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

 U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT 

 09/25/98 

 THOMAS K. KAHN 

 CLERK

PUBLISH

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________________

No. 95-8459 

________________________________

D.C. Docket Nos. 1:91-CV-2399-ODE

1:91-CV-2400-ODE

1:91-CV-2401-ODE

STACY C. GRAY, individually and as Surviving Spouse 

of Lt. Douglas G. Gray, and as Personal Representative of

Lt. Douglas G. Gray, deceased,

Plaintiff-Appellee, Cross-Appellant,

versus

LOCKHEED AERONAUTICAL SYSTEMS COMPANY,

a division of Lockheed Corporation,

Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Appellee,

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

GRACE M. SCHUMACHER, individually and as Surviving 

Parent of Lt. John T. Hartman, and as Personal 

Representative of Lt. John Hartman, Deceased,

Plaintiff-Appellee, Cross-Appellant,

versus

LOCKHEED AERONAUTICAL SYSTEMS COMPANY,

a division of Lockheed Corporation,

Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Appellee,

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

WILMA J. JENNINGS, individually, and as Surviving Parent 

of Lt. David S. Jennings, and as Personal Representative 

of Lt. David S. Jennings, Deceased,
2

Plaintiff-Appellee, Cross-Appellant,

versus

LOCKHEED AERONAUTICAL SYSTEMS COMPANY,

a division of Lockheed Corporation,

Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Appellee,

_________________________________________________________________ 

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Northern District of Georgia

_________________________________________________________________

(September 25, 1998)

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before HATCHETT, Chief Judge, TJOFLAT, Circuit Judge, and CLARK, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

This case is before the court on remand from the United States Supreme Court for further

consideration of our earlier opinion in light of Dooley v. Korean Air Lines Co., Ltd., 118 S. Ct.

1890 (1998). In accord with the Court’s opinion, we reverse our previous holding that appellees

may recover damages for pain and suffering on their survival action claims based on general

maritime law in conjunction with the Death on the High Seas Act, 46 U.S.C. App. §§ 761-768. 

See Gray v. Lockheed Aeronautical Sys. Co., 125 F.3d 1371, 1381-86 (11th Cir. 1997). We

affirm the remainder of our decision that does not touch such survival action claims, and remand

to the district court for further proceedings consistent with our decision and Dooley.

REVERSED IN PART and REMANDED.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Webb Interactive Services, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Lindley S. Branson, Vice President  General Counsel, the Companys principal executive and principal financial officer, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



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



/s/ Lindley S. BransonVice President  General Counsel (Principal
Executive and Principal Financial Officer)




Date: August 22, 2005
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULES 13a-14(a) AND 15d-14(a)**

**UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

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

 

I, Alfred J. Novak, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Novoste Corporation;

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untruestatement 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 quarterly report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly 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) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant 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 materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared; 

 

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this quarterly report based on such evaluation; and 

 

c) disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

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

 

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the 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 who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: August 6, 2004
ACCEPTED

04-14-00246-CR

FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS

SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS

9/14/2015 9:21:33 AM

KEITH HOTTLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 4th COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 09/14/15 9:21:33 AM KEITH E. HOTTLE Clerk
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joseph Rucco, Appellant.

Judgment of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Antonio Brandveen, J.), rendered July 7, 1989, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of burglary in the second degree and two counts of sexual abuse in the first degree and sentencing him to concurrent indeterminate terms of *IVi*to 15 years and *SVz*to 7 years (two terms), respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The victim’s coherent, credible, and comprehensive testimony supports the verdict. *(People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490.) The complainant testified that she was awakened at the sound *237of her doorbell and opened it because she thought that the person who identified himself as "Joe” was a security guard with whom she had previously had a relationship. Instead, defendant, another guard, was at the door, and he forced his way inside. The victim testified that she could read the nameplate that defendant was wearing on his uniform.

Defendant’s argument that he could not have committed the crime because his employer did not supply uniform nameplates was a matter to be resolved by the jury, and in our view does not raise a reasonable doubt, especially in light of the victim’s certain identification of defendant and the proof of his opportunity to commit the crime. Moreover, while the victim’s testimony was not free from inconsistencies, defendant has not established that the jury did not apply the facts to the law as charged. *(Cf, People v Boettcher,*69 NY2d 174.)

