alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Lisa Velez, an Infant, by Her Mother and Natural Guardian, Stella Velez, et al., Respondents, v Corinne Clemenza, Appellant.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vinik, J.), dated October 6, 1989, as granted the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

*392Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The defendant was properly precluded from offering any evidence on the issue of liability at trial based on her failure to comply with the Supreme Court’s conditional order of preclusion *(see, Kaire v Trump Mgt.,*140 AD2d 494; *Bernstein v Burson,*126 AD2d 593; *Metflex Corp. v Klafter,*123 AD2d 845). Under the circumstances, the Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment on the issue of liability, upon the plaintiffs’ prima facie showing of their entitlement thereto *(see, Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Center,*64 NY2d 851). Mangano, P. J., Kunzeman, Sullivan and Ritter, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 4.2
                                 Loan Agreement


This LOAN AGREEMENT ("this Agreement") dated as of January 1, 2001 is entered
into by and among CyberAds, Inc., a Florida Corporation with offices located at
3350 NW Boca Raton Blvd., Suite A44, Boca Raton, FL 33431 ("Company") and
International Dialing Services, Inc. a Florida Corporation with offices located
at 3350 NW Boca Raton Blvd., Suite A44, Boca Raton, FL 33431 ("Loaner").

WHEREAS, Loaner shall lend Company funds on an as needed basis to be used as
working capital as the board of directors see fit.

                                      Terms

1)       Company shall also refer to IDS Cellular, Inc. and NetAds of South
         Florida, Inc. both of which are owned by CyberAds, Inc.

2)       Larry Levinson is the major shareholder of both the Company and the
         Lender.

3)       Such funds shall be lent to Company with no set payment schedule for
         repayment. All repayments made to Loaner shall be at the discretion of
         Company.

4)       In lieu of an interest payment, Company agrees to make Leased Car
         payments of Mr. Levinsons vehicle, which may change from time to time.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the duly authorized representatives of the parties have
executed this Agreement as of the date first above written.

International Dialing Services, Inc.                 CyberAds, Inc.



---------------------------                          ---------------------------
By: Larry Levinson                                   By: Robert B. Kline
                                                         Title: President/CFO
|                                                                     
|---------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                     
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                       
|View History: Annual                                                 
|View History: Annual                                                 
|View History:                                                        
|                                                                     
|California Dry Natural Gas Reserves Divestitures (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                     
|                                                                     
|California Dry Natural Gas Reserves Divestitures (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                     

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 51     | 7      | 49     | 60     | 128    | 201    | 274    | 164    | 8      | 4     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 3      | 47     | 284    | 70     | 1,155  | 1      | 35     | 15     | 16     | 2     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 2      | 10     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
|                                                                
|----------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                  
|View History: Annual                                            
|View History: Annual                                            
|View History:                                                   
|                                                                
|Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Divestitures (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                
|                                                                
|Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Divestitures (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 4,402  | 2,902  | 3,889  | 2,552  | 2,780  | 4,098  | 4,603  | 5,790  | 3,087  | 1,852 
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 2,580  | 20,510 | 2,774  | 3,423  | 6,483  | 4,353  | 7,308  | 4,145  | 4,778  | 4,591 
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 3,978  | 3,796  |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
AVAQMD Rule 1174 

B-3

Final Staff Report, 01/24/13
Dismissed and Opinion Filed March 11, 2015 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-00159-CV 

IN RE JAMES LARAY ROWE, Relator 

Original Proceeding from the 304th Judicial District Court 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. JD-35928-W 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Lang-Miers, Evans, and Whitehill 

Opinion by Justice Whitehill 

Relator filed this petition for writ of mandamus requesting that the Court order the trial 

court to rule on his petition for writ of habeas corpus brought under the TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 

56.01(o). By order dated February 10, 2015 we abated this case pursuant to rule 7.2(b) of the 

Texas Rules of Civil Procedure to allow the successor judge to determine whether to take the 

action requested by relator. By letter received March 9, 2015, the successor judge provided a 

copy of the predecessor judge’s November 6, 2014 order denying relator’s application for writ of 

habeas corpus. Because the trial court has ruled on the application for writ of habeas corpus, 

which is the relief relator seeks by his petition for writ of mandamus, a justiciable controversy 

does not exist. In re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc., 166 S.W.3d 732, 737 (Tex. 2005) (orig. 

proceeding) (“A case becomes moot if a controversy ceases to exist between the parties at any 

stage of the legal proceedings.”); State Bar of Tex. v. Gomez, 891 S.W.2d 243, 245 (Tex. 1994) 

(orig. proceeding) (stating that for controversy to be justiciable, there must be a real controversy 
 –2– 

between the parties that will be actually resolved by the judicial relief sought); Dow Chem. Co. v. 

