alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### MARSEE v. KENTUCKY UTILITIES CO.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

June 12, 1953.

Carlo's B. Pope, Barbourville, for appellant. ‘

Kenneth H. Tuggle, Barbourville, T. M. Galphin, Jr., Louisville, for appellee.

CULLEN, Commissioner.

Charles Marsee, while standing under a clump of small trees near a pathway passing through a field, during a rain and wind storm, was killed by some electrical force. Contending that the electrical force was not lightning, but was a charge of electricity from high-voltage lines of the Kentucky Utilities Company which crossed the field close to the clump of trees, Marsee’s administrator sued the company for damages for wrongful death. A directed verdict was given for the company, -and the administrator appeals.

The first ground for reversal asserted by the appellant is that the court erred in directing a verdict for the company. We. have examined the record carefully and find that the plaintiff’s evidence was sufficient only to ‘create a mere inference, surmise or speculation that the death was caused by electricity passing from the high-voltage lines through the trees. None of the normal physical evidences of such an occurrence, .-such as the .scorching of leaves or limbs of -the trees,- were shown;' - Taking the evidence' in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, it shows only that the death might have been caused -by electricity pass*46ing- from the high-voltage lines, or by lightning. Actually, the evidence tends to be convincing that lightning caused the death. Under these circumstances, it was proper for the court to direct a verdict for the company. Spencer’s Adm’r v. Number Four Superior Coal Co., 228 Ky. 799, 16 S.W.2d 168; Louisville Gas Co. v. Kaufman, Strauss & Co., 105 Ky. 131, 48 S.W. 434.

It is next contended that the court erred in not granting a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. The new evidence consisted of testimony of three witnesses that they heard a loud noise at the time of Marsee’s death and saw a large ball of fire come along the transmission line and jump into the top of the clump of trees. This evidence does not lend any support to appellant’s theory that Marsee’s death was the result of regular electrical energy passing from the transmission line to the trees; on the contrary, it tends to buttress the company’s claim that the death was caused by lightning.

The judgment is affirmed.
#### ANTON ZILBERT v. W. T. BLAKELY.1

October 6, 1911.

Nos. 17,266—(39).

Judgment notwithstanding verdict.

In an action to recover for injury caused by defendant’s stock, where the evidence wholly failed to show any substantial damage, the court did not err in ordering judgment in favor of defendant, notwithstanding the verdict for ten dollars-in favor of plaintiff. [Reporter.]

Action in the district court for Beltrami county to recover $450 damages to hay and grass caused by defendant’s cattle and sheep. The answer was a general' denial. The case was tried before Stanton, J., who denied defendant’s motion fora directed verdict. The jury returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff for ten dollars. Prom an order granting defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding, the verdict, plaintiff appealed.

Affirmed.

*Charles W. Scrutchin,*for appellant.

*Chester MoKusich,*for respondent.

1

 Reported in 132 N. W. 1135.

Per Curiam.

This action was brought to recover damages for the claimed destruction, by the defendant’s sheep and other stock, of hay and grass growing on plaintiff’s. *538land. Upon the trial the plaintiff obtained a verdict for ten dollars. Thereafter, •on defendant’s motion, the court ordered judgment in defendant’s favor, notwithstanding the verdict. The case is brought to this court on appeal from that order.

An examination of the evidence discloses that the plaintiff had sowed timothy and clover seed in the spring of 1910, while snow was on the ground, on ten acres -of newly-cleared and broken land. The land was unfenced and was thereafter over-run by defendant’s stock at times during the spring and early summer, and the injury claimed resulted therefrom. The evidence wholly failed to show any substantial growth of hay on the land at the time of the claimed injury, or any destruction of hay or grass occurring thereon, and it does not appear that any substantial damage could be established upon a new trial.

In this state of the testimony the order appealed from was justified.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         238,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               12,510,000
<ALLOWANCES>                               (1,130,000)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            18,802,000
<PP&E>                                     155,780,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              43,389,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             139,484,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        9,973,000
<BONDS>                                     28,900,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    517,000
<COMMON>                                        43,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  39,100,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               139,484,000
<SALES>                                     59,014,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            59,014,000
<CGS>                                       43,397,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               52,025,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           (3,230,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               107,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,228,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              8,043,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                 3,217,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          4,826,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 4,826,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.75
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.73


</TABLE>
#### EUBANKS v. STATE.

No. 26368.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 20, 1953.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

Wesley Dice, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is burglary; the punishment,, six years.

