alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(17 Misc. Rep. 731.)

#### TALMADGE v. LANE.

(Ontario County Court.

August, 1896.)

Statute of Frauds—Sale of Personalty—Future Crops.

A contract t>y which one party is to raise a crop and the other is to purchase it at a certain price is not a contract of sale.

Appeal from justice court.

Action by Mark Talmadge against Albert T. Lane. There was a judgment in favor of plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Hill *&*Shaw, for appellant.

French & Co'on, for respondent.

METCALF, J.

The defendant appeals from a judgment rendered before a justice of the peace of the town of Victor upon a verdict of a jury. In the month of May, 1895, the plaintiff and the defendant made a verbal agreement that the plaintiff-was to raise a crop of potatoes, which the defendant was to purchase in November at the agreed price of 40 cents per bushel. Thereafter the plaintiff tendered *to the*defendant the marketable potatoes so raised by him, being 550 to 600 bushels, for which the defendant declined and refused to pay. The defendant contends that as the agreement was one of sale, and the amount was for more than $50 in value, it came within the pro*414Mbition of the statute of frauds, and cannot be enforced by the plaintiff. The plaintiff, on the other hand, contends that the agreement was one for work and labor, or for services, and therefore not within the statute. The statute referred to is, “Every contract for the sale of any goods, chattels or things in action for the price of $50, or more, shall be void,” etc. Our statute differs in some respects from the English and Massachusetts statutes, but there is more variance between the decisions of our courts and the English and Massachusetts cases construing this statute. The distinction, as defined by our courts, is that we lay stress on the word “sale,” and that there must be a sale at the time the contract is made, to bring the case within the prohibition of the statute, while the English and Massachusetts cases hold that if the product can, at the time stipulated for the delivery, be regarded as goods, wares, and merchandise, the case then falls within the prohibition of the statute. The rule, as recognized in this state, is “that an agreement for the sale of any commodity not in existence at the time, but which the vendor is to manufacture, or put in a condition to be delivered, such as flour from wheat not yet ground, or nails to be made from iron belonging to the manufacturer, is not a contract of sale.” Cooke v. Millard, 65 N. Y. 359; Parsons v. Loucks, 48 N. Y. 17; Deal v. Maxwell, 51 N. Y. 652; Manufacturing Co. v. Holbrook, 118 N. Y. 593, 23 N. E. 908; Joy v. Schloss, 15 Abb. N. C. 373. Applying the rule thus deduced from these decisions, no other conclusion can be arrived at but that the agreement between these parties cannot be said to be a contract of sale, but must be held as not coming within the statute, as the subject of the sale had no existence or potential existence at the time of making the agreement which would permit of its delivery. For these reasons the judgment appealed from is affirmed, with costs.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 9
<RESTATED>
<CIK> 0001034594
<NAME>  BAY BANKS OF VIRGINIA, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> US
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                       4,606,369
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                     156,847,867
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               162,397
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 52,858,961
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      54,320,178
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        52,858,961
<LOANS>                                    146,148,395
<ALLOWANCE>                                (1,286,684)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             214,151,947
<DEPOSITS>                                 178,377,591
<SHORT-TERM>                                14,314,248
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          1,017,985
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     5,792,808
<OTHER-SE>                                  15,611,218
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             214,151,947
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              8,993,440
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            2,399,090
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                69,096
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            11,461,626
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           5,571,585
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           6,037,324
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        5,424,302
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  190,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             (4,875)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              4,796,871
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,671,399
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   1,671,399
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,230,399
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.02
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.91
<LOANS-NON>                                     19,365
<LOANS-PAST>                                   466,918
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             1,197,843
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  115,213
<RECOVERIES>                                    14,055
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            1,286,684
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         1,286,684
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0



</TABLE>
SCWC-17-0000634

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI‘I

YUKO KAKAZU, Respondent/Petitioner-Appellee,

vs. 

