alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Robert GINDEL, Kevin Humphrey, Xioadan Song, Weijing Li, Patricia Jacobs, Craig Handwerker, John Woods, Michelle Charbonneau, Annie Brousseau, Claude Racine, Roland Skerget, Anne Smart, Anthony D'acunto, Gregg Lutz, Eric Nemeth, Judith Grasso, Lori Bryan, Brian Streicher, and Grace Mackey, Appellants, v. CENTEX HOMES, Centex Real Estate Corporation, 2728 Holding Corporation, Pulte Home Corporation, and Pulte Corporation, Appellees.

No. 4D17-2149

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[April 3, 2019]

Scott C. Harris of Whitfield Bryson & Mason, LLP, Raleigh, NC, for appellants.

Luis E. Ordonez and Gabriel A. Alfonso of Quintairos, Prieto, Wood & Boyer, P.A., Miami, John H. Dannecker, Derrick M. Valkenburg, and Jennifer P. Sommerville of Shutts & Bowen, LLP, Orlando, and Jason B. Gonzalez of Shutts & Bowen, LLP, Tallahassee, for appellees.

***On Motion for Certification***

Per Curiam.

Appellees request this Court to certify that its decision is in direct conflict with a decision of another district court of appeal, and/or that the decision passes upon a question of great public importance. Pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.030(a)(2)(A)(v), we grant the motion for certification. Because reasonable people may differ on the interpretation of applicable Florida Supreme Court precedent as it applies to the interpretation of sections 95.11(3)(c) and 558.004, Florida Statutes (2014), we certify the following question to the Florida Supreme Court as one of great public importance:

DOES COMPLIANCE WITH THE NOTICE REQUIREMENT UNDER SECTION 558.004(1), FLORIDA STATUTES (2014) CONSTITUTE THE COMMENCEMENT OF A CIVIL ACTION OR PROCEEDING SUFFICIENT TO TOLL THE STATUTE OF REPOSE SET FORTH IN SECTION 95.11(3)(C), FLORIDA STATUTES (2014)?

Fernandez and Scales, Associate Judges, and Suarez, Senior Associate Judge, concur.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 3.17

                          CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION

                                       OF

                            MERCER FORGE CORPORATION

      1. The name of the corporation is MERCER FORGE CORPORATION.

      2. The address of the corporation's registered office in the State of
Delaware is Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange Street, in the City of
Wilmington, County of New Castle. The name of its registered agent at such
address is The Corporation Trust Company.

      3. The purposes of the corporation are to engage in any lawful act or
activities for which corporations may be organized under the General Corporation
Law of Delaware.

      4. The total number of shares of all classes of stock which the
corporation shall have authority to issue is One Thousand (1,000) shares of the
par value of One Dollar ($1.00) each, all of which shall be Common stock.

      5. The name and mailing address of the sole incorporator is Michael A. O.
deFreitas, c/o Hodgson, Russ, Andrews, Woods & Goodyear, 1800 One M & T Plaza,
Buffalo, New York 14203.

      6. In furtherance and not in limitation of the powers conferred by
statute, the board of directors is expressly authorized to adopt, amend or
repeal the by-laws of the corporation.

      7. Election of directors need not be by written ballot unless the by-laws
of the corporation shall so provide.

<PAGE>


      8. The corporation reserves the right to amend, alter, change or repeal
any provision contained in this Certificate of Incorporation, in the manner now
or hereafter prescribed by statute, and all rights conferred upon stockholders
herein are granted subject to this reservation.

      THE UNDERSIGNED, being the sole incorporator hereinbefore named, for the
purpose of forming a corporation pursuant to the General Corporation Law of the
State of Delaware, does make this certificate, hereby declaring and certifying
that this is his act and deed and the facts herein stated are true, and
accordingly has hereunto set his hand this [ILLEGIBLE] day of October, 1985.

                                         /s/ Michael A. O. deFreitas
                                         -------------------------------
                                         Michael A. O. deFreitas
1 17-cv-00179-HSG

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT LINDA ZHONG'S APPLICATION TO 

APPEAR AT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE BY TELEPHONE

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GENERAL CAPACITOR, 

INTERNATIONAL, INC., 

a Florida corporation, GENERAL 

CAPACITOR, LLC, 

and GENERAL CAPACITOR CO. 

