alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### STEUERLE v. TINDELL et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

March 5, 1954.

Raymond C. Arny, Louisville, for appellant. ' ■

*788Marion F. Wiseheart, Lyndon Everbach, Louisville,' for appellee.

STANLEY, Commissioner.

Clarence J. Steuerie sued Thomas H. Tindell on a note for $8,500 dated November 26, -1948, and sought to have his conveyance of an interest in land set aside as fraudulent. The court analyzed the vague and confusing pleadings .and proof and concluded that the petition should be “dismissed on one of more of the following grounds: Unclean hands, fraud in inducement, lack of consideration, or release of the principal obligor,, thus releasing the surety.” Judgment was entered accordingly.

We agree with everything the trial court had to say about the record and with his conclusions.

It appears that Steuerie was the real owner of a corporation known as the American Distributing Company. He sold his interest to Tindell, but the papers did not show a sale of the stock/ The references are to the sale of the company. The note sued on was signed by the corporation by Tindell as'its president and then by him personally as surety. A mortgage of the company’s personal property was executed in the same way. The company :-was- insolvent and soon went into1 receivership. It is quite clear that Steuerie knew of its insolvency. Tindell probably was also acquainted with it. The picture of the transaction is obscure and tangled. The more prominent part of it is the dark shadows. It is well painted in the trial court’s opinion and need not be reproduced here. It seems sufficient to say that the transaction appears to have been an effort to “get from under” the collapsing structure. The men*2 ■were close friends and Tindell had been employed by the company until six months before the transaction. It may have been that Tindell undertook to pull the company out of the depths, and that it was understood by both parties that his liability upon the note depended upon that accomplishment. A significant thing is that Tindell was called by Steuerie as a witness in his behalf in a divorce proceeding, and upon his request Tindell testified that he was not indebted to. Steuerie because the corporation had failed. Steuerie had released the mortgage of record on March 1, 1949, as haying been “satisfied in full.”

We find no merit in appellant’s argument he was entitled to judgment on the pleadings. The ground of discharge from the obligation'sued on because of the release of' the mortgage security given by the principal debtor- may be'put out of the case because it- was not pleaded. Nor was there an affirmative plea of- payment. See Sandmanrt v. Getty, 254 Ky. 496, 71 SW.2d 954. But unconscionable character of a transaction between the parties need not be pleaded or set up-as a defense, for the court on its own motion may apply the maxim of unclean hands. 30 C.J.S., Equity, § *97.*The pleadings .and evidence also sustain the other grounds stated by the court for his conclusion.

The judgment is affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 297 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 297

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 7, 2013

     Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, 
                     Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To amend the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize support for 
      graduate medical education programs in children's hospitals.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Children's Hospital GME Support 
Reauthorization Act of 2013''.

SEC. 2. PROGRAM OF PAYMENTS TO CHILDREN'S HOSPITALS THAT OPERATE 
              GRADUATE MEDICAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS.

    (a) In General.--Section 340E of the Public Health Service Act (42 
U.S.C. 256e) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``through 2005 and each 
        of fiscal years 2007 through 2011'' and inserting ``through 
        2005, each of fiscal years 2007 through 2011, and each of 
        fiscal years 2013 through 2017'';
            (2) in subsection (f)(1)(A)(iv), by inserting ``and each of 
        fiscal years 2013 through 2017'' after ``2011''; and
            (3) in subsection (f)(2)(D), by inserting ``and each of 
        fiscal years 2013 through 2017'' after ``2011''.
    (b) Report to Congress.--Section 340E(b)(3)(D) of the Public Health 
Service Act (42 U.S.C. 256e(b)(3)(D)) is amended by striking ``Not 
later than the end of fiscal year 2011'' and inserting ``Not later than 
the end of fiscal year 2016''.

            Passed the House of Representatives February 4, 2013.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. RP01-46-000]

Take notice that on October 13, 2000, Carnegie Interstate Pipeline Company (Carnegie) in compliance with the Commission's September 28, 2000 order in Docket No. RM96-1-016, and pursuant to Rule 212 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.212, tendered for filing their requests for waiver of section 284.12(c)(2)(ii) of the Commission's regulations, which requires pipelines to implement imbalance netting and trading on their systems.

Carnegie states that its shippers do not incur imbalances netting trading to avoid cash-out charges because Carnegie does not have a cash-out mechanism.

Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed on or before October 26, 2000. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-27342 Filed 10-24-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
EXHIBIT 32.01



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 on Form 10-Q of Swank, Inc. (the "Company") for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2005 (the "Report"), the undersigned each hereby certifies 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 respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|Dated: May 13, 2005  |  | /s/ John Tulin                          
|-------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------
|                     |  |                                         
|                     |  | John Tulin, President                   
|                     |  | (Chief Executive Officer)               
|                     |  |                                         
|                     |  |                                         
|Dated:  May 13, 2005 |  | /s/ Jerold R. Kassner                   
|                     |  |                                         
|                     |  | Jerold R. Kassner, Senior Vice President
|                     |  | and Treasurer                           
|                     |  | (Chief Financial Officer)               

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Swank, Inc. and will be retained by Swank, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Markowitz, Exrx., et al., Appellants, *v.*The Brooklyn Heights Cemetery Association et al., Appellees.

(No. 27998

Decided February 7, 1940.)

*Mr. Dorr E. Warner,*for appellants.

*Messrs. McKeehan, Merrick, Arter & Stewart, Mr. Ashley M. Van*Duser, *Mr. George P. Bickford*and *Mr. Milton G. Portmann,*for appellees.

It is ordered and adjudged that said appeal as of right be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason no debatable constitutional question is involved in said cause.

*Appeal dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Day, Zimmerman, "Williams, Myers and Hart, JJ., concur.

Matthias, J., not participating.
SERVED MARCH 19, 2010 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

AMERICAN EAGLE AIRLINES, INC. 

FAA DOCKET No. CP09SW0007 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

DMS No. FAA-2009-1043 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

Complainant Federal Aviation Administration ("Complainant") filed a Complaint 

dated November 10, 2009. Respondent American Eagle Airlines, Inc. ("Respondent") 

had filed a Request for Hearing on November 6, 2009. Respondent on March 17, 2010 

moved to withdraw its request for hearing ("Motion") and seeks dismissal of the matter, 

citing settlement. 

14 C.F.R. § 13.215 states: "At any time before or during a hearing, an agency 

attorney may withdraw a complaint or a party may withdraw a request for a hearing 

without the consent of the administrative law judge. If an agency attorney withdraws the 

complaint or a party withdraws the request for a hearing and the answer, the 

administrative law judge shall dismiss the proceedings under this subpart with prejudice." 

Wherefore, the within filed Motion having been read and considered, it is ordered 

as follows: 

1. Respondent's Motion is hereby granted; and 

2. This proceeding be and is hereby dismissed with prejudice. 
s o ORDERED. 

Attachment - Service List 

Richard C. Goodwin ' ^ 

Administrative Law Judge 
FAA Docket No. CP09SW0007 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1OOO' 

ONE COPY 

American Eagle Airlines, Inc., Respondent 

ATTN: Peter Bowler, President 

1700 W. 20* Street, MD 1200 

P.O. Box 612527 

DFW Airport, TX 75261-2527 

Francis C. Heil, Respondent's Counsel 

American Airlines, Inc., Legal Department 

P.O. Box 619616, Mail Drop 5675 

DFW Airport, TX 75261-9616 

TEL: 202-496-5642 

FAX: 202-496-5660 

Rena M. Price, Complainant's Counsel 

Safety Enforcement Branch, Office of the Regional Counsel 

Southwest Region, ASW-7E1, RMP 

Federal Aviation Administration 

2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663 

Fort Worth, TX 76137-0007 

TEL: 817-222-5068 

FAX: 817-222-5945/5092 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room E12-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: Attomey-Advisor 202-366-2139 

Legal Assistant 202-366-5121 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC^SO.
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I,Wilson W. Cheung, certify that:

 

1.             I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/Aof AXT, Inc.;

 

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

 

3.             Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, andother financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects, the financial condition, results of operations and cashflows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

 
| Date: June 17, 2009 | By:      | /s/  Wilson W. Cheung                            |
|--------------------------|----------|--------------------------------------------------|
|                     |     | Wilson  W. Cheung                                |
|                     |     | Chief  Financial Officer and Corporate Secretary |
| * *                 | * * | *(Principal Executive Officer and*               |
| * *                 | * * | *Principal Financial Officer)*                   |

 

----
<page>

EXHIBIT 23.2

            Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

         We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 pertaining to Integrated Healthcare Holdings, Inc.'s 2006
Stock Incentive Plan, of our report dated July 11, 2006 relating to our audit of
the consolidated financial statements of Integrated Healthcare Holdings, Inc.
for the year ended December 31, 2005, which includes an explanatory paragraph
concerning uncertainty about the Company's ability to continue as a going
concern, contained in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year
ended March 31, 2008.



/s/ RAMIREZ INTERNATIONAL
Financial & Accounting Services, Inc.
August 18, 2008
Irvine, California
#### WHITE v. STATE.

No. 22108.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 6, 1942.

Rehearing Denied June 3, 1942.

Alex P. Pope, of Tyler, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

*101GRAVES, Judge.

Appellant was charged by complaint and information with the possession of an illicit beverage, to-wit: liquor to which no stamp had been affixed showing the payment of the tax due the State of Texas, and upon his trial was by the jury convicted and assessed a penalty of a $200 fine.

