publications shall not be bound publications 
       for mail classification purposes, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 4, 1993

  Mr. Porter introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
               Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the provisions of title 39, United States Code, to provide 
 that certain periodical publications shall not be bound publications 
       for mail classification purposes, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS EXCLUDED FROM CLASSIFICATION 
              AS BOUND PUBLICATIONS.

    Section 3626 of title 39, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) by redesignating the second subsection (k) as 
        subsection (l); and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(m) In the administration of this section, a weekly periodical 
publication which is eligible to publish legal notices under the laws 
of any State, the pages of which were customarily secured by 2 staples 
before March 19, 1989, shall not be considered to be a bound 
publication for mail classification purposes solely because its pages 
continue to be secured by 2 staples after that date.''.

                                 <all>
```
#### Charles K. SIMMONS v. R. K. BONSLAGEL.

No. 46970.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Jan. 29, 1973.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 19, 1973.

Sullivan, Sullivan & Keyes, Jackson, for appellant.

Heidelberg, Woodliff & Franks, William H. Brown, Jr., Jackson, for appellee.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Hinds County; Leon F. Hendrick, Judge.

Before RODGERS, P. J., and PATTERSON, INZER, SMITH and ROBERTSON, JJ.

Affirmed.