alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.14





The Share Escrow and Trust Agreement





Party A: Zhejiang Kandi Vehicles Co., Ltd (the “Kandi Vehicles”)





Party B: Mr. Hu Xiaoming





According to the Agreement of Establishment of of Kandi New Energy Vehicles Co., Ltd., by and between the Parties, the Parties reach the agreement on share escrow and trust as follows:




Section 1




During the term of Kandi New Energy Vehicles Co., Ltd., (“Kandi New Energy”),  Party B agrees to entrust his entire 50% equity in the Kandi New Energy with Kandi Vehicles and Kandi Vehicle agrees to accept such trust.





Section 2




Party A shall take all responsibilities of Kandi New Energy upon entrustment and Party B will take no responsibilities of Kandi New Energy.





Section 3




The annual renewal/examination of Kandi New Energy and other related issues that require either Party’s consent, the such Party shall cooperate to accomplish these procedures. Failing to do so, such Party shall compensate for the other Party’s loss or damages.





Section 4




This agreement shall take effect at the same time of the Agreement of Establishment of Kandi New Energy Co., Ltd.





Section 5 Dispute Resolution




1. The agreement shall be governed and constructed by the applicable laws of People’s Republic of China.





2. In the implementation process of this agreement, Parties shall settle any disputes through consultation or mediation, if failed, Parties can choose to resolve the disputes as below:





(i)
to submit the issue to Jinhua City Arbitration Commission for arbitration;




(ii)
take the legal action at the People’s Court of China.





Section 6





This agreement is made into 4 originals and each party holds two copies.








Party A: Zhejiang Kandi Vehicles Co., Ltd





Legal Representative:____________________________








Party B: Mr. Hu Xiaoming





Legal Representative:____________________________





May 18, 2010
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 32.1


       CERTIFICATION OF CO-CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS UNDER 18 U.S.C.ss.1350

     We, William R. Cruz and Ralph L. Cruz, Co-Chairmen of the Board and
Co-Chief Executive Officers of TradeStation Group, Inc., hereby certify, to our
respective knowledge, that:

     The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of TradeStation Group, Inc. for the
quarter ended June 30, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 TradeStation
Group, Inc.

     The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.



August 12, 2003                        /s/ William R. Cruz
---------------                        -----------------------------------------
Date                                   William R. Cruz
                                       Co-Chairman of the Board
                                       and Co-Chief Executive Officer



August 12, 2003                        /s/ Ralph L. Cruz
---------------                        -----------------------------------------
Date                                   Ralph L. Cruz
                                       Co-Chairman of the Board
                                       and Co-Chief Executive Officer
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03

- 21

- 00564

- CV

Keith Volk , Appellant

v. Coryell County Sheriff ’ s Office , Appellee

FROM THE 459TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY NO. D

- 1

- GN

- 21

- 000290 , THE HONORABLE MAYA GUERRA GAMBLE , JUDGE P R E SIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Keith Volk and Coryell County Sheriff ’ s Office have filed a Joint Motion for Entry of Agreed Judgme nt , ann ouncing that they have reached an agreement that resolves their dispute

. We grant the motion. Cons ist ent with their moti on, we set aside the trial court ’ s judgme nt without regard to t he merits and remand th is ca u se to the trial court for rendition of judgment in accorda nce with the parties ’ agreement. See T e x. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(B).

______________ ___ ___________________ _____ Darlene Byrne, Chief Justice

Before C hief Justice Byrne, Justices Kelly and Smith
Set Aside and Remanded
Filed: July 1 2, 202 3
#### KNIGHT v. STATE.

No. 26633.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 25, 1953.

Affirmed.

William L. Scarborough, Corpus Christi, for appellant.

Wesley Dice, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is driving while intoxicated; the punishment, ten days in jail and a fine of $50.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception.

All the proceedings appearing regular and nothing being presented for our review, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
#### NAB Construction Corp., Appellant, v Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Acting by New York City Transit Authority, Respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Francis N. Pécora, J.), entered on March 2, 1990, which denied plaintiff’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3025 (b) for leave to serve a second amended complaint and petition, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Although, as plaintiff correctly notes, CPLR 3025 (b) provides that leave to amend a complaint shall be freely granted *302
      *(Edenwald Contr. Co. v City of New York,*60 NY2d 957), nevertheless, this court has held that leave to amend a complaint is not granted upon mere request without a proper showing. Rather, in determining whether to grant leave to amend, a court must examine the underlying merit of the causes of action asserted therein, since, to do otherwise would be wasteful of judicial resources. *(Brennan v City of New York,*99 AD2d 445; *East Asiatic Co. v Corash,*34 AD2d 432.)

