alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the Court has determined that this

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit

No. 96-30720 Summary Calendar

HELEN M. SAVOY

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

METHODIST HOSPITAL

Defendant-Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court For the Western District of Louisiana

(96-CV-226) November 26, 1996

Before SMITH, DUHÉ and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 1

Appellant Savoy sued Methodist Hospital of Houston, Texas in

Louisiana for damages arising from the death of her husband

allegedly resulting from blood transfusions administ ered to him

while hospitalized in Houston. Appellant contended that the blood

administered was contaminated which caused her husband’s death.2

The hospital successfully moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(2) for

lack of personal jurisdiction. The district court correctly ruled

that under both Louisiana and Texas law, the administering of blood

was a medical service and not the sale of a product, and that the

hospital lacked the necessary minimum c ontacts with Louisiana to

make it amenable to suit in Louisiana. We agree for the reasons

stated by the district court.

Appell ant contends that the district court erred in its

“stream of commerce” analysis because it relied on the 1990 version

of Louisiana Civil Code Article 2322.1. It is correct that the

court relied on the 1990 version and not the version in effect at

the time the blood was administered. The analysis is not adversely

affected by this fact, however, because it is clear that under both

Texas and Louisiana law in effect at the time of the transfusions,

blood was not a product.

Alternatively, even if blood was considered a product, there

are still insufficient contacts by the hospital with Louisiana to

make it amenable to suit in Louisiana.

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit
      32.2








Certification
      of President and Co Chief Executive Officer








**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**


**(18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350)**








In
      connection with the Annual Report of Century Casinos, Inc. (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned
      certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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, as amended;
                and





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







Date:
      March 15, 2007








/s/
      Peter Hoetzinger


Peter
      Hoetzinger


President
      and Co Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 7
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AND STATEMENT OF INCOME OF ARM FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.'S FORM 10K FOR THE
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                         4,068,386
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                      28,342
<MORTGAGE>                                      16,429
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                               4,239,271
<CASH>                                         228,206
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                   0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                          87,170
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,138,124
<POLICY-LOSSES>                              4,242,578
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                  0
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                 38,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     50,000
<COMMON>                                           232
<OTHER-SE>                                     257,313
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,138,424
<PREMIUMS>                                           0
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                            329,979
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                               3,192
<OTHER-INCOME>                                  24,611
<BENEFITS>                                     247,418
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                     10,416
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                            37,263
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 41,738
<INCOME-TAX>                                    14,139
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             27,599
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    27,599
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.07
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0


</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   Exhibit 23(b)


              CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS




We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
Form S-8, File No. 333-50389, pertaining to the Financial Consultation
Agreement dated as of January 19, 1998 of our report dated May 25, 1995, with
respect to the financial statements of LifePoint, Inc., formerly known as U.S.
Drug Testing, Inc., included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended March 31, 1998, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.



                                   /s/ Wolinetz Gottlieb & Lafazan, P.C.
                                   WOLINETZ GOTTLIEB & LAFAZAN, P.C.


Rockville Centre, New York
June 5, 1998
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________

m 00-20940

_______________

W. SUE LEFALL,

Plaintiff,

W. SUE LEFALL,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

BOARD OF REGENTS OF TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY;

WILLARD L. JACKSON,

IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF REGENTS

OF TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY;

JAMES M. DOUGLAS,

IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS PRESIDENT OF TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY AND INDIVIDUALLY;

HAROLD ODOM, INDIVIDUALLY; EDWARD GANTT, INDIVIDUALLY; AND KENNETH W.

JACKSON, INDIVIDUALLY,

Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

(H-98-CV-2824)

_________________________

June 8, 2001
2

Before SMITH, DUHÉ, and WIENER,

Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

W. Sue Lefallsued the Board ofRegents of

Texas Southern University and certain of its

officials for sex discrimination under title VII

and for deprivation of substantive and

procedural due process under 42 U.S.C. §

1983. The district court entered summary

judgment in favor of defendants, and Lefall

appeals only under § 1983.