Defendant’s acquittal on the attempted rape charge was not a bar to his conviction under the burglary count. After the court singled out rape as the underlying crime, the trial assistant was obligated to prove that very intent because the court’s charge became the law of the case. However, there is ample proof in the record of defendant’s intent to commit a rape, and the jury, as charged, was permitted to find defendant guilty of the burglary, but not of the attempted rape. *(People v Tucker,*55 NY2d 1, 7, n 4.) Defendant’s acquittal on the attempted rape did not necessarily negate the "intent to commit rape” element of the burglary charge.

Defendant also fails to show that the prosecutor committed reversible error in summation. Most of his claims of error have not been preserved for review, and the trial assistant’s characterization of the victim’s motivation for testifying was directly responsive to counsel’s claim that the victim’s account was incredible.

Defendant also claims that the prosecutor had no basis to ask a defense witness whether defendant had been discharged, but any error was cured by the court’s prompt instructions. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Ross, Ellerin and Smith, JJ.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement of
Sofamor Danek Group, Inc. 1993 Long-Term Incentive Plan on Form S-8 (File No.
33-60840) of our report dated February 2, 1998, on our audits of the
consolidated financial statements and consolidated financial statement schedule
of Sofamor Danek Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 1997 and 1996,
and for the three years in the period ended December 31, 1997, which report is
included as an exhibit to Form 10-K.



Memphis, Tennessee                                  COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.
March 23, 1998





<PAGE>   2
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement of
Sofamor Danek Group, Inc. Incentive Stock Option Plan on Form S-8 (File No.
33-43614) of our report dated February 2, 1998, on our audits of the
consolidated financial statements and consolidated financial statement schedule
of Sofamor Danek Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 1997 and 1996
and for the three years in the period ended December 31, 1997, which report is
included as an exhibit to Form 10-K.

                                COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.


Memphis, Tennessee
March 23, 1998





<PAGE>   3




CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement of
Sofamor Danek Group, Inc. Employee Stock Purchase Plan on Form S-8 (File No.
33-43597) of our report dated March 12, 1998, on our audits of the consolidated
financial statements and consolidated financial statement schedule of Sofamor
Danek Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 1997 and 1996 and for the
three years in the period ended December 31, 1997, which report is included as
an exhibit to Form 10-K.



                                                     COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.


Memphis, Tennessee
March 23, 1998
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1854 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1854

    To amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to enhance 
   penalties for theft of a firearm from a Federal firearms licensee.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 25, 2017

   Mr. Graham (for himself, Mr. Cassidy, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Risch, Mr. 
    Boozman, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Strange, Mr. Crapo, and Ms. Heitkamp) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to enhance 
   penalties for theft of a firearm from a Federal firearms licensee.

    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 ``Federal Firearms Licensee Protection 
Act of 2017''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO ENHANCE CERTAIN PENALTIES.

    Section 924 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) by striking subsection (i) and inserting the following:
    ``(i)(1)(A) A person who knowingly violates section 922(u), or 
attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more 
than 20 years, or both.
    ``(B) In the case of a violation described in subparagraph (A) that 
occurs during the commission of--
            ``(i) a burglary, the term of imprisonment shall be not 
        less than 3 years; or
            ``(ii) a robbery, the term of imprisonment shall be not 
        less than 5 years.
    ``(2) In this subsection--
            ``(A) the term `burglary' means the unlawful entry into, or 
        remaining in, the business premises of a licensed importer, 
        licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer with the intent to 
        commit a crime; and
            ``(B) the term `robbery' has the meaning given the term in 
        section 1951(b).''; and
            (2) in subsection (m), by inserting ``or attempts to do 
        so,'' after ``or licensed collector,''.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AT 12/31/97 FILED IN THE 1997 FORM 10K; CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET,
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE YEAR ENDED 12/31/97 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10K, DECEMBER 31, 1997.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           8,437
<SECURITIES>                                    43,856<F1>
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                28,066
<PP&E>                                          19,899
<DEPRECIATION>                                (13,214)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  59,588
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,244
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           203
<OTHER-SE>                                      53,816
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    59,588
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,049
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                23,492
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (18,119)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (18,119)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.89)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.89)

<FN>
<F1> Marketable securities includes long term investments
     of $24,788.
</FN>


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23



                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


The Board of Directors
nVIEW Corporation:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Forms
S-8 (No. 33- 44682, No. 33-76904, No. 33-38349 and No. 333-20023) of nVIEW
Corporation and subsidiaries of our report dated February 17, 1998, except as to
note 7, which is as of March 8, 1998, relating to the consolidated balance
sheets of nVIEW Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1997 and 1996,
and the related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders' equity, and
cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31,
1997, and all related schedules, which report appears in the December 31, 1997
annual report on Form 10-K of nVIEW Corporation.



                                                  /s/ KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

Norfolk, Virginia
April 13, 1998
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          27,394
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  949,777
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (17,502)
<INVENTORY>                                  1,064,152
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,038,907
<PP&E>                                       3,892,449
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,021,711)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,835,939
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,388,142
<BONDS>                                      1,417,935
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,975,139
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,835,939
<SALES>                                      9,081,251
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,083,861
<CGS>                                        8,640,531
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                8,790,599
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   352
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                10,811
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              71,997
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                210,102
<INCOME-TAX>                                    66,402
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            143,700
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   143,700
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00


</TABLE>
!function(e){"use strict";"function"==typeof define&&define.amd?define(["jquery","./version"],e):e(jQuery)}((function(e){"use strict";return e.ui.safeActiveElement=function(e){var n;try{n=e.activeElement}catch(t){n=e.body}return n||(n=e.body),n.nodeName||(n=e.body),n}}));
//# sourceMappingURL=safe-active-element-min.js.map
#### BURNS v. STATE.

No. 20846.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 20, 1940.

Rehearing Denied April 17, 1940.

M. E. Lawrence, of Eastland, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

It was charged by complaint and information that on April 1, 1939 in Brown County, Texas, appellant sold whisky to J. M. Rich. By proper averments it was alleged that Brown County was dry territory. It was also alleged that appellant had been convicted of an offense of like character on the 20th day of July, 1937. Upon conviction appellant’s punishment was assessed at a fine of $500.

There is incorporated in the transcript what is denominated a statement of facts. It is not approved by the trial judge and is not shown to have ever been filed in the trial court. It is not subject to consideration.

A number of bills of exception are found in the record. As qualified, no error is manifest. Some cannot be appraised in the absence of the facts.

The judgment is affirmed.

On Motion for Rehearing.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant has filed a motion for rehearing and seems to take the view that he has been deprived of a statement of facts and is entitled, under the authorities, to have his case reversed. There is found within the papers a statement of facts which does not show to have been filed in the case and was not approved by the judge. Counsel may be correct as a matter of fact but there is nothing in the record to bring that to the attention of this court. It cannot be done by the mere statement of counsel in his brief nor in his motion for rehearing.

We find nothing before us for consideration, and accordingly, the motion for rehearing is overruled.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 233 (Monday, December 4, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 75722]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-30825]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Health Resources and Services Administration


Availability of Funds Announced in the HRSA Preview; Withdrawal

AGENCY: Health Resources and Services Administration.

ACTION: Notice; withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY: In the Federal Register issue of Friday, July 7, 2000, in Part 
III ``Availability of Funds Announced in the HRSA Preview'' of FR Doc. 
00-16874, on page 42219, the grant category beginning in the second 
column under the heading ``Continuing Education and Development 
Cooperative Agreement to Advance Education and Program/Policy 
Development in Maternal and Child Health (CFDA #93.110TP),'' is 
withdrawn from competition while the Agency is considering its options 
regarding the activities proposed for support. After a decision is 
made, another announcement will be published in the Federal Register.
    Prospective applicants who have submitted letters of intent or 
requested application materials from the HRSA Grants Application Center 
have been notified directly of this withdrawal.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Galaty or Sharon Adamo, Office 
of Program Development, Maternal and Child Health Bureau, Health 
Resources and Services Administration, Room 11A-22, Parklawn Building, 
5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857; telephone 1-301-443-2778.

    Dated: November 29, 2000.
Claude Earl Fox,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 00-30825 Filed 12-1-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-15-P