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

No. 10966.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Dallas.

May 14, 1932.

Wynne *&*Wynne, of Wills Point, for appellant.

P. H. Brendergast, of Marshall, and A. A. Dawson, of Canton, for appellees.

JONES, C. J.

Appellant, J. W. Bateman, a resident of Van Zandt county, instituted this suit in the district court of said county against appel-lees, H. W. McGee and C. E. McClelland, the former residing in Harrison county and the latter in Gregg county, to recover commissions on the sale of royalties from'mineral lands in Van Zandt county. Appellees each filed a plea of privilege, McGee praying that the suit against him be transferred to Harrison county, the county of his residence, and McClelland, yielding his right to be sued in Gregg county, also prayed that the suit be transferred to Harrison county. After a trial on the pleas of privilege, the court entered judgment transferring the cause to the district court of Harrison county, and appellant has duly perfected an appeal.

Appellant’s controverting affidavit alleged a right to maintain the venue ip Van Zandt county, under subdivision 7 of article 1995, R. C. S., the general venue statute. This subdivision declares in substance that, in all cases of fraud, suit may be brought in the county where the fraud was committed. Appellant alleged certain fraudulent representations made to him in Van Zandt county, by appellees, in reference to their power to bind *375the owners of the land to pay a commission on royalty sales. The main issue raised by the evidence shows that there exists between the parties a disputed issue of fact as to whether any contract was entered into at all, and that any fraud claimed by appellant to have been practiced on him, in reference to their authority to represent the owners, is only incidental to this main issue. Appellant’s suit is not one to cancel a contract because of fraud, but to recover on the contract that he undertakes to make binding on appellees. Under this state of facts, we think there was no error in the judgment rendered by the trial court. Latshaw v. McLean (Tex. Civ. App.) 238 S. W. 1004; Neal v. Barbee (Tex. Civ. App.) 185 S. W. 1060; Dowell v. Long (Tex. Civ. App.) 219 S. W. 560; Slaughter v. Oakes (Tex. Civ. App.) 203 S. W. 407; Sheffield v. Rousey (Tex. Civ. App.) 153 S. W. 653; Winfield v. Conyers (Tex. Civ. App.) 38 S.W.(2d) 894; Beale v. Cherryhomes et al. (Tex. Civ. App.) 21 S.W.(2d) 65.

It follows that the judgment of the lower - court should be affirmed.

Affirmed. »
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE DONNA
KARAN INTERNATIONAL INC. FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-02-2000
<CASH>                                           5,834
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  112,916
<ALLOWANCES>                                    30,598
<INVENTORY>                                     64,824
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               196,270
<PP&E>                                          90,501
<DEPRECIATION>                                  50,706
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 270,274
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           94,732
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           216
<OTHER-SE>                                     135,833
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   270,274
<SALES>                                        172,770
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               172,770
<CGS>                                          116,791
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  116,791
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                49,776
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 571
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,642
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,314
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,328
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,328
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.15


</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.1


CERTIFICATIONS

I, Frank W. Getman Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer of
BayCorp Holdings, Ltd., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of BayCorp
 Holdings, Ltd.;

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

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information 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 and maintaining 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 material information 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) [paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and
34-47986];

  c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures and 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

 d) disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the
registrant's internal control over 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;

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

  a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting
which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the 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's internal controls.

Date:  August 6, 2004   By: /s/ Frank W. Getman Jr.
                        --------------------------
                        Frank W. Getman Jr.
                        President and Chief Executive Officer
                        (principal executive officer)
<PAGE>
                                       
                                   EXHIBIT 11

                             DUPONT PHOTOMASKS, INC.
                          EARNINGS PER SHARE COMPUTATION
                 (DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE AMOUNTS)
                                  (UNAUDITED)


                                                  Quarter Ended December 31,1996
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                    Primary        Fully Diluted
                                                  ----------       -------------

Weighted average shares outstanding               15,100,000         15,100,000
Dilutive effect of stock performance plans           439,182            488,952
                                                  ----------         ----------
                                                  15,539,182         15,588,952
                                                  ----------         ----------
                                                  ----------         ----------

Net income for the period                             $9,433             $9,433

Earnings per share                                     $0.61              $0.61


                                              Six Months Ended December 31, 1996
                                              ----------------------------------
                                                    Primary        Fully Diluted
                                                  ----------       -------------

Weighted average shares outstanding               15,100,000         15,100,000
Dilutive effect of stock performance plans           343,047            417,302
                                                  ----------         ----------
                                                  15,443,047         15,517,302
                                                  ----------         ----------
                                                  ----------         ----------

Net income for the period                            $18,448            $18,448

Earnings per share                                     $1.19              $1.19
Novoste Corporation

Exhibit 11
Computation of Net Loss Per Share

                                                     Three Months Ended

                                                         March 31,
                                                -------------------------
                                                    1997           1996
                                                -------------------------
Weighted average number of shares of
common stock outstanding during the year          8,330,281     4,110,195

Effect of common stock issued and stock
options and warrants granted during the 12-
month period preceding April 11, 1996 (1)           --          1,194,411

Elimination of duplicative effect of including
the same shares in both above amounts               --           (357,384)
                                                -----------   -----------

Total common and common equivalent shares         8,330,281     4,947,222
                                                ===========   ===========

Net loss                                        $(2,642,406)  $(1,210,661)
                                                ===========   ===========

Net loss per share (2)                          $     (0.32)  $     (0.24)
                                                ===========   ===========

(1)  Pursuant to Securities and Exchange Commission Staff Accounting Bulletin
     No. 83, Common Stock issued and stock options and warrants granted at
     prices below the initial public offering price per share during the
     12-month period immediately preceding the initial filing date of the
     Company's Registration Statement for its initial public offering have been
     included as outstanding for all periods presented which include periods
     prior to such filing date using the treasury stock method. 
(2)  Since the impact of including common stock equivalents is anti-dilutive for
     both primary and fully diluted loss per share, the calculation of loss per
     share for both purposes is identical.
EXHIBIT 32.2




Certification Pursuant to


18 U.S.C. Section 1350,


as Adopted Pursuant to


Section 906 of the Sarbanes –Oxley Act of 2002






In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of DELCATH SYSTEMS, INC. (the "Company") for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David A. McDonald, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:




(1) The "Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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.





DATE  March 8, 2011
/s/ David A. McDonaldDavid A. McDonaldChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11
25-Mar-97
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                         INTERNATIONAL LOTTERY, INC.
                      Computation of earnings per share

                                 Three months ended                  Year ended
                                    December 31,                     December 31,
                                1996            1995            1996            1995
                                ----            ----            ----            ----
<S>                             <C>             <C>             <C>             <C>
Weighted average common         3,210,000       3,210,000       3,210,000       3,207,587
shares outstanding during
the period

Net income                       $726,384        $430,320      $1,320,597      $1,987,219

Net income per share                $0.23           $0.13           $0.41           $0.62


Assuming full dilution:

  Shares
  Weighted average common       3,210,000       3,210,000       3,210,000       3,207,587
  shares outstanding
  during the period

  Assuming exercise of              2,000          74,291           2,000          35,897
  options

  Weighted average common       3,212,000       3,284,291       3,212,000       3,243,484
  shares outstanding
  as adjusted

  Net income                     $726,384        $430,320      $1,320,597      $1,987,219

  Earnings per common               $0.23           $0.13           $0.41           $0.61
  share assuming full
  dilution
</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                    D&E Communications, Inc. and Subsidiaries

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the period
ended June 30, 2002 of D&E Communications, Inc. (the "Company") as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Thomas E. Morell, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. " 1350, as adopted pursuant to " 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

      (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. " 78m(a) or " 78o(d));
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/ Thomas E. Morell
---------------------------------
Name: Thomas E. Morell
Title: Chief Financial Officer
Date:  March 31, 2003

This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-K pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required
by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.


                                       51
Novoste Corporation                                               Exhibit 10.23

July 1, 1999

Dr. Raoul Bonan
9451 Cote St-Louis
Mirabel
Quebec, Canada J0N 1S0

                  Re:   Modifications to your Employment Agreement

Dear Raoul:

      I am pleased to confirm our mutual agreement to amend your existing
employment agreement with us in recognition of your outstanding performance over
the past year.

      We will increase your annual salary to $220,000 retroactive to June 1,
1999. Based on our normal bi-weekly payroll, you will receive $8,461.54 per pay
period, less applicable withholdings and deductions.

      We will forgive repayment of your promissory note dated April 20, 1999
payable to us in the amount of $80,000 and will return your shares of common
stock that we have held as collateral for that loan.

      We will pay you a one-time lump sum cash bonus of $40,000, subject to
applicable withholdings and deductions, payable on or before September 1, 1999.

      We will pay you an additional one-time payment in the amount of $3,262,
payable on or before September 1, 1999, to cover any claims that you may have
had for a "gross-up" of your income taxes relating to the forgiveness of the
$80,000 promissory note, rent payments you received from us or otherwise.


                                       26
<PAGE>

Dr. Raoul Bonan                     July 1, 1999                        Page Two

      You acknowledge and agree that you have no other claim for compensation
for services that you have rendered to us to date under your employment
agreement other than as set forth in this letter or in your stock option
agreements.

Best regards,

William A. Hawkins
President & CEO

Accepted:

-------------------------                       --------------------
Dr. Raoul Bonan                                 Date


                                       27
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed July 12, 2023. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D23-0850 Lower Tribunal No. F75-9136

________________ 

### Tommy L. Murrell, Appellant, vs. 

### The State of Florida, Appellee. An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Teresa Pooler, Judge. Tommy L. Murrell, in proper person. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee. Before FERNANDEZ, SCALES and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed.
**EXHIBIT21.1**

**MedImmune,Inc. Subsidiaries**
| Name                                                       | ** ** | ** **     | ** ** | **State or Jurisdiction of Organization** | ** ** | ** ** |
|------------------------------------------------------------|------------|----------------|------------|-------------------------------------------|------------|------------|
| ** **                                                 | ** ** | ** **     |
| 1. MedImmune Oncology,  Inc.                               |       | Delaware       |
|                                                       |       |           |
| 2. MedImmune Finance,  Inc.                                |       | Delaware       |
|                                                       |       |           |
| 3. MedImmune Pharma BV                                     |       | Netherlands    |
|                                                       |       |           |
| 4. MedImmune Vaccines,  Inc.                               |       | Delaware       |
|                                                       |       |           |
| 5. MedImmune U.K. Ltd.                                     |       | United Kingdom |
|                                                       |       |           |
| 6. MedImmune Ventures,  Inc.                               |       | Delaware       |
|                                                       |       |           |
| 7. MedImmune  Distribution Holdings, Inc.                  |       | Delaware       |
|                                                       |       |           |
| 8. MedImmune Commercial  Operations, Inc.                  |       | Delaware       |
|                                                       |       |           |
| 9. MedImmune Distribution,  LLC                            |       | Delaware       |
|                                                       |       |           |
| 10. MedImmune Affairs,  Inc.                               |       | Delaware       |
|                                                       |       |           |
| 11. MedImmune  International, LLC                          |       | Delaware       |
|                                                       |       |           |
| 12. MedImmune  International Holdings (Bermuda) LP         |       | Bermuda        |
|                                                       |       |           |
| 13. MedImmune  International Holdings (The Netherlands) BV |       | Netherlands    |
|                                                       |       |           |
| 14. MedImmune International Distribution BV                |       | Netherlands    |
|                                                       |       |           |
| 15. Cellective Therapeutics, Inc.                          |       | Delaware       |

1

----
#### WALL v. REIMERS et al.

No. 8042.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Austin.

Jan. 23, 1935.

A. M. Felts and Horace Shelton, both of Austin, for appellant.

L. L. Hoge and Hart, Patterson, & Hart, all of Austin, for appellees.

McCLENDON, Chief Justice.

Mrs. Jackel sued C. F. and T. B. Wall upon their joint and several note in her favor, dated in 1928, and due one year after date. While the case was pending, Mrs. Jackel died, and Reimers, her administrator, was substituted as plaintiff.

Upon a trial to the court without a jury, the judgment was for the plaintiff against both defendants for the full amount of the note. C. F. Wall alone has appealed.

Appellant’s brief has no assignments of error, but urges two propositions to the effect, first, that although he signed the note as principal, he was in fact only a surety for T. B. Wall, which fact was known to Mrs. Jackel; and, second, that to fix his liability as surety it was necessary under R. S. art. 566 that the holder either protest the note or bring suit thereon to the first or second term of court thereafter. The record conclusively shows that appellant was in fact only a surety, and that this was known to Reimers who acted for Mrs. Jackel in making the loan. The above article was not complied with. The difficulty we find with the second proposition is that the invoked article only applies to the drawers and indorsers of bills of exchange, and the indorsers of negotiable notes. The statute has no application whatever to a surety, - whether or not his suretyship be expressed upon the face of the note. See 8 O. J., p. 531, § 743. This statute was repealed by implication by article 5938 (Uniform Negotiable Instruments Act, § 89 et seep, First Nat. Bank v. Cotton Oil Co. [Tex. Civ. App.] 250 S. W. 313, judgment affirmed [Tex. Com. App.] 274 S. W. 127); which makes mandatory notice of dishonor to the drawer and indorser; but in like manner as article 566 has no application to sureties.

There is an additional ground of invalidity of this defense, in that the note provides: “The makers and endorsers hereof hereby severally waive protest, demand, and notice of protest and nonpayment in case this note is not paid at maturity, and agree to all extensions and partial payments before or after maturity without prejudice to holder.” Brinker v. Bank (Tex. Civ. App.) 16 S.W.(2d) 965, reversed on other grounds (Tex. Com. App.) 37 S.W.(2d) 136.

The trial court’s judgment is affiimed.

Affirmed.