We have reviewed the briefs and applicable

law and pertinent portions of the record and

have heard the arguments of counsel. We conclude that Lefall has made no showing of any

actions that colorably amount to a constitutional violation. Plainly, defendants took no

action that can fairly be described as arbitrary

and capricious, even assuming that the parties

were bound by the 1985 staff manual that permitted disciplinary action only for just cause.

Moreover, Lefall received all process she was

due to ensure her an oppportunity to vindicate

her rights. Absent a valid constitutional claim,

there is no need to visit the issue of qualified

immunity.

AFFIRMED.

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has

determined that this opinion should not be published

and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1  Chief Executive Officer Certification (Section 906)
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS 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; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and result of
operations of the Company.
 /s/ Willem M. Smit

Willem M. SmitChief Executive OfficerPresident and Director
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of

the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. This court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Filed 9/26/96 TENTH CIRCUIT

United States of America,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v. Luwayne Coy Tindall,

Defendant - Appellant. No. 96-8004 (D. Ct. No. 95CR 52J) (D. Wyo.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before, TACHA, BALDOCK and BRISCOE, Circuit Judges.
After examining the briefs and the appellate record , this three-judge panel has determined unanimously that oral argument wouldnot be of material assistance in the determination of this appeal. Se e Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The cause is therefore ordered sub mitted without oral argument. This appeal is from an order of the district court sentencing appellant to ninety-seven months imprisonment after appellant’s plea of guilty to one count of Aggravated Sexual Abuse of a Child in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2241 and 1153.- 2 -

On appeal appellant objects to the length of the se ntence imposed. Appellant’s counsel has filed a brief and requested leave to wi thdraw as counsel pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). A defendant’s right to appeal a sentence imposed bya federal court is governed by 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a). Under that sectio n, a sentence within the Sentencing Guidelines may not be appealed unless imposed in violation of law or as a result of an incorrect application of the Guid elines. 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a)(1)- (2); United States v. Havens , 910 F.2d 703, 706-07 (10th Cir. 1990), cert. deni ed , 498 U.S. 1030 (1991); United States v. Richardson , 901 F.2d 867, 870 (10th Cir. 1990); United States v. Davis , 900 F.2d 1524, 1530 (10th Cir. 1990), cert. denie d , 498 U.S. 856 (1990). In this case, appellant’s sentence was not imposed in violation of law. The sentence was at the low end of the applicable sente ncing range. Appellant’s sentence also was not imposed as a result of an inc orrect application of the guidelines. Appellant was given opportunity to obj ect to the criminal history computation in appellant’s presentence report, and the district court reduced the range within which appellant was to be sentenced. Appellant has pointed to no error in calculating the sentence imposed. As we h ave previously concluded, section 3742(a) does not allow an appeal “‘because of a claim that a particular sentence is draconian.’” Richardson , 901 F.2d at 870 (quoting United States v.- 3 -

Guerrero , 894 F.2d 261, 267 (7th Cir. 1990)). We therefore dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See United States v. Garcia , 919 F.2d 1478, 1482 (10th Cir. 1990) (dismissing appeal of sentence within pr oper guideline range for lack of jurisdiction). The mandate shall issue forthwith. ENTERED FOR THE COURT,

Deanell Reece Tacha Circuit Judge
Exhibit 31.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer  Pursuant to Section 302 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, John J. Coughlan, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Lawson Software, Inc.;

2.     Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.     Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     The
registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:



5.     The
registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



|Date: April 12, 2004                                                      |  | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|/s/JOHN J. COUGHLANJohn J. Coughlan President and Chief Executive Officer |  | 

---

QuickLinks
|   | (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 result of operations of the                Company. |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/ Michael A. McManus,                Jr.                                             |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Michael                  A. McManus, Jr.                                                                                                                                                                                           |
|   | President                  and Chief Executive Officer                                                                                                                                                                             |
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                               |
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

The following certification accompanies the issuer’squarterly report on Form 10-QSB and is not filed, as provided in Release33-8212.  34-47551 dated April 21, 2004.