LTD.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

LINDA ZHONG,

Defendant.

CASE NO.: 3:17-cv-00179-HSG

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT 

LINDA ZHONG'S APPLICATION TO 

APPEAR AT CASE MANAGEMENT 

CONFERENCE BY TELEPHONE

Case 4:17-cv-00179-HSG Document 40 Filed 02/07/17 Page 1 of 2
2 17-cv-00179-HSG

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT LINDA ZHONG'S APPLICATION TO

APPEAR AT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE BY TELEPHONE

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Defendant LINDA ZHONG applies for an order allowing her counsel to appear by 

telephone at the Case Management Conference on February 14, 2017 at 2:00pm. 

Whereas the Court finds that there is good cause to allow Defendant's counsel to appear 

by telephone, NOW THEREFORE,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant LINDA ZHONG's counsel may appear by 

telephone at the Case Management Conference on February 14, 2017 at 2:00pm. 

Counsel shall contact CourtCall at (866) 582-6878 to make arrangements for the 

telephonic appearance. 

DATED: February 7, 2017 By: __________________________

 Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.

Case 4:17-cv-00179-HSG Document 40 Filed 02/07/17 Page 2 of 2
## Court of Appeals of the State of Geo rgia

ATLA NTA,

_________________ _ The Court of

Appeals hereby passes

the followi

ng order: A14D0425. JAMES LAMAR RILEY v. THE STAT E. May 1, 20 1 4, the trial court enter ed an o rder re voki ng Ja mes Lamar Ril ey’s probation. On Jun e 23, 2014, Riley filed this application for discretionary appeal seeking r eview of that order. An application for discretionary appeal m ust be filedwith in 3 0 da ys of entry of the order to be appealed . OCGA§ 5-6-35 (d ). “ The requirements of

OCGA § 5-6- 35 are jur isdictional

and this court c annot

accept an appeal not made in com pliance therewith.” Boyle v. State , 190 Ga. App. 734 (380 SE2d 57) (1989); see also Gable v. State , 290 Ga. 81, 82-83 (2) (a) (720 SE2d 1 70) (2 011) . Becau se Ril ey’s applicati onwas filed 53 days after entry of the ord er he seek s to app eal, it i s un timel y. We thus lack jurisd iction to consider this app lication , which is her eby DISMISSED. Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Offi

ce, Atlant a,_______________

___ I certify t hat the abo ve is a true

extrac t from the minutes of the Court

of Appeals

of Georgia. Witness my signature a nd t he s eal of sai

d court hereto aff

ixed the day and year last above writt

en. , Clerk. 07/16/2014 July 16, 2014
Adele SIMONS, and Corner Lakes Estates Homeowners Association, Inc., Appellants, v. ORANGE COUNTY, Banksville of Florida, Inc., CHCG Land Services, LLC., Rolling R. Ranch, Ltd., Mary Rybolt Lamar, Individually and Mary Rybolt Lamar as Trustee of the Eloise A. Rybolt Revocable Trust, Appellees.

Case No. 5D18-1418

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed May 28, 2019 Rehearing Denied June 19, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Richard PATTERSON v. STATE

CR-16-0466

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 2, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Reh. denied; memo of 10/06/2017 withdrawn; memo substituted; affirmed.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HENSTOOTH RANCH LLC,

Plaintiffs,

v.

THE BURLINGTON INSURANCE 

COMPANY,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-00006-SI (SI)

AMENDED

PRETRIAL PREPARATION ORDER

(CIVIL)

It is hereby ORDERED pursuant to F.R.C.P. and the Local Rules of this Court:

FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT: November 17, 2017 at 3:00 PM.

Counsel must file a joint case management statement seven days in advance of the 

conference.

DISCOVERY PLAN: Per F.R.Civ.P and Local Rules, subject to any provisions below.

NON-EXPERT DISCOVERY CUTOFF is: April 20, 2018.