Garcia, 909 S.W.2d 503, 505 (Tex. 1995) (orig. proceeding) (court will not issue mandamus if it 

would be useless or unavailing). We DISMISS the petition for writ of mandamus. 

 

150159F.P05 /Bill Whitehill/ 

BILL WHITEHILL 

JUSTICE
#### Kerby Saunders-Warkol, Inc., Appellant, v Harry Macklowe Real Estate Company, Inc., Respondent.

Order of the Supreme Court, New York County (William J. Davis, J.), entered on May 16, 1990, which, *inter alia,*granted the motion of defendant-respondent for partial summary judgment dismissing four categories of damages, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the motion denied, with costs.

*177Defendant-respondent’s motion for partial summary judgment seeks to limit the categories of damages upon which proof will be received. Plaintiff’s earlier motion for summary judgment was granted, thus establishing defendant’s liability.

Plaintiff is an HVAC subcontractor that entered into a contract to perform services at two adjacent buildings being renovated by defendant, which subsequently repudiated the contract and ordered plaintiff to stop all work. Specifically at issue on this motion is plaintiff’s entitlement to lost profits in four categories of work agreed to in the contract: (1) lost profits anticipated to be made by subcontractors of plaintiff, and their out-of-pocket expenses; (2) lost profits on agreed-upon extra work; (3) lost profits on overtime; and (4) lost profits on a guarantee of 20 floors of air-conditioning work.

The motion court held that plaintiff was barred from seeking these items of damages under the doctrine of judicial estoppel because plaintiff had previously asserted in its summary judgment motion that damages were based on the July 8, 1987 agreement and it now asserts that the scope of the work was expanded in dialogue and correspondence subsequent to the July 8 letter agreement.

We hold that the doctrine of judicial estoppel has no applicability here. Plaintiff has not taken inconsistent positions; it merely argued that the July 8 letter memorialized the award of the contract, not that it set forth all the material terms. *(See, Norr v Spiegler,*72 AD2d 20, *affd*53 NY2d 661.)

Each of the categories of damages meets the standard of *Kenford Co. v County of Erie*(67 NY2d 257, 261). Plaintiff’s loss of profits in each category was unquestionably caused by defendant’s breach, and the damages are not speculative, remote, or the result of intervening causes. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Carro, Kassal and Wallach, JJ.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5200 

To suspend temporarily the duty on anatase titanium dioxide. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 27, 2012 

Mr. MULVANEY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on anatase titanium dioxide. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ANATASE TITANIUM DIOXIDE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Anatase titanium dioxide 

(CAS No. 1317–70–0) 

(provided for in subheading 2823.00.00) ......... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5200 IH

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5176 

To suspend temporarily the duty on footwear for women (other than house 

slippers, tennis shoes, basketball shoes, gym shoes, training shoes and 

the like and other than work footwear), valued $15/pair or higher. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 27, 2012 

Mrs. MALONEY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on footwear for women 

(other than house slippers, tennis shoes, basketball shoes, 

gym shoes, training shoes and the like and other than 

work footwear), valued $15/pair or higher. 

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


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5176 IH

1 SECTION 1. FOOTWEAR FOR WOMEN (OTHER THAN HOUSE 

2 SLIPPERS, TENNIS SHOES, BASKETBALL 

3 SHOES, GYM SHOES, TRAINING SHOES AND 

4 THE LIKE AND OTHER THAN WORK FOOT5 WEAR), VALUED $15/PAIR OR HIGHER. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

7 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

8 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

9 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Footwear for women (other 

than house slippers, tennis 

shoes, basketball shoes, 

gym shoes, training shoes 

and the like and other than 

work footwear), valued 

$15/pair or higher (provided for in subheading 

6402.99.31) ....................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

10 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

11 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

12 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

13 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
### UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, D.C.

Pensacola Aviation Center, LLC, Complainant



### v. Pensacola International Airport, City of Pensacola, FL Respondent ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 

### FAA Docket No. 16

- 12-12

NOTICE OF EXTENSION OF TIME

This matter is before the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) based on the abovereferenced complaint, filed in accordance with FAA Rules of Practice for Federally-Assisted Airport Enforcement Proceedings, 14 CFR Part 16 (Rules ofPractice). Pursuant to the Rules ofPractice, §16.ll(a), the date by which the Director, FAA Office of Airport Compliance and Management Analysis will issue a Director's Determination in this matter is hereby extended to on or before December 21, 20 15.