 

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVEOFFICERPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the accompanying quarterly reporton Form 10-QSB of Coast Bancorp for the quarter ended March 31, 2004, I, JackC. Wauchope, Chief Executive Officer of Coast Bancorp, hereby certify pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002  that:

 

(1)          such quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Coast Bancorp for the quarter endedMarch 31, 2004, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)           theinformation contained in such quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Coast Bancorpfor the quarter ended March 31, 2004, fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of Coast Bancorp.

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to Coast Bancorp and will be retained by CoastBancorp and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staffupon request.

 

Dated:  April21, 2004

 
|   | /s/ Jack C. Wauchope                                   |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | JACK C. WAUCHOPE                                       |
|   | Chief Executive Officer  (Principal Executive Officer) |

 

21

----
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

CHARICE NICHOLE JONES, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D17-1401

)

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, o/b/o )

TIMOTHY PAUL ADAMS, )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed August 17, 2018.

Appeal from an Administrative Order of 

the Department of Revenue.

Charice Nichole Jones, pro se. 

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, and Toni C. Bernstein, 

Senior Assistant Attorney General, 

Tampa, for Appellee. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

CASANUEVA, CRENSHAW, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

_______ _________________ No. 20

- 13829 Non

- Argument Calendar

________________________ D.C. Docket No. 6:20

- cr - 00004

- CEM

- DCI

- 1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff

- Appellee,

versus
JAMES OWEN COLE, II , Defendant

- Appellant.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida

________________________ (June 1, 2021) Before JILL PRYOR , NEWSOM and LUCK , Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

USCA11 Case: 20-13829 Date Filed: 06/01/2021 Page: 1 of 22 Melissa Fussell , appointed counsel for James Owen Cole, II in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. Cali fornia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is
GRANTED , and Cole’s conviction s and sentence s are AFFIRMED

.

USCA11 Case: 20-13829 Date Filed: 06/01/2021 Page: 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
THE BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF OPERATION AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                      24,386,872
<SECURITIES>                                   500,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  371,793
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            25,317,602
<PP&E>                                         430,285
<DEPRECIATION>                                 176,562
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              25,594,223
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,675,673
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  5,000,000
<COMMON>                                    49,622,795
<OTHER-SE>                                (37,445,278)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                25,594,223
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            17,499,948
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            25,323,526
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             226,685
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                591,611
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            591,611
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   591,611
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.04


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 129 (Friday, September 21, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1652]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

              RECOGNIZING THE LIFE OF SPC JOSHUA N. NELSON

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. G. K. BUTTERFIELD

                           of north carolina

                    in the house of representatives

                       Friday, September 21, 2012

  Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Mr. Speaker, it is with mixed emotions that I rise 
today to honor the life of Specialist Joshua N. Nelson of the United 
States Army. Specialist Nelson was a native of Greenville, North 
Carolina, which is in my Congressional District. Specialist Nelson was 
one of four soldiers that tragically lost their lives in Zabul 
Province, Afghanistan on September 16, 2012.
  Specialist Nelson graduated from North Pitt High School in 2008 and 
later enlisted in the Army where he became a signals intelligence 
analyst. Specialist Joshua Nelson was a source of great pride in his 
hometown of Greenville. He exemplified to the community what was 
possible with determination, and epitomized what it meant to serve with 
honor and distinction.
  These facts were demonstrated in the various awards and decorations 
Specialist Nelson received during his career in the Army. Specialist 
Nelson received the National Defense Service Medal, the Overseas 
Service Ribbon, the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, the NATO 
Medal, and the Army Service Ribbon. In only 22 short years, Specialist 
Nelson accomplished more than most people do in a full lifetime.
  Unfortunately, earlier this month, Specialist Nelson perished while 
serving his country. He is survived by his wife, Quamisha Nelson; his 
mother, Kathy Glover; his father, Brian Nelson; and his stepmother, 
Valorie Nelson. I offer my sincere appreciation to his loved ones for 
his service in the United States Army and his selfless efforts in the 
defense of our great nation.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in offering heartfelt 
condolences to Specialist Joshua Nelson's family. I pray that his life 
serves as a guiding force for the Greenville community and others 
around the country. We are forever indebted to his family for the 
ultimate sacrifice he paid on our behalf.

                          ____________________
```