DESIGNATION OF EXPERTS: 6/18/18; REBUTTAL: 6/29/18;

Parties SHALL conform to Rule 26(a)(2).

EXPERT DISCOVERY CUTOFF is: July 27, 2018.

DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS SHALL be filed by; April 27, 2018;

Opp. Due: May 11, 2018; Reply Due: May 18, 2018;

and set for hearing no later than June 1, 2018 at 10:00 AM.

PRETRIAL CONFERENCE DATE: August 7, 2018 at 3:30 PM.

COURT TRIAL DATE: August 20, 2018 at 8:30 AM.

Courtroom 1, 17th floor.

TRIAL LENGTH is estimated to be 3-5 days.

SPECIAL DISCOVERY AND PRETRIAL PROVISIONS:

Due to an underlying state court proceeding, the Court amended the trial schedule as 

indicated above. 

The deadline to conduct mediation is 4/20/18.
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

The Court anticipates no further trial continuances.

The pretrial conference SHALL be attended by trial counsel prepared to discuss all aspects 

of the case, including settlement. Parties SHALL conform to the attached instructions. 

Plaintiff is ORDERED to serve a copy of this order on any party subsequently joined in this 

action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

____________________________________

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

8/7/17
1

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER GRANTING QUALCOMM'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO SEAL

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

v.

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER GRANTING QUALCOMM'S 

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO 

SEAL

Re: Dkt. No. 1352

Applying the compelling reasons standard, the Court rules on Qualcomm’s motion to seal 

as follows. For the Chipty Demonstrative, Qualcomm’s motion and this order use the 

PowerPoint’s actual pagination.

Document Portions of Pages Ruling

QX2778 FTC-Nokia-0000009 GRANTED.

Lee Deposition 58:22 GRANTED.

Lee Deposition 58:25 GRANTED.

Lee Deposition 59:1 GRANTED.

Lee Deposition 59:4 GRANTED.

Lee Deposition 106:5-7 GRANTED.

QX9220 Q2014FTC02110079 GRANTED.

Chipty Demonstrative Slide 3 GRANTED.

Chipty Demonstrative Slide 14 GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 18, 2019 ______________________________________

LUCY H. KOH

United States District Judge

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1365 Filed 01/18/19 Page 1 of 1
Amy Lee BURKICH, Appellant, v. 3 BRO'S TRUCKING, INC., et al., Appellees.

No. 3D16-2646

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed December 26, 2018

Amy Lee Burkich, in proper person.

Feiler & Leach, P.L., Michael B. Feiler and Martin E. Leach, for appellees.

Before EMAS, FERNANDEZ and LOGUE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 10.3

                      ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT

                  THIS ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT (this "Assignment"),
dated as of June 30, 2003, is entered into by and between Alleghany Insurance
Holdings LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Assignor"), and RSUI Group,
Inc., a Delaware corporation ("Assignee").

                                  WITNESSETH:

                  WHEREAS, Assignor is a party to that certain Acquisition
Agreement, dated as of June 6, 2003 (the "Acquisition Agreement"), by and
between Assignor and Royal Group, Inc. ("Royal"); and

                  WHEREAS, Assignor desires to assign to Assignee all of
Assignor's rights under the Acquisition Agreement and Assignee desires to assume
all of Assignor's obligations of Assignor under the Acquisition Agreement,
subject to the terms of this Assignment.

                  NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises and
the following mutual terms and conditions, the receipt and adequacy of which are
hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:

                  1.  Assignment of Rights. Subject to the terms and conditions
of this Assignment, Assignor hereby agrees to assign, transfer, convey and
deliver any and all of its rights under the Acquisition Agreement and Assignee
hereby agrees to the assignment, transfer, conveyance and delivery of such
rights.

                  2.  Assumption of Liabilities. Subject to the terms and
conditions of this Assignment, assignee hereby agrees to assume, pay, perform
and discharge all debts, obligations and liabilities of every kind, character or
description of Assignor under the Acquisition Agreement.