With this in mind, we find that the IAS court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiffs proposed amendment as legally insufficient. On a prior appeal *(NAB Constr. Corp. v Metropolitan Transp. Auth.,*148 AD2d 1020, *lv dismissed*74 NY2d 841), this court rejected the cause of action now sought to be added, seeking a declaratory judgment that the alternate dispute resolution procedure in the parties’ contract was invalid and against public policy under the New York Court of Appeals decision in *Crimmins Contr. Co. v City of New York*(74 NY2d 166). We perceive no basis for reexamining our prior determination. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.
UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

_____________________________

FORM 8-K

CURRENT REPORT
Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934







Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported)

November 18, 2009





PHILLIPS-VAN HEUSEN CORPORATION(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)



|Delaware                                       | 001-07572                | 13-1166910                       
|---------------------------------------------- | ------------------------ | ---------------------------------
|(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation) | (Commission File Number) | (IRS Employer Identification No.)
|200 Madison Avenue, New York, New York         | 10016                   
|(Address of principal executive offices)       | (Zip Code)              



Registrants telephone number, including area code  (212)-381-3500

Not Applicable

(Former name or former address, if changed since last report.)



Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:

 ̈Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)

 ̈Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)

 ̈Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act

(17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))

 ̈Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act

(17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))



---





ITEM 2.02

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS AND FINANCIAL CONDITION

On November 18, 2009, Phillips-Van Heusen Corporation (the Company) issued a press release to report the Companys earnings for the third quarter of 2009, which is attached to this report as Exhibit 99.1.

The information in this Form 8-K and the Exhibit attached hereto shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.



ITEM 9.01

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND EXHIBITS

(d)  Exhibits.

|Exhibit | Description                            
|------- | ---------------------------------------
|99.1    | Press Release, dated November 18, 2009.







---





SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.

PHILLIPS-VAN HEUSEN CORPORATION



By: /s/ Bruce Goldstein

Bruce Goldstein

Senior Vice President and Controller



Date: November 18, 2009



---

Exhibit Index



|Exhibit | Description                            
|------- | ---------------------------------------
|99.1    | Press Release, dated November 18, 2009.
# From Ross.Philip@epamail epa.gov 

# Sent 

# Monday December 15 2008 

# 1103

# PM

# GMT To Boucher Michael 

# mbouchermckennalong 

# com Cc Edwards.Dennisepamail.epa.gov 

# Boucher Michael 

# mbouchermckennalong 

# com Subject 

# ReYour courier address
Michael 

## When do you expect to be sending 

### yoursubmission

need to check with 

## my secretary 

### and get precise instructions for

## you If

### you are ready to send it

### you 

# may as suggested 

### one other

### time send 

# mycopy to 

### Dennis Edwards and can get it

### from

## him Please let

## me know Phil Philip 

### Ross United States Environmental Protection 

### Agency Office of General Counsel Pesticides and Toxic Substances 

## Law Office 

### 202-564-5637



## From
Boucher Michael 

## mbouchermckennalong 

# com
To
Philip 

## Ross/DC/USEPA/US@EPA


# Cc

Dennis 

## Edwards/DC/USEPA/US@EPA Boucher Michael 

## mbouchermckennalong.com

### Date

12/15/2008 

## 0550

# PM

Subject


### Your courier address



### Dear Phil 

### At you convenience would you kindly send 

## me your address for courier delivery cannot send the submission 

### by electronic 

### mail because it will contain confidential business information also will send copies of the submission to 

### your client 

### Dennis Edwards and to Seth 

### Goldberg 

## who represents 

### Nalco 

## Company have courier addresses for

### Messrs Edwards and 

### Goldberg Thank 

## you Sincerely 

### Michael Boucher Counsel to

## Buckman Laboratories 

### Inc 

# McKENNA LONG ALDRIDGE LLP Attorneys at

## Law Michael Boucher 

## Tel

# 202 496-7729 

## Fax

# 202 496-7756 Cell 

# 202 306-1645 

## mbouchermckennalong com 1900 Street 

# NW Suite 100 

### Washington 

## D.C 20006-1102 United States of

### America 

## Tel

# 202 496-7500 http//www.mckennalong.com 

# ALBANY ATLANTA BRUSSELS 

# DENVER LOSANGELES 

# NEWYORK PHILADELPHIA 

# SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO 

# WASHINGTON D.C

## CONFIDENTIALITY 

# NOTICE This e-mail and any attachments contain information 

### from the 

### law firm of

## McKenna Long Aldridge 

# LLP and are intended solely forthe use of the 

### named recipient or recipients This e-mail 

## may contain privileged attorney/client 

### communications or

### work product 

## Any dissemination of this e-mail 

### by anyone other than an intended recipient is strictly prohibited If

### you are not 

### named recipient 

### you are prohibited 

### from any further viewing of the e-mail or any attachments or

### from making any use of the e-mail or attachments If

### you believe 

### you have received this e-mail in error notify the sender immediately 

### and permanently delete the e-mail any attachments 

### and all copies thereof 

### from any drives or storage 

### media and destroy any printouts of the e-mail or attachments
#### Smith Packing Company, Inc., Respondent, v Quality Pork International, Inc., Appellant.

Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Defendant moved to dismiss on the ground of lack of personal jurisdiction (CPLR 3211 [a] [8]). The principal issue raised, however, was whether the oral agreement entered into between the parties was enforceable under the Statute of Frauds (UCC 2-201 [1]). We hold that it was not. The sole basis for jurisdiction was an alleged oral agreement between plaintiff, a New York corporation, and defendant, a Nebraska corporation, for the sale of goods in New York (CPLR 302 [a] [1]). Since the alleged agreement was oral and was for the sale of goods over $500, it was unenforceable unless the purchase order between the State of New York and plaintiff, which plaintiff sent to defendant, satisfied the "merchant’s exception” (UCC 2-201 [2]) to the Statute of Frauds. The merchant’s exception permits enforcement of oral contracts "[b]etween merchants if within a reasonable time a writing in confirmation of the contract and sufficient against the sender is received and the party receiving it has reason to know its contents” (UCC 2-201 [2]). Further, whether documents constitute confirmatory writings "must be determined from the documents themselves, as a matter of law” *(Bazak Intl. Corp. v Mast Indus.,*73 NY2d 113, 118).

Here, the plaintiff’s alleged confirmatory writings do not indicate a contract between plaintiff and defendant but, rather, between plaintiff and the State of New York. Thus, they do not satisfy the requirement for a confirmatory writing *(see, 2*Anderson, Uniform Commercial Code, at 77-78 [3d ed 1982]). Further, those writings were not "sufficient against the sender” because they were not signed by the sender (1 White and Summers, Uniform Commercial Code § 2-5, at 86 [3d ed 1988]).

In reviewing the adequacy of these writings, we also note that the writings, except for the notation that they were sent to defendant, fail to make any reference to an agreement with defendant corporation. Further, plaintiff acknowledges that the prices listed on these purchase orders differ from the ones allegedly quoted by defendant. Additionally, the notation on the purchase orders "confirmed * * * with Laura Lee” does *876not make them confirmatory writings because they fail to identify who Laura Lee is, let alone establish that she was defendant’s agent. Parol evidence may not be considered in determining whether Laura Lee was defendant’s agent or to explain otherwise these writings *(see, Bazak Intl. Corp. v Mast Indus., supra).*

Given those facts, the writings were insufficient to indicate the confirmation of a preexisting agreement to satisfy the requirements of UCC 2-201 (2) *(cf., Bazak Intl. Corp. v Mast Indus., supra,*at 123-124). Defendant’s motion to dismiss should therefore have been granted. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Tenney, J.—dismiss complaint.) Present—Denman, J. P., Green, Lawton and Davis, JJ.
EXHIBIT 31.2  CERTIFICATION  I, Adam Wasserman, certify that:  1.
        I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Gold Horse International, Inc. for the period ended December 31, 2007.
  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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
  4.
        The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) 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 small business issuer and have:
  (a)
        Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
  (b)
        Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
  (c)
        Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting;
  5.
        The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
  (a)
        All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuers ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
  (b)
        Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.
  /s/ Adam WassermanName: Adam WassermanTitle: Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer
  Dated: February 19, 2008
Exhibit 32.2  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 Bidgive International, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2010 (the Report), I, Rebecca Richardson-Blanchard, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 1) The Report fully complies with the requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations.  August 12, 2010 /s/ Rebecca Richardson-Blanchard Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 32.2**
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER UNDER 18 U.S.C. §1350**
     I, David H. Fleischman, Chief Financial Officer of TradeStation Group,Inc., hereby certify, to my knowledge, that:
     The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of TradeStation Group, Inc. for thequarter ended March 31, 2004 (the “Report”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of TradeStation Group, Inc.
     The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18U.S.C. §1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separatedisclosure document.   May 5, 2004Date /s/ David H. Fleischman
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 Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report of Edgen Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Daniel J. O'Leary, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



June 23, 2006

|By: |  | /s/DANIEL J. O'LEARYDaniel J. O'Leary President and Chief Executive
Officer |  | 
|--- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 

---



QuickLinks
Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**I, Carl J. Grivner, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of XO Holdings, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand 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 andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared;  b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internalcontrol over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to providereasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparationof financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally acceptedaccounting principles;  c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors: a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date:  November 9, 2007 /s/ Carl J. Grivner   Carl J. Grivner   Chief Executive Officer