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..
**Exhibit 21**

**SUBSIDIARIES OF ELDERTRUST OPERATING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP**

**AS OF MARCH 31, 2006**

ET Capital Corp., a Delaware corporation 

ET GENPAR, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company 

ET Sub-Belvedere LimitedPartnership, L.L.P., a Virginia limited liability partnership 

ET Belvedere Finance, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liabilitycompany 

ET Sub-Berkshire Limited Partnership, a Delaware limited partnership 

ET Berkshire, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 

ET Sub-Cabot Park, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company 

Cabot ALF, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company 

ET Sub-Cleveland Circle, L.L.C. a Delaware limited liability company 

Cleveland ALF, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company 

ET Sub-DCMH Limited Partnership, L.L.P., a Virginia limited liability partnership 

ET DCMH Finance, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company 

ET Sub-Heritage Andover, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company 

ET Sub-Heritage Woods, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company 

ET Sub-Highgate, L.P., a Pennsylvania limited partnership 

ET Sub-Lacey I, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company 

ET Sub-Lehigh Limited Partnership, a Delaware limited partnership 

ET Lehigh, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 

ET Sub-Lopatcong, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company 

ET Sub-Pennsburg Manor Limited Partnership, L.L.P., a Virginia limited liability partnership 

ET Pennsburg Finance, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company 

ET Sub-Phillipsburg I, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company 

ET Sub-Pleasant View, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company 

ET Sub-POB I Limited Partnership, L.L.P., a Virginia limited liability partnership 

ET POBI Finance, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company 

ET Sub-Rittenhouse Limited Partnership, L.L.P., a Virginia limited liability partnership 

ET Sub-Riverview Ridge Limited Partnership, L.L.P., a Virginia limited liability partnership 

ET Sub-Sanatoga Limited Partnership, a Delaware limited partnership 

ET Sanatoga, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 

ET Sub-SMOB, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company 

ET Sub-Vernon Court, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company 

Vernon ALF, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company 

ET Sub-Wayne I, Limited Partnership, L.L.P., a Virginia limited liability partnership 

ET Wayne Finance, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company 

ET Sub-Willowbrook Limited Partnership, L.L.P., a Virginia limited liability partnership 

ET Sub-Woodbridge, L.P., a Pennsylvania limited partnership
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

YV &DVH1R

ORDER

%(,75(0(0%(5('RQWKLVGD\WKHUHZDVSUHVHQWHGWRWKH&RXUWWKH0RWLRQIRU

$GPLVVLRQ3UR+DF9LFHILOHGE\FRXQVHOIRU

DQGWKH&RXUWKDYLQJUHYLHZHGWKHPRWLRQHQWHUV

WKHIROORZLQJRUGHU

,7,625'(5('WKDWWKH0RWLRQIRU$GPLVVLRQ3UR+DF9LFHLV*5$17('DQG

PD\DSSHDURQEHKDOIRI

LQWKHDERYHFDVH

,7,6)857+(525'(5('WKDWLIKHVKH

KDVQRWDOUHDG\GRQHVRVKDOOLPPHGLDWHO\WHQGHUWKHDPRXQWRIPDGHSD\DEOHWRClerk, U.S.

District CourtLQFRPSOLDQFHZLWK/RFDO&RXUW5XOH$7OI

6,*1('WKLVWKHGD\RI



WACO DIVISION

InfoGation Corporation

6:20-cv-00366-ADA

Google LLC

Daniel Silverman

Google LLC

Daniel Silverman Google LLC

Daniel Silverman

August

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 6:20-cv-00366-ADA Document 20-1 Filed 08/06/20 Page 1 of 1
AO 120 (Rev. 08/10)

TO:

Mail Stop 8

Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

P.O. Box 1450

Alexandria, VA 22313-1450

REPORT ON THE

FILING OR DETERMINATION OF AN

ACTION REGARDING A PATENT OR

TRADEMARK

In Compliance with 35 U.S.C. § 290 and/or 15 U.S.C. § 1116 you are hereby advised that a court action has been

filed in the U.S. District Court Western District of Texas on the following

G Trademarks or G Patents. ( G the patent action involves 35 U.S.C. § 292.):

DOCKET NO.

6:20-cv-00376

DATE FILED

5/11/2020

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

Western District of Texas

PLAINTIFF DEFENDANT

Appliance Computing III, Inc. Redfin Corporation

PATENT OR 

TRADEMARK NO.