PETER CHRISTOPHER, Petitioner/Respondent-Appellant. 

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(CAAP-17-0000634 & CAAP-18-0000306; CIVIL NO. 3SS17-1-0093)

ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.)

Petitioner/Respondent-Appellant Peter Christopher’s

Application for Writ of Certiorari filed on April 28, 2022 is 

hereby rejected. 

DATED: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, June 6, 2022.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

/s/ Todd W. Eddins

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-17-0000634

06-JUN-2022

11:18 AM

Dkt. 6 ODAC
# EUR-Lex - 52006AP0248 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52006AP0248

**European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Community and Bosnia and Herzegovina on certain aspects of air services (COM(2005)0351 - C6-0139/2006 - 2005/0140(CNS)) **

*
Official Journal 300 E , 09/12/2006 P. 0089 - 0089 *

P6_TA(2006)0248

EC-Bosnia and Herzegovina Agreement on certain aspects of air services *

European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Community and Bosnia and Herzegovina on certain aspects of air services (COM(2005)0351 — C6-0139/2006 — 2005/0140(CNS))

(Consultation procedure)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (COM(2005)0351) [1],

- having regard to Articles 80(2) and 300(2), first subparagraph, first sentence, of the EC Treaty,

- having regard to Article 300(3), first subparagraph, of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C6-0139/2006),

- having regard to Rules 51 and 83(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A6-0195/2006),

1. Approves the conclusion of the agreement;

2. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and Bosnia and Herzegovina.

[1] Not yet published in OJ.

--------------------------------------------------
Case: 1:02-cr-00579 Document #: 47 Filed: 06/20/05 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:108
Case: 1:02-cr-00579 Document #: 47 Filed: 06/20/05 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:109
Case: 1:02-cr-00579 Document #: 47 Filed: 06/20/05 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:110
Case: 1:02-cr-00579 Document #: 47 Filed: 06/20/05 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:111
Case: 1:02-cr-00579 Document #: 47 Filed: 06/20/05 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:112
Case: 1:02-cr-00579 Document #: 47 Filed: 06/20/05 Page 6 of 6 PageID #:113
# EUR-Lex - 52006AP0469 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52006AP0469

**European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Community and the government of Canada establishing a framework for cooperation in the fields of higher education, training and youth (COM(2006)0274 - C6-0255/2006 - 2006/0096(CNS)) **

*
Official Journal 314 E , 21/12/2006 P. 0065 - 0066 *

P6_TA(2006)0469

EC-Canada Agreement on cooperation in the fields of higher education, training and youth *

European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Community and the government of Canada establishing a framework for cooperation in the fields of higher education, training and youth (COM(2006)0274— C6-0255/2006 — 2006/0096(CNS))

(Consultation procedure)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (COM(2006)0274) [1],

- having regard to Article 300(2), first subparagraph, and Articles 149 and 150 of the EC Treaty,

- having regard to Article 300(3), first subparagraph, of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C6-0255/2006),

- having regard to Rules 51 and 83(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Culture and Education (A6-0338/2006),

1. Approves the conclusion of the Agreement;

2. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and the parliaments of the Member States and the government of Canada.

[1] Not yet published in OJ.

--------------------------------------------------
## Adriene Sibley 

## Appellant In the Fourteenth Court ofAppeals Houston, Texas FILED IN 14th COURT OF APPEALS 

## SEP 04 2015 CHRtSTOrntM H. KHINE CLERK 

### v. Cause No. 14-15-00718-CV 

## Seminole Pipeline Co., LLC 

## Enterprise Products Operating, LLC First Call Field Service Corp. TDW Services, Inc. 

## Appellees
CORRECTION OF PARTIES 

## Adriene Sibley request that the parties to the appeal be corrected to add Enterprise Products Operating, LLC, First Call Field Service Corp. and TDW Services as appellees. These appellees are parties to thejudgment and case CI50979. 

