alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Davis Unemployment Compensation Case.

Argued December 13, 1961.

Before Ervin, Wright, Woodside, Watkins, Montgomery, and Flood, JJ. (Rhodes, P. J., absent).

*Richard S.*Mailman, for appellant.

*Sydney*Reuben, Assistant Attorney General, with Mm *David*Stahl, Attorney General, for Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, appellee.

January 16, 1962:

Opinion by

Watkins, J.,

TMs is an unemployment compensation appeal wherein tbe Bureau of Employment Security awarded benefits but, on appeal, tbe referee reversed tbe bureau and tbe Unemployment Compensation Board affirmed this action and denied benefits on tbe ground that the *265claimant’s unemployment was due to Ms discharge for willful misconduct in connection with his work under the provisions of §402(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law, 43 PS §802 (e).

The claimant, Samuel Davis, was last employed by Berk Industries, Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on March 31, 1961, as a jig boring machine operator, at $2.85 an hour. He had been so employed for nine months. The board found as a fact that, “Over the period of claimant’s employment for Berk Industries, Inc. he repeatedly and continually encouraged co-employees to leave their employment; told his employer that other employees were dissatisfied with their employment when such was not the case; and circulated false rumors concerning co-employees among others at his place of employment; and generally undermined employee relations at his place of employment.” The board also found that he had been warned of these activities but continued them.

Although the claimant denied the charged activities and despite some conflict of testimony, there is competent evidence to support the findings in this record. The credibility of the witnesses, the weight of their testimony, and the reasonable inferences to be drawn from it are for the board. *Ristis Unemployment Compensation Case,*178 Pa. Superior Ct. 400, 116 A. 2d 271 (1955). In this case the misconduct was clearly against the employer’s interest; was deliberately and flagrantly in disregard of the standards of behavior which the employer had the right to expect of his employee; and clearly constitutes willful misconduct under the law as decided many times by this Court. *Gagliardi Unemployment Compensation Case,*186 Pa. Superior Ct. 142, 141 A. 2d 410 (1958); *Koble Unemployment Compensation Case,*190 Pa. Superior Ct. 565, 155 A. 2d 223 (1959).

Decision affirmed.
1st Amendment to employement agreement



 EXHIBIT 10.9(gg) 
  
 FIRST AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 
  
 This FIRST AMENDMENT is made by and between PEDIATRIC SERVICES OF AMERICA, INC. (“PSA” or
“Company”), a Delaware corporation, and DANIEL J. KOHL (“EMPLOYEE”), and individual residing in the State of Georgia. 
  
 WHEREAS, EMPLOYEE and PSA previously entered into that certain Employment Agreement dated as of December 1, 2004, (the “Employment
Agreement”); and 
  
 WHEREAS, EMPLOYEE and PSA desire to
further amend certain terms and provisions of the Employment Agreement; 
  
 NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed that: 
  

	 	1.	Section 3.6 of the Employment Agreement is amended by deleting the paragraph and replacing it with the following: 

  
 3.6 Car Allowance. PSA shall pay EMPLOYEE $600.00 per month for a
car allowance and shall pay reasonable and appropriate maintenance, insurance, operating expenses and taxes related thereto. 
  

	 	2.	Except as specifically amended herein, the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 

  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the day, month and year first set forth below each
parties’ signature. 
  

							
	DANIEL J. KOHL	 	 	 	PEDIATRIC SERVICES OF AMERICA, INC.
				
	/s/    Daniel J. Kohl        	 	 	 	BY:	 	/s/    Robert P. Pinkas        
	  
 DATE:    7/29/05
	 	 	 	         Authorized Signature
  
 NAME:   Robert P. Pinkas, Chairman of Compensation
   Committee of the Board of Directors
  
 DATE:    7/29/05
#### JACKSONVILLE ELECTRIC AUTHORITY, Appellant, v. BEEMIK BUILDERS & CONSTRUCTORS, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. BL-297.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Dec. 30, 1986.

*330Gerald A. Schneider, Gen. Counsel, William Lee Allen, and Cindy A. Laquidara-Kenney, Asst. Counsel, Jacksonville, for appellant.

Earl S. Poitevent, III, Jacksonville, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Jacksonville Electric Company (JEA) appeals the trial court’s nonfinal order denying JEA’s request to dissolve the temporary injunction and finding JEA in contempt of court for violating the terms of the injunction by failing to pay a previously approved draw to the contractor.

Having found that the temporary injunction was incorrectly issued in an earlier ease, this issue now before the court is moot. *Jacksonville Elec. v. Beemik Builders,*487 So.2d 372 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). Without addressing the merits of the other issues raised by JEA and in light of this court’s earlier opinion reversing the injunction order, we find the trial court’s order purporting to enforce the injunction (via contempt proceeding) by ordering JEA to make certain monetary payments to be likewise invalid.