                  3.  Discharge. Assignor acknowledges that, in accordance with
Section 17.8 of the Acquisition Agreement, as between Assignor and Royal, this
Assignment shall not relieve Assignor of any of its obligations under the
Acquisition Agreement.
<PAGE>
                  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Assignment
effective as of the day and year first written above.

                                      ALLEGHANY INSURANCE
                                      HOLDINGS LLC

                                      By:  /s/ Weston M. Hicks
                                         ------------------------
                                        Name:  Weston M. Hicks
                                        Title: Chief Executive Officer



                                      RSUI GROUP,INC.

                                      By:  /s/ James P. Slattery
                                         -------------------------
                                        Name:  James P. Slattery
                                        Title: President
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 Quarterly Report of Ideal Financial Solutions, Inc., (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ben Larsen, 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 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/  Benjamin M. LarsenBenjamin M. Larsen, Chief Financial OfficerNovember 15, 2010
EXHIBIT C 

Case 4:16-cv-07387-JSW Document 45-3 Filed 01/18/18 Page 1 of 3
Case 4:16-cv-07387-JSW Document 45-3 Filed 01/18/18 Page 2 of 3
Case 4:16-cv-07387-JSW Document 45-3 Filed 01/18/18 Page 3 of 3
ASA Statement on 

Statistical 

Significance & PValues

1

:

A look back

Regina Nuzzo, PhD

ASA Senior Advisor for Statistics 

Communication & Media Innovation

2

2 Opinions are my own

1 Wasserstein, Ronald L., and Nicole A. Lazar. "The ASA statement on pvalues: context, process, and purpose." (2016): 129-133.
2014:

Q: Why do so many colleges and grad schools teach p = 0.05?

A: Because that's still what the scientific community and journal 

editors use.

Q: Why do so many people still use p = 0.05?

A: Because that's what they were taught in college or grad school.

— George Cobb, Mount Holyoke College

2 FCSM © Nuzzo 2020
2015:

The Basic and Applied Social Psychology (BASP) 2014 Editorial 

emphasized that the null hypothesis significance testing 

procedure (NHSTP) is invalid, and thus authors would be not 

required to perform it . . . The purpose of the present Editorial is to 

announce that the grace period is over. From now on, BASP is 

banning the NHSTP.

3

— BASP Editors David Trafimow and Michael Marks

3 Trafimow, David, and Michael Marks. "Editorial in Basic and Applied Social Pschology." Basic and Applied Social 

Psychology 37 (2015): 1-2.

3 FCSM © Nuzzo 2020
TAS Statement:

6 P-Value Principles ! ! "

4 FCSM © Nuzzo 2020
!

P-values can indicate how 

incompatible the data are with a 

specified statistical model.

!

5 FCSM © Nuzzo 2020
!

P-values do not measure the 

probability that the studied 

hypothesis is true, or the probability 

that the data were produced by 

random chance alone.

! "

6 FCSM © Nuzzo 2020
!

Scientific conclusions and business 

or policy decisions should not be 

based only on whether a p-value 

passes a specific threshold.

!

7 FCSM © Nuzzo 2020
!

Proper inference requires full 

reporting and transparency

! "

8 FCSM © Nuzzo 2020
!

A p-value, or statistical significance, 

does not measure the size of an 

effect or the importance of a result.

!

9 FCSM © Nuzzo 2020
!

By itself, a p-value does not provide 

a good measure of evidence 

regarding a model or hypothesis.

10 FCSM © Nuzzo 2020
!

 By itself, a p-value does not provide a good measure of 

evidence regarding a model or hypothesis.

• A p-value without context or other evidence provides limited 

information. 

!

• A p-value near 0.05 taken by itself offers only weak evidence

against the null hypothesis. 

" !

• A large p-value does not imply evidence in favor of the null

hypothesis. 

! "

• Data analysis should not end with the calculation of a p-value. 

11 FCSM © Nuzzo 2020
Tally

!

 2

! "

 4

!

 3

And that's why we're here today . . . 