## Attached is a copy ofthe first page of the case summary that shows the appellees as parties to the case. ExhibitA Respectfully submitted Adriene Sibley 4808 Fairmont Pkwy Pasadena, Texas 77505 

## sibleyadriene@yahoo.com 832-420-2071

### Certificate of Service 

## I copy of the foregoing Correction of Parties has been served on the following parties via certified mail on September4, 2015. Seminole Pipeline Co., LLC Enterprise Products Operating James Freeman 

## 1135 Heights Blvd Houston, Texas 77008 

## FirstCall Field Service Corp. CynthiaFronterhouse 8588 Katy Freeway #225 Houston, Texas 77024 

## TDW Service, INc. 

## Marque! Sautural 700 Louisiana #400 

## Houston, Texas77002



## Adriene SibleyCounty Court at Law #3 

## Case Summary Case No. CI50979 

# mm SeminolePipeline Company LLC vs. Adriene Sibleya/k/a § Adriene Gail Lewis et al § Location: County Court at Law #3 Judicial Officer: Warren, Jeremy Filed on: 02/06/2014
Case Information Statistical Closures 05/26/2015 FinalJudgmentAfterNon-Jury Trial(OCA)

Date

Plaintiff
Defendant

Counter Defendant Cask Assignment Current Case Assignment CaseNumber CI50979 Court County Court at Law #3 DateAssigned 02/06/2014 Judicial Officer Warren, Jeremy

PAKTV I.NTOKMaTION Seminole Pipeline Company LLC Lewis, Donyll Dwayne Lewis, Dushay Demitric Lewis, Johnel Lewis, LaMont DeShaun Rossow Sr, Reginald Timothy Rossow, Winston James Sibley, Adriene Seminole Pipeline Company LLC
Counter Plaintiff Sibley, Adriene Third Party Defendant

Date 02/06/2014 Enterprise Products Operating, LLC
FirstCall Field Service Corp.

TDW Services Inc
EVENTS & OKDKKS OKTill. COURT 

### Qui Original Petition (OCA)

andRequestforInjunctive andOtherRelief Case Type: Condemnation Case Flags: Jury FeePaid Money in Court Registry

Lead Attorneys Freeman, James A. Retained 713-802-9U7(W)

Freeman, James A. Retained 713-802-9117(W) Freeman, James A. Retained * 713-802-9117(W) Fronterhouse, Cynthia Nimmons Retained 713-467-1760(W) SAUTURAL, MARQUEL R Retained 713-228-6601 (W) INDEX


# &n.W f
# EUR-Lex - 52006AP0579 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52006AP0579

**European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing for the period 2007-2013 the specific programme "Drugs prevention and information" as part of the General programme "Fundamental Rights and Justice" (COM(2006)0230 - C6-0095/2005 - 2005/0037B(COD)) **

*
Official Journal 317 E , 23/12/2006 P. 0604 - 0604 *

20061223

P6_TA(2006)0579

Drugs prevention and information (2007-2013) ***I

European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing for the period 2007-2013 the specific programme "Drugs prevention and information" as part of the General programme "Fundamental Rights and Justice" (COM(2006)0230 — C6-0095/2005 — 2005/0037B(COD))

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the amended Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2006)0230) [1],

- having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 152 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6-0095/2005),

- having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Budgets (A6-0454/2006);

1. Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

[1] Not yet published in OJ.

--------------------------------------------------
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Hyder Bundy, Also Known as Larry Atkinson, Appellant.

— Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Herbert Altman, J.), rendered on July 11, 1984, unanimously affirmed. Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted. *(See, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833.) We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal. Concur—Sandler, J. P., Sullivan, Fein, Kassal and Rosenberger, JJ.
<PAGE>

                                                                         Ex. 3.1

                               SECOND AMENDMENT TO
                           AMENDED AND RESTATED BYLAWS
                                       OF
                            SILVERLEAF RESORTS, INC.