DATE OF PATENT

OR TRADEMARK

HOLDER OF PATENT OR TRADEMARK

1

2

3

4

5

In the above—entitled case, the following patent(s)/ trademark(s) have been included:

DATE INCLUDED INCLUDED BY

G Amendment G Answer G Cross Bill G Other Pleading

PATENT OR 

TRADEMARK NO.

DATE OF PATENT

OR TRADEMARK

HOLDER OF PATENT OR TRADEMARK

1

2

3

4

5

In the above—entitled case, the following decision has been rendered or judgement issued:

DECISION/JUDGEMENT

05/17/2022 document 234 Jury verdict

CLERK

Philip J. Devlin 5/8/2024

Copy 1—Upon initiation of action, mail this copy to Director Copy 3—Upon termination of action, mail this copy to Director

Copy 2—Upon filing document adding patent(s), mail this copy to Director Copy 4—Case file copy

DATE

Case 6:20-cv-00376-ADA Document 273 Filed 05/08/24 Page 1 of 1
|                                                                                                              
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                              
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                
|View History: Annual                                                                                          
|View History: Annual                                                                                          
|View History:                                                                                                 
|                                                                                                              
|North Dakota Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Reserves Divestitures (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                              
|                                                                                                              
|North Dakota Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, 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                                                                                                                            | 1      | 1      | 4      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 1      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 2      | 1      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | W      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5120 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on calcium chloride phosphate 

phosphor. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 27, 2012 

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

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on calcium 

chloride phosphate phosphor. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CALCIUM CHLORIDE PHOSPHATE PHOSPHOR. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.22.72 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 calcium chloride phosphate phosphor) is amended by strik7 ing the date in the effective period column and inserting 

8 ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 

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

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


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5120 IH

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

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
|                                                                                      
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                      
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                        
|View History: Annual                                                                  
|View History: Annual                                                                  
|View History:                                                                         
|                                                                                      
|No chart available.                                                                   
|No chart available.                                                                   
|                                                                                      
|                                                                                      
|Arkansas Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves New Field Discoveries (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                      

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | --     | --     | --     | --    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --     | --     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5355 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5355

       To extend the temporary reduction of duty on Flumioxazin.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 7, 2012

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
       To extend the temporary reduction of duty on Flumioxazin.

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

SECTION 1. FLUMIOXAZIN.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.25.69 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to Flumioxazin) 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 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER

PASAFESHARE LLC, 

Plaintiff, 

 v. 

MICROSOFT CORPORATION, 

Defendant. 

Case No. 6:20-cv-00397-ADA 

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 

AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER 

Further to the parties’ communications with the Court and pursuant to Rule 16, 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court ORDERS that the following schedule will 

govern deadlines up to and including the trial of this matter: 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

WACO DIVISION 
2 

AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER

Deadline Item 

12/1/2020 Plaintiff files Opening claim construction brief, 

including any arguments that any claim terms are 

indefinite. 

12/22/2020 Defendant files Responsive claim construction brief.

1/8/2021 Plaintiff files Reply claim construction brief.

1/28/2021 Defendant files Sur-Reply claim construction brief.

2/2/2021 Parties submit Joint Claim Construction Statement. 

See General Issues Note #8 regarding providing copies 

of the briefing to the Court and the technical adviser (if 

appointed). 

2/4/2021 [at 

least one week 

before 

Markman 

Hearing] 

Parties submit optional technical tutorials to the Court 

and technical adviser (if appointed). The parties should 

contact the law clerk to request a Box link so that the 

party can directly upload the file to the Court’s Box 

account. 

2/11/2021 Markman Hearing at 1:30 p.m. 

Dated: __________________________ 

ALAN D ALBRIGHT 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

November 19, 2020
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 195 (Friday, October 6, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 59875]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-25721]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993; Petroleum Environmental Research Forum 
(``PERF'')

    Notice is hereby given that, on August 18, 2000, pursuant to 
section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), the Petroleum Environmental 
Research Forum (``PERF'') has filed written notifications 
simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade 
Commission disclosing changes in its membership status. The 
notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's 
provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual 
damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, BOC Gases 
Technology, Murray Hill, NJ has been added as a party to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and the Petroleum Environmental Research 
Forum (``PERF'') intends to file additional written notification 
disclosing all changes in membership.
    On February 10, 1986, the Petroleum Environmental Research Forum 
(``PERF'') filed its original notification pursuant to section 6(a) of 
the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal 
Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on March 14, 1986 (51 FR 
8903).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on June 6, 
2000. A notice has not yet been published in the Federal Register.

Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 00-25721 Filed 10-5-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M