There is neither a statement of facts nor bills of exceptions in the record. The proceedings shown in the record appear to be regular, and there being nothing presented for review, the judgment is affirmed.

On Motion for Rehearing.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

Appellant’s motion for rehearing is of a formal nature only. No specific challenge is made to our holding. Nothing new is presented or pointed out.

The motion for rehearing is overruled.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the, Commission of Appeals has been examined-by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2946 

To direct the Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration 

to assess and report on the risk posed to commercial aviation security 

if a flight deck door is opened during flight. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

AUGUST 1, 2013 

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

Committee on Homeland Security 

A BILL 

To direct the Administrator of the Transportation Security 

Administration to assess and report on the risk posed 

to commercial aviation security if a flight deck door 

is opened during flight. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Risk-Based Cockpit 

5 Security Act of 2013’’. 

6 SEC. 2. SECURITY RISK ASSESSMENT. 

7 (a) ASSESSMENT.—Not later than 90 days after the 

8 date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator of 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2946 IH

1 the Transportation Security Administration shall complete 

2 an assessment that— 

3 (1) identifies any risk posed to commercial avia4 tion security if a flight deck door is opened while a 

5 commercial aircraft is in flight; 

6 (2) identifies methods to mitigate such risk; 

7 and 

8 (3) recommends security standards for any 

9 mitigation method that involves installing a physical 

10 secondary cockpit barrier on a commercial aircraft. 

11 (b) REPORT.—Not later than 10 days after com12 pleting the assessment described in subsection (a), the Ad13 ministrator of the Transportation Security Administration 

14 shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security of 

15 the House of Representatives and the Committee on 

16 Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Sen17 ate a report containing any findings and recommendations 

18 of the assessment. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Rubincon Ventures Inc










 



Rubincon Ventures Inc.



        



Suite 2410, 650 West Georgia Street, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6B 4N7



Ph: 604-689-8336   Fax: 604-682-5564






 



 



February 22, 2006






James H. Batmasian



Suite 1 - 215 North Federal Hwy



Boca Raton, Florida



33432






Dear Mr. Batmasian:






Re: Subscription Agreement (the "Agreement") with Rubincon Ventures Inc. (the "Company") dated February 15, 2006






This letter is written to confirm your agreement to amend the terms of the Agreement as follows:






Sections 6.2 and 6.3 of the Agreement are hereby removed and replaced with the new sections 6.2 and 6.3 as follows:






6.2       The Subscriber understands that the proceeds from this sale of securities is intended to be used by the issuer primarily for acquisitions to be made subsequent to the acquisition of an operating company by the Issuer as a result of which the Issuer is no longer a shell company as defined under the federal securities laws, of other businesses, assets, technologies and intellectual property, and for investments in research and development (each an "Acquisition") to complement the Issuer's business plans.  The Issuer is obligated to use its best efforts to file with the SEC a registration statement registering for resale under the Securities Act of 1933 all of the Shares issued hereunder on the earlier of (i) 90 days after the closing of an Acquisition or (ii) nine months of the date of the Subscriber's subscription date, which subscription date is February 15, 2006 (such earlier dates shall be referred to as the "Filing Date").  In the event that the Issuer files with the SEC a registration statement registering shares other than the Shares, and does so before the Filing Date, the Subscriber shall have the right, commonly known as a "piggy-back registration right", to have the Subscriber's Shares included in any such registration statement.



 



6.3       In the event that the Issuer does not file with the SEC, on or before the Filing Date, a registration statement as described in Section 6.2 above, then the Subscriber shall be entitled to receive an additional number of Shares equal to 10% of the number of Shares subscribed for and the Issuer shall issue the additional Shares to the Subscriber within 15 days after the Filing Date.  For greater clarity, if a Subscriber subscribes for 2,500,000 Shares, and the registration statement is not filed with the SEC by the Filing Date, then that Subscriber would receive an additional 250,000 Shares.






In all other ways, the Agreement remains in full force and effect, unamended.






Please execute a copy of this letter and return it to the office of our corporate counsel at (604) 608-4223.






Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact us at anytime.







Yours truly,



RUBINCON VENTURES INC.






 







Guy Peckham, 



President






The above terms of amendment of my subscription agreement with Rubincon Ventures Inc. dated February 15, 2006 are hereby read, understood, acknowledged and accepted.






 



_________________________ 



JAMES H. BATMASIAN
#### MOORE v. STATE.

No. 22105.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 6, 1942.

Rehearing Denied June 3, 1942.

Alex P. Pope, of Tyler, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

Upon his plea of guilty to the offense of driving an automobile upon a public highway while intoxicated, appellant was convicted and his punishment assessed at a fine of $50.

The record is before us without statement of facts or bills of exception. No error appears of record.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.