Randall S. Fiertz Director, Airport Compliance and Management Analysis 

# f 

# e.,/

- Jo, if;r I Date

### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on

# Septembe**,** 2015, I served via Certified mail a true copy ofthe FAA's Notice of Extension ofTime, addressed to:

Counsel for Complainant: Leonard D. Kirsch, Esq. McBreen 

### & Kopko 500 North Broadway Jericho, New York 11753 Tel: (516) 364-1095 Fax: (516) 364-0612

Counsel for Respondent: Robert J. Williams, Esq. Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis, LLP Fifth Avenue Place 120 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2700 Pittsburgh, PA 15222

- 3001 Tel: (412) 577-5223 Fax: (412) 765-3858

Copy to: FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket FAA Airport Compliance and Management Analysis, (A CO-l 00)

Claudia Roberts Office of Airport Compliance and

Management Analysis
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5276 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5276

       To extend and modify the temporary reduction of duty on o-
                    Acetylsalicylic acid (Aspirin).

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2012

 Mr. Pascrell introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
       To extend and modify the temporary reduction of duty on o-
                    Acetylsalicylic acid (Aspirin).

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

SECTION 1. O-ACETYLSALICYLIC ACID (ASPIRIN).

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.12.11 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to o-Acetylsalicylic acid 
(Aspirin)) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``3.0%'' and inserting ``Free'' in the 
        general rate of duty column; and
            (2) by striking the date in the effective period column and 
        inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) apply to 
goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 
the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4744 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4744

      To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Cyproconazole.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 25, 2012

   Mr. Johnson of Illinois introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Cyproconazole.

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

SECTION 1. CYPROCONAZOLE.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.12.59 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to Cyproconazole) is amended by 
striking the date in the effective period column and inserting ``12/31/
2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DEL RIO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Petitioner,

V. CIVIL NO. DR-20-CV-36-

$1,531,924.54 IN UNITED STATES

CURRENCY SEIZED FROM

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK ACCOUNT

405685541 IN THE NAME OF

D L INVESTMENTS, 

Respondent.

WARRANT FOR THE ARREST OF PROPERTY

TO THE UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERVICE, OR ITS DESIGNATED AGENT, OR 

OTHER AUTHORIZED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER OR ANY OTHER PERSON 

OR ORGANIZATION AUTHORIZED BY LAW TO ENFORCE THE WARRANT:

WHEREAS a Verified Complaint for Forfeiture in rem was filed on the day 

of , 2020, against the following property: 

$1,531,924.54 in United States Currency Seized from JPMorgan Chase Bank Account 

405685541 in the Name of D L Investments,

hereinafter the "Respondent Property,” alleging that the Respondent Property is subject to 

forfeiture to the United States of America pursuant to Title 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) for violation

of Title 18 U.S.C. § 1343; and

WHEREAS an Order has been entered by the United States District Court for the Western 

District of Texas that a Warrant for Arrest of Property be issued as prayed for by Petitioner United 

States of America.

YOU ARE THEREFORE COMMANDED to arrest and take actual or constructive 

possession of Respondent Property as soon as practicable by serving a copy of this warrant on the 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case 2:20-cv-00036-AM Document 1-3 Filed 05/12/20 Page 1 of 2
2

custodian in whose possession, custody or control the Respondent Property is presently found, and 

to use whatever means may be appropriate to protect and maintain the Respondent Property in 

your custody until further order of this Court, including designating a substitute custodian or 

representative for the purposes of maintaining the care and custody of the Respondent Property

and to make a return as provided by law.

SIGNED this day of , 2020.

JEANNETTE CLACK

United States District Clerk

Western District of Texas

By:

Deputy

Case 2:20-cv-00036-AM Document 1-3 Filed 05/12/20 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF SPRINGS INDUSTRIES, INC. FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JULY 4,
1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-02-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-04-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-04-1998
<CASH>                                             762
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  325,352
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    462,714
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               836,109
<PP&E>                                       1,375,950
<DEPRECIATION>                                 825,938
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,471,403
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          257,637
<BONDS>                                        275,609
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,688
<OTHER-SE>                                     728,078
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,471,403
<SALES>                                      1,093,818
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,093,818
<CGS>                                          898,936
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  898,936
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,058
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,876
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,474
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,402
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,402
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.12
        


</TABLE>
Case 6:20-cv-00251-ADA Document 249-1 Filed 03/24/23 Page 1 of 1
#### SCOTT v. STATE.

No. 25761.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 19, 1952.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

WOODLEY, Commissioner.

Upon a plea of guilty, appellant was convicted of operating a motor vehicle on a public highway while under the influence of intoxicating liquor and was assessed a fine of $100.

No bills of exception or statement of facts appear in the record. All proceedings appearing regular and nothing being presented for review, the judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the Court.