(to be continued)

12 FCSM © Nuzzo 2020
Everett Emerson CORNETT, Jr. v. STATE

CR-17-0070

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 2, 2018 Reh. denied March 9, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Unassociated Document


    
      	
              National
      City®

               

            	 
      	
              Alan
      Jones

              Vice
      President

              Credit
      Administration

              One
      National City Center Suite 400S 

              Indianapolis,
      TN 46255

            


    

    


     

     

     

    December
19, 2008

     

     

    


    Michael
Cox

    CFO

    Bioanalytical
Systems, Inc. 2701 Kent Avenue

    West
Lafayette, Indiana 47906

    


    RE:           National
City Bank, N.A. (NCB or Bank) credit facilities to Bioanalytical Systems, Inc.
referred to as (Borrower).

    


    Dear
Michael:

    


    This
letter is to provide you with written notice that NCB hereby waives as of
September 30, 2008 the Borrower’s violation of Paragraph 5.3.3 of the Second
Amendment to Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated October 24, 2007
regarding Tangible Net Worth. Furthermore, the Bank has approved the following
definition to replace Paragraph 5.3.3:

    


    Maintain
its Tangible Net Worth at not less than Fourteen Million Dollars ($14,000,000)
as of September 30, 2008, and increasing as of each fiscal quarter end
thereafter by an amount equal to Fifty Percent (50%) of Borrower’s net income
(without reduction for any net losses) for such fiscal quarter.

    


    This
waiver of the above referenced paragraph does not in any way waive any of the
Borrowers’ obligations and duties under the Loan Agreement or affect NCB’s
rights and remedies under the same for any covenant violations or other defaults
that have occurred in the past, exist now, or may arise in the
future.

     

     

    

    Alan D. Jones

    
      Vice
President
**BEVERLY ENTERPRISES, INC.**
**EXHIBIT 12.1**
**COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES**
**(Dollars in thousands)**                                                     **Six Months Ended**   **Years ended December 31,** **June 30,**       **2002** **2001** **2000** **1999** **1998** **2003** **2002**         Income (loss) before provision for (benefit from)income taxes, discontinued operations and extraordinary chargeand cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles $(38,352) $(204,489) $(42,098) $(232,285) $(79,629) $8,765  $8,974                       Add fixed charges:                             Interest expense (including capitalized interest)  63,109   74,105   77,142   69,438   63,437   30,590   32,106  Interest factor in rent expense  18,379   22,891   24,559   24,814   25,608   8,782   9,375  Amortization of debt issue costs  3,096   4,051   2,571   2,909   2,336   2,422   1,562                       Total fixed charges  84,584   101,047   104,272   97,161   91,381   41,794   43,043                       Less capitalized interest  (1,492)  (1,517)  (2,326)  (1,655)  (1,365)  (201)  (962)                      Total earnings $44,740  $(104,959) $59,848  $(136,779) $10,387  $50,358  $51,055                       Ratio of earnings to fixed charges  (1)   (1)  (1)   (1)   (1)   1.20   1.19                       
(1) Earnings were inadequate to cover fixed charges by $39,844,000,$206,006,000, $44,424,000, $233,940,000 and $80,994,000 for theyears ended December 31, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999, and 1998, respectively.
Case 3:05-cv-02511-M Document 7 Filed 02/02/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 17
EX PARTE Eddie L. MITCHELL

CR-17-0087

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

January 3, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Reh. denied.
Exhibit 15.1





May 9,
2008





Bois
d'Arc Energy, Inc.


Chase Tower


600
Travis, Suite 5200


Houston,
TX 77002





Shareholders
and Board of Directors


Bois
d'Arc Energy, Inc.





We are
aware of the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement No.
333-127744 filed on Form S-8 of Bois d'Arc Energy, Inc. of our report dated May
9, 2008 relating to the unaudited consolidated interim financial statements
of Bois d'Arc Energy, Inc. that are included in its Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended March 31, 2008.





/s/ Ernst
& Young LLP





Dallas,
Texas
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection with the Annual Report of
on Form 10-K of ChoicePoint Inc. (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, the Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certifies that: Based on my knowledge,

(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 result of operations of the Company.



/s/    DEREK V. SMITHDerek V. SmithChairman and Chief Executive Officer


February 28, 2008