REVERSED.

SMITH, SHIVERS and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.
Sample of Common Stock Certificate



 Exhibit 4.6 
  



 







 NATIONWIDE HEALTH PROPERTIES, INC. 
  
 Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. is authorized to issue two classes of shares, Common and Preferred, and the Preferred may
be issued in one or more series. The corporation will furnish to any stockholder, on request and without charge, a statement of the designations, preferences, conversions and other rights, voting powers, restrictions, limitations as to dividends,
qualifications and terms and conditions of redemption of the stock of each class, or series, which the corporation is authorized to issue and any other information required by Section 2-211 of the Corporations and Associations Article of the
Annotated Code of Maryland. The board of directors of the corporation has authority to fix all or any of the dividend rights, dividend rate, conversion rights, voting rights, rights and terms of redemption (including sinking fund provisions), the
redemption price or prices, and the liquidation preferences of any wholly unissued Preferred shares or of any wholly unissued series of Preferred shares, the number of shares constituting any unissued series of Preferred shares, and the designations
of such series. 
  
 The transfer of these shares to any person who
would thereby hold beneficial interest of more than 9.9% of the outstanding shares of stock of the corporation may be prohibited or void or subject to other transfer restrictions or redemption rights as set forth in the Articles of Incorporation.
The corporation will furnish information concerning such restrictions to any stockholder on request and without charge. 
  
 The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full
according to applicable laws or regulations: 
  

											
	TEN COM	  	 — as tenants in common
	  	UNIF GIFT MIN ACT—	 	___________	  	Custodian	  	__________
						
	TEN ENT	  	 — as tenants by the entireties
	  	 	 	(Cust)	  	 	  	(Minor)
				
	JT TEN	  	 — as joint tenants with right of
	  	 	 	under Uniform Gifts to Minors
	 	  	     survivorship and not as Act tenants	  	 	 	Act  _____________________
	 	  	     in common	  	 	 	 	  	(State)	  	 
		
	 	  	     Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5


<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                  JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                        121,340
<SECURITIES>                  103,500
<RECEIVABLES>                 429,695
<ALLOWANCES>                  (50,391)
<INVENTORY>                   172,654
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              892,288
<PP&E>                        1,307,646
<DEPRECIATION>                (1,030,257)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                9,462,743
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         13,306,401
<BONDS>                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         0
<PREFERRED>                   240,000
<COMMON>                      669,143
<OTHER-SE>                    (8,108,481)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  9,462,743
<SALES>                       5,784,962
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              5,784,962
<CGS>                         6,034,183
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 4,768,832
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            536,888
<INCOME-PRETAX>               (5,554,941)
<INCOME-TAX>                  800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           (5,555,741)
<DISCONTINUED>                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>               0
<CHANGES>                     0
<NET-INCOME>                  (5,555,741)
<EPS-BASIC>                   (.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                 (.08)


</TABLE>
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Paul BURGESS and James L. Fitzgerald.

No. 88-KD-1314.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 26, 1988.

In re State of Louisiana; applying for supervisory and/or remedial writs; Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court, Div. “D”, No. 87-3423.

Granted, to be docketed as an appeal.
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

The Board of Directors NYMAGIC, INC.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No. 3310780,
2-94924 and 33-88342 on Form S-8 of NYMAGIC,  INC. of our report dated  February
14, 1997  relating to the  consolidated  balance  sheets of  NYMAGIC,  INC.  and
subsidiaries  as of  December  31, 1996 and 1995,  and the related  consolidated
statements of income,  shareholders' equity and cash flows for each of the years
in the three-year  period ended December 31 1996, and related  schedules,  which
report  appears in the December 31, 1996 Annual  Report on Form 10-K of NYMAGIC,
INC. Our report refers to the adoption of the provisions of Financial Accounting
Standards   Board's  Statement  of  Financial   Accounting   Standards  No.  115
"Accounting for Certain  Investments in Debt and Equity  Securities,"  effective
January 1, 1994.


                                             /s/ KPMG Peat Marwick LLP


New York, New York
March 25, 1997
J.

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A Despite our conclusion, we are concerned that the district

court sentenced Holliday to a term of incarceration after previously entering an order dismissing her case and setting aside the conviction. We question the propriety of the district court's subsequent vacating of that order discharging her from probation and dismissing the case after it was brought to the court's attention. We point out that Holliday's amended judgment of conviction was filed in the district court on August 14, 2012. Therefore, although we express no opinion regarding the merits of such an action, we note that she has one year from that date to file a timely habeas petition in the district court challenging the constitutionality of her conviction and sentence. See NRS 34.724(1) & (2)(b); NRS 34.726(1); Edwards v. State, 112 Nev. 704, 708, 918 P.2d 321, 324 (1996) ("Issues concerning the validity of a conviction or sentence . . . must be raised in habeas proceedings.").

Having concluded that Holliday failed to establish this court's jurisdiction, we

ORDER this app ged 

### rmsyissED.

Douglas Gibbons

cc: Hon. Jerome T. Tao, District Judge Clark County Public Defender Cassandra June Holliday Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

2
# Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali C 123A/16 t

| | ISSN 1977-0987 |
| --- | --- |
| Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali
  tal-Unjoni Ewropea | C 123A |
| | |
| Edizzjoni bil-Malti | Informazzjoni u Avviżi | Volum 6316 ta' April 2020 |

ISSN 1977-0987

Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali

tal-Unjoni Ewropea

C 123A

Edizzjoni bil-Malti

Informazzjoni u Avviżi

Volum 6316 ta' April 2020

---

| Werrej | Paġna |
| --- | --- |
| | Rettifika |
| 2020/C 123 A/01 | Rettifika għall-avviż ta’ kompetizzjonijiet miftuħa — EPSO/AD/375/20 — Ġuristi lingwisti (AD 7) tal-lingwa Daniża (DA) — EPSO/AD/376/20 — Ġuristi lingwisti (AD 7) tal-lingwa Griega (EL) — EPSO/AD/377/20 — Ġuristi lingwisti (AD 7) tal-lingwa Franċiża (FR) — EPSO/AD/378/20 — Ġuristi lingwisti (AD 7) tal-lingwa Kroata (HR) — EPSO/AD/379/20 — Ġuristi lingwisti (AD 7) tal-lingwa Pollakka (PL) ( ĠU C 72 A, 5.3.2020 ) | 1 |

Werrej

Paġna

Rettifika

2020/C 123 A/01

Rettifika għall-avviż ta’ kompetizzjonijiet miftuħa — EPSO/AD/375/20 — Ġuristi lingwisti (AD 7) tal-lingwa Daniża (DA) — EPSO/AD/376/20 — Ġuristi lingwisti (AD 7) tal-lingwa Griega (EL) — EPSO/AD/377/20 — Ġuristi lingwisti (AD 7) tal-lingwa Franċiża (FR) — EPSO/AD/378/20 — Ġuristi lingwisti (AD 7) tal-lingwa Kroata (HR) — EPSO/AD/379/20 — Ġuristi lingwisti (AD 7) tal-lingwa Pollakka (PL) ( ĠU C 72 A, 5.3.2020 )

( ĠU C 72 A, 5.3.2020 )

1

---

| MT | |
| --- | --- |

MT

---

Rettifika

| 16.4.2020 | MT | Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea | CA 123/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.4.2020

MT

Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea

CA 123/1

---

Rettifika għall-avviż ta’ kompetizzjonijiet miftuħa — EPSO/AD/375/20 — Ġuristi lingwisti (AD 7) tal-lingwa Daniża (DA) — EPSO/AD/376/20 — Ġuristi lingwisti (AD 7) tal-lingwa Griega (EL) — EPSO/AD/377/20 — Ġuristi lingwisti (AD 7) tal-lingwa Franċiża (FR) — EPSO/AD/378/20 — Ġuristi lingwisti (AD 7) tal-lingwa Kroata (HR) — EPSO/AD/379/20 — Ġuristi lingwisti (AD 7) tal-lingwa Pollakka (PL)

(
  Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea C 72 A tal-5 ta’ Marzu 2020
  )

(2020/C 123 A/01)

Fil-paġna 1,

minflok:

“Id-data tal-għeluq għar-reġistrazzjoni: is-7 ta’ April 2020 f’12:00 (nofsinhar), ħin ta’ Brussell”,

aqra:

aqra:

“Id-data tal-għeluq għar-reġistrazzjoni: il-5 ta’ Mejju 2020 f’12:00 (nofsinhar), ħin ta’ Brussell”;

Fil-paġna 6,

minflok:

minflok:

“Applika online fuq il-websajt tal-EPSO http://jobs.eu-careers.eu sa:

is-7 ta’ April 2020 f’12.00 (nofsinhar), ħin ta’ Brussell.”,

aqra:

aqra:

“Applika online fuq il-websajt tal-EPSO http://jobs.eu-careers.eu sa:

Il-5 ta’ Mejju 2020 f’12.00 (nofsinhar), ħin ta’ Brussell.”.

---
#### Vincent B. RECARD, Jr. v. TRINITY UNIVERSAL INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.

No. 87-00825.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 15, 1987.

Dismissed by joint motion July 24,1987. In re Recard, Vincent B. Jr.; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 86-161; Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court, Div. “C”, No. 131922.

Prior report: La.App., 503 So.2d 519.

Granted.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

January 4, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

132369 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 132369 

 COA: 271001 

Gogebic CC: 05-000111-FH 

ROBERT THOMAS GURDA, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 19, 2006 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of 

granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Gogebic Circuit Court for a 

determination of whether the defendant is indigent and, if so, for the appointment of 

appellate counsel, in light of Halbert v Michigan, 545 US 605; 125 S Ct 2582; 162 L Ed 

2d 552 (2005). Appointed counsel may file an application for leave to appeal with the 

Court of Appeals, and/or any appropriate postconviction motions in the trial court, within 

twelve months of the date of the Gogebic Circuit Court’s order appointing counsel, in 

accord with the deadlines in effect at the time the defendant was denied counsel. See 

MCR 7.205(F)(3), MCR 6.311, and MCR 6.429. Counsel may include among the issues 

raised, but is not required to include, those issues raised by the defendant in his 

application for leave to appeal to this Court. In all other respects, leave to appeal is 

DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the remaining questions presented should be 

reviewed by this Court. 

s1218 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

January 4, 2007 

 Clerk
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Matthew S. Schissler, Chief Executive Officer of Cord Blood America, Inc. (the Company), in compliance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 hereby certify,to the best of my knowledge, in connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) on the date hereof, that:



| |   |                                                                                                                      
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | · | the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



| |   |                                                                                                                                                     
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | · | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



CORD BLOOD AMERICA, INC.

Date: March 16, 2008



| |                                                                                                                  
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | /s/ Matthew L. Schissler                                                                                         
| | Matthew L. Schissler                                                                                             
| | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

WESTERN DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

LESLIE SMITH, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 19 WAL 2016 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 13th day of April, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
EXHIBIT 32.1



                            CERTIFICATION 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 of SmartPros Ltd. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Allen
S. Greene, Chief Executive 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:

         (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.

              A signed original of this written statement has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its
staff upon request.



/s/  ALLEN S. GREENE
-----------------------
     Allen S. Greene
Chief Executive Officer

May 11, 2005
Exhibit 10.3(b)

       Schedule of Warrants (new financings) Issued by NCT Group, Inc. to
             Carole Salkind for the three months ended June 30, 2005



   Grant Date       Expiration Date      Exercise Price       Shares Granted
   ----------       ---------------      --------------       --------------
    04/14/05           04/14/10             $0.0130              7,000,000
    04/26/05           04/26/10             $0.0110              7,000,000
    05/16/05           05/16/10             $0.0123              7,000,000
    06/10/05           06/10/10             $0.0100              7,000,000
    06/24/05           06/24/10             $0.0160             35,000,000
                                                            ------------------
                                                                63,000,000
                                                            ==================
III

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 283

To direct the Senate Legal Counsel to intervene in the name of the Senate

Committee on Appropriations and the Senate Committee on the Judiciary

in United States of America v. Northwest Airlines Corporation, et al.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

APRIL 7, 2000

Mr. LOTT (for himself and Mr. DASCHLE) submitted the following resolution;

which was considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

To direct the Senate Legal Counsel to intervene in the name

of the Senate Committee on Appropriations and the Senate Committee on the Judiciary in United States of

America v. Northwest Airlines Corporation, et al.

Whereas, in the case of United States v. Northwest Airlines

Corporation, et al., Misc. No. 99–424, pending in the

United States District Court for the District of Columbia, defendant Northwest Airlines, by seeking to compel

the production of documents of the United States General Accounting Office, has placed in issue the privileges

of the United States Senate under the Speech or Debate

Clause, art. I, sec. 6, cl. 1, of the United States Constitution; and
2

SRES 283 ATS

Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(c), 706(a), and 713(a) of

the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. 288b(c),

288e(a), and 288l(a), the Senate may direct its counsel

to intervene in the name of a committee of the Senate

in any legal action in which the powers and responsibilities of Congress under the Constitution are placed in

issue: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Senate Legal Counsel is directed

2 to intervene in the name of the Senate Committee on Ap3 propriations and the Senate Committee on the Judiciary

4 in the case of United States v. Northwest Airlines Cor5 poration, et al., to protect the Senate’s privileges under

6 the Speech or Debate Clause of the Constitution.

Æ
Exhibit 32.1

APD ANTIQUITIES, INC.

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 USC SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the periodic report of APD ANTIQUITIES, INC., a Nevada corporation (the Company), on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, CINDY K. SWANK, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



(1)  the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods indicated.



This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Date:  July 11, 2007



By: /s/ Cindy K. Swank



Cindy K. Swank, President

Chief Executive Officer,

Chief Financial Officer
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Preston George DEMOUCHET, et al.

No. 88-KH-0055.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 12, 1988.

In re Demouchet, Preston George; applying for remedial writ; Parish of St. Mary, 16th Judicial District Court, Div. “G”, No. 89-969.

Denied.