      WHEREAS, the Board of Directors unanimously approved an amendment to the
Amended and Restated Bylaws dated February 28, 1998 ("Restated Bylaws") of
Silverleaf Resorts, Inc. (the "Corporation") to decrease the vote required to
take action by written consent of the shareholders;

      Therefore, Article I, Section 10 of the Bylaws of the Corporation be, and
it hereby is amended to read as follows:

            "Section 10. Informal Action

            Any action required or permitted to be taken at a meeting of
            shareholders may be taken without a meeting if there is filed with
            the records of shareholders meetings a written consent of the
            holders of the Corporation's voting shares outstanding having not
            less than the minimum number of votes that would be necessary to
            take such action at a meeting at which holders of all shares
            entitled to vote on the action were present and voted. Prompt notice
            of the taking of any action by shareholders without a meeting by
            less than unanimous written consent shall be given to those
            shareholders who did not consent in writing to the action."

                            CERTIFICATE OF SECRETARY

      I, Sandra G. Cearley, hereby certify that I am the Secretary of Silverleaf
Resorts, Inc., a Texas corporation (the "Corporation"); and that the foregoing
Amendment to the Amended and Restated Bylaws was adopted effective the 30th day
of April, 2004, by the action of the Board of Directors of the Corporation.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of
the Corporation this 4TH day of June, 2004.

(S E A L)                                /s/ SANDRA G. CEARLEY
                                         -------------------------------
                                         Sandra G. Cearley, Secretary
**EXHIBIT 23.2**
**INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S CONSENT**
     We consent to the incorporation by reference inRegistration Statement No. 333-42153 on Form S-8 ofCHS Inc. of our report dated June 16, 2003 (which reportexpresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatoryparagraph relating to the adoption of Statement of FinancialAccounting Standards No. 142, *Goodwill and OtherIntangible Assets* in 2002) on the consolidated financialstatements of Ventura Foods, LLC and subsidiary, appearing inthe Annual Report on Form 10-K/A-3 of CHS Inc. for the yearended August 31, 2003.
 /s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP    
Los Angeles, CaliforniaMarch 1, 2004
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

KELLY J. RICHARDSON, and JAMES

POWELL, personally and as next friend for

I.R., a minor, and S.P., a minor, 

No 3:14-cv-01027-ST

Plaintiffs,

ORDER

v.

EMILIE SCHUBERT, in her individual 

capacity, GINGER VAN WINKLE, in 

her individual capacity, ERIN WIRTZ, 

in her individual capacity, JENNIE SMITH, 

in her individual capacity, KRISTIN LEMON,

in her individual capacity, CARLOS CRUTCH,

in his individual capacity, LINDSEY VERNOOY, 

in her individual capacity, DANIELLE SANTILI-DAY, 

in her individual capacity, 

Defendants.

HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge:

Magistrate Judge Stewart issued a Findings and Recommendation [40] on November 14, 

2014, in which she recommends that this Court deny Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [28]. The 

1 - ORDER

Case 3:14-cv-01027-YY Document 48 Filed 12/29/14 Page 1 of 2
matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 72(b).

When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings & 

Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the 

Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th 

Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc).

I have carefully considered Defendants’ objections and conclude there is no basis to 

modify the Findings & Recommendation. I have also reviewed the pertinent portions of the 

record de novo and find no other errors in the Magistrate Judge's Findings & Recommendation. 

CONCLUSION 

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Stewart’s Findings & Recommendation [40].

Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [28] is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this day of , 201_____.

 

MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ

United States District Judge

2 - ORDER

Case 3:14-cv-01027-YY Document 48 Filed 12/29/14 Page 2 of 2
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Grand Forks, North Dakota
 close




            Search small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Plains Area Grand Forks, North Dakota People & Locations







Alexander  Marquette
                        Grand Forks, North Dakota

                        




                        
                        Non-Federal Affiliate
                        Phone: (701) 795-8243
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov