alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Steven Morris HURD, petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 18-211.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 9, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District denied.
GTC TELECOM CORP.
                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS




To  the  Board  of  Directors
GTC  Telecom  Corp.  and  Subsidiaries


We  hereby  consent  to  the  incorporation by reference in the previously filed
Registration  Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-88521, 333-94969, 333-37496,
333-73614  and  333-81898)  of our report dated August 29, 2003, except for Note
14,  as  to which the date is September 19, 2003, appearing in the Annual Report
on Form 10-KSB of GTC Telecom Corp. and subsidiaries for the year ended June 30,
2003.



                      /s/ Squar, Milner, Reehl & Williamson
                        SQUAR, MILNER, REEHL & WILLIAMSON, LLP


Newport  Beach,  California
September  29,  2003
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 10.2


                                 FIRST AMENDMENT
                                       TO
                                 REVOLVING NOTE
                                      FROM
                             THE J. JILL GROUP, INC.
                                       TO
                         CITIZENS BANK OF MASSACHUSETTS


         This First Amendment to Revolving Note from The J. Jill Group, Inc. to
Citizens Bank of Massachusetts is dated as of July 25, 2002.

                              W I T N E S S E T H:

         Reference is made to that certain Revolving Note dated as of June 29,
2001 from The J. Jill Group, Inc. to Citizens Bank of Massachusetts in the face
amount of Twenty-Two Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($22,500,000) (the
"REVOLVING NOTE").

         NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency
of which are hereby acknowledged, the REVOLVING NOTE is hereby amended by
deleting the date "June 1, 2003" set forth in the second paragraph of the
REVOLVING NOTE and substituting therefor the words "Termination Date."

         Except as modified hereby, the REVOLVING NOTE remains in full force and
effect and is hereby reconfirmed and republished.

         EXECUTED as an instrument under seal as of July 25, 2002.

                               THE J. JILL GROUP, INC.

                               By: /s/ Linda L. Trudel
                                   -------------------------------------
                                   Name:  Linda L. Trudel
                                   Title: Vice President/Corporate Controller


                               CITIZENS BANK OF MASSACHUSETTS

                               By: /s/ Lori B. Leeth
                                   -------------------------------------
                                   Name:  Lori B. Leeth
                                   Title: Senior Vice President
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Olen Ware II v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01-13-00545-CR

Trial court case number: 1328054

Trial court: 208th District Court of Harris County

Appellant, Olen Ware II, has filed a motion “for an Order to the Trial Court Reporter to 

Complete the Record and for an Extension of Time to File Brief,” contending that a portion of 

State’s Exhibit 1 was not included in the record. Our complete review of the above-referenced 

appeal requires that the appellate record include the trial exhibits. Accordingly, we GRANT 

appellant’s motion and order the court reporter to file a supplemental reporter’s record 

containing a complete copy of State Exhibit 1. See TEX. R. APP. P. 34.6(d).

The supplemental reporter’s record containing a copy of State Exhibit 1 is due in this 

Court within 10 days of the date of this order.

Appellant’s brief is ORDERED to be filed no later than 30 days from the date of this 

order. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(d).

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Justice Laura C. Higley

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: January 28, 2014
Michael Lynn COOK, petitioner, v. Charles L. RYAN, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections, et al.

No. 18-5782.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Cameron Heath RAY, petitioner, v. OKLAHOMA.

No. 18-491.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma denied.
Edwin A. VEGA, petitioner, v. OHIO.

No. 18-1157.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 17, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Ohio denied.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

 

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

 

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

 

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002

 

 

 

In connection with the Annual Report of Intellinetics, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission(the “Report”), I, Matthew L. Chretien, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 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 Section13(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.

 

Dated: April 28, 2015

 

/s/ Matthew L. Chretien

 

President and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit A

Case 1:23-cv-00281-MAC Document 49-1 Filed 11/26/24 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 546
Case 1:23-cv-00281-MAC Document 49-1 Filed 11/26/24 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 547
You can view the docket sheet in this case by clicking the link

above, or by logging into your DocketBird account.

If you need any help, don't hesitate to let us know.

Thanks,

Team DocketBird

DocketBird ID: 2024/11/25/[$LATEST]1cee2a7ec7a442fa83dbb8428c151e77|

pts61u1rjt3q9q2310iiboukce12rhq3jmn3q0o1

Tired of these notifications? You can turn them off in your DocketBird Case

Management Settings.

Made by Mink LLC

Las Vegas, NV

0048. (2024-11-25) MEMORANDUM AND ORDER- granting [45] Plaintiffs Motion to Amend its Response. If Goodyear

chooses i.pdf

161K

Case 1:23-cv-00281-MAC Document 49-1 Filed 11/26/24 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 548
#### THOMAS FLOODY v. GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY and Another.1

June 18, 1909.

Nos. 16,168—(158).

Complaint Good — Defective Switch.

The complaint states a cause of action against appellant company for damages occasioned by constructing and maintaining a defective switch, notwithstanding it appears from the complaint that another railway company was negligent in operating the same.

Action in the district court for Ramsey county against the Great Northern Railway Company and the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Company to recover $25,000 damages for personal injuries. The Great Northern Railway Company demurred to the complaint on the ground that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against it. Erom an order, Hallam, J., overruling the demurrer, the demurring defendant appealed.

Affirmed.

*M. L.*Countryman, for appellant.

*Barton &*Kay, for respondent.

1

 Reported in 121 N. W. 875.

Lewis, J".

TJpon the former appeal (104 Minn. 474, 116 N. W. 943) the demurrer, upon the ground.that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, was sustained, for the rea*217son that it appeared from the facts stated that the derailment of the train was caused by the negligent handling of the switch by the Omaha Company, and not by reason of any fault of the Great Northern Company in the construction of the switch. In the complaint now before us the acts of the Great Northern Company with reference to the construction of the switch and the manner in which the accident was caused by reason of the defective switch are elaborated, and it fairly appears from the facts set forth that the accident was caused by the concurrent negligence of the Great Northern Company in constructing a defective switch with a rod so long that the dog would not automatically catch and hold the switch. The fact that the Omaha Company failed to take proper precautions to fasten the switch, knowing it was in the defective condition* described, does not necessarily release the Great Northern [Railway Company.

For these reasons, we agree with the trial court that the complaint states a cause of action, and the order appealed from is affirmed.

Jag card, J., dissents.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>This schedule contains summary financial information 
extracted from the Registrant's audited financial statements for 
the year ended December 31, 1997 and is qualified in its entirety 
by reference to those financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000917032
<NAME> RIDGEWOOD ELECTRIC POWER TRUST III
       <S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       2,687,626
<SECURITIES>                                24,613,978<F1>
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,708,084<F2>
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              27,336,224
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          378,910<F3>
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  26,957,314<F4>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                27,336,224
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,227,395
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,743,631<F5>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,355,866)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,355,866)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,355,866)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (3,460)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3,460)
<FN>
<F1>Investments in power project partnerships.
<F2>Includes $20,458 due from subsidiaries.
<F3>Includes $340,373 due to subsidiaries.
<F4>Represents Investor Shares of beneficial interest in Trust 
with capital accounts of $31,406,084 less managing shareholder's 
accumulated deficit of $17,145.
<F5>Includes writedowns of investments of $4,743,631.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Tajuan WILLIAMS, petitioner, v. Sherman CAMPBELL, Warden.

No. 18-5573.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 9, 2018.

*339Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Olen Ware II v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01

- 1 3

- 00 545

- CR

Trial court case number: 1328054

Trial court: 208 th District Court of Harris County

Appellant, Olen Ware II, has filed a motion “for an Order to the Trial Court Reporter to

Complete the Record and for an Extension of Time to File Brief,” contending that a portion of

State’s Exhibit 1 was not included in the record. Our complete review of the above

- referenced

appeal requires that the appellate record include the trial exhibits. Accordingly, we GRANT

appellant’s motion and order the court reporter to file a supplemental reporter’s record

containing a complete copy of State Exhibit 1. See T EX

. R. A PP . P. 34.6(d)

.

The supplemental reporter’s record containing a copy of State Exhibit 1 is due in this

Court within 10 days of the date of this order.

Appellant’s brief is ORDERED to be filed no later than 30 days from the date of this

order. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.6(d).

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Justice Laura C. Higley

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: January 28, 2014
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

KENNETH M. FLOWERS as 

Administrator of the Estate of 

CHRISTINE FLOWERS, Deceased;

KENNETH M. FLOWERS, 

individually, KAREN FLOWERS, 

LAWRENCE FLOWERS, and 

ANTHONY MIMMS, individually,

Plaintiffs Below, 

 Appellants,

v.

CHRISTIANA CARE HEALTH 

SYSTEM, IPC HEALTHCARE, 

INC. f/k/a IPC – THE 

HOSPTIALIST COMPANY, and 

ANURADHA AMARA, M.D.,

Defendants Below, 

 Appellees.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 223, 2019

Court Below: Superior Court

of the State of Delaware

C.A. No. N15C-06-281

Submitted: November 20, 2019

Decided: December 2, 2019

Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and VAUGHN, Justices.

O R D E R

This 2

nd day of December 2019, the Court having considered this matter on 

the briefs filed by the parties has determined that the final judgment of the Superior

Court should be affirmed on the basis of and for the reasons assigned by the Superior 

Court in its order dated April 3, 2019.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the judgment of the 

Superior Court be, and the same hereby is, AFFIRMED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ James T. Vaughn, Jr. 

Justice
Patricia BURNEY, petitioner, v. Debbie ALDRIDGE, Warden.

No. 18-6021.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
Exhibit
10.39 


 


AMENDMENT
NO. 7

TO

ACTINIUM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. 2013 AMENDED AND RESTATED STOCK PLAN


 


Pursuant
to Section 14 of the 2013 Amended and Restated Stock Plan, as amended (the “Plan”) of Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(the “Company”), the Board of Directors of the Company has duly adopted a resolution, conditioned upon approval by
the stockholders of the Company, approving this Amendment No. 7 to the Plan to increase the total number of shares of common stock,
par value $.001 per share, of the Company (the “Common Stock”) reserved and available for issuance under the Plan
as follows:


 


1.       Section
3 of the Plan is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:


 


“Subject
to the provisions of Section 14 of the Plan, the maximum aggregate number of Shares reserved for issuance to Participants under
the Plan is 22,750,000, and the maximum aggregate number of Shares that may be granted in the form of Incentive Stock Options
is 22,750,000. The Shares may be authorized, but unissued, or reacquired Common Stock. If an award should expire or become unexercisable
for any reason without having been exercised in full, or is surrendered pursuant to an Option Exchange Program, the unpurchased
Shares that were subject thereto shall, unless the Plan shall have been terminated, become available for future grant under the
Plan. In addition, any Shares of Common Stock which are retained by the Company upon exercise of an award in order to satisfy
the exercise or purchase price for such award or any withholding taxes due with respect to such exercise or purchase shall be
treated as not issued and shall continue to be available under the Plan. Shares issued under the Plan and later repurchased by
the Company pursuant to any repurchase right which the Company may have shall not be available for future grant under the Plan.”


 


2.       All
other terms and provisions of the Plan shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect as written.


 


3.       A
majority in voting interest of the stockholders present in person or by proxy and entitled to vote at the meeting of stockholders
at which this Amendment No. 5 was considered, has duly approved this Amendment No. 7 to the Plan.


 


IN WITNESS
WHEREOF, this Amendment No. 7 to the Plan is made effective this 6th day of March, 2019.


 


	 	 	ACTINIUM
    PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	By:	 	 /s/
    Sandesh Seth – Chairman and CEO
EXHIBIT F - PHOTO SHOWING NO TRESPASSING, LOITERING, OR

NON-RESIDENT PARKING ON THE PROPERTY

10

Case 4:23-cv-00194-ALM Document 37-6 Filed 08/03/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 303
11

Case 4:23-cv-00194-ALM Document 37-6 Filed 08/03/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 304
Exhibit 23.1


                         Consent of Independent Auditors




The Board of Directors and Shareholders
EFTC Corporation:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos.
33-77938, 33-92418, 333-34255, 333-47943, and 333-50044) on Form S-8 of EFTC
Corporation of our reports dated January 31, 2001, relating to the consolidated
balance sheets of EFTC Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2000 and
1999, 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, 2000, and the related financial statement schedule, which reports
appear in the December 31, 2000 annual report on Form 10-K of EFTC Corporation.




KPMG LLP

Denver, Colorado
March 29, 2001
Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed January 15 , 2019

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14- 18 -00857- CV

SHAWNERVIN BRAGGS, Appellant

V.

ERIK MATTHEW SONGER , Appellee

On Appeal from County Civil Court at Law No. 1

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1113174

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N This is an appeal from a final judgment signed August 29, 2018. Appellant’s brief was due November 5, 2018. No brief or motion for extension of time to file the
brief was filed.
On November 13, 2018 , the court ordered appellant to filed a brief by
December 5 , 2018

. We cautioned that if appellant failed to comply with our order, we would dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).
No brief or motion for extension of time to file the brief was filed.2

Therefore, the appeal is DISMISSED

.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Wise, Zimmerer, and Spain
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1998
<CASH>                                          70,189
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  241,475
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                77,462
<PP&E>                                           7,273
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 353,621
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           51,288
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       486,887
<OTHER-SE>                                    (184,554)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   353,621
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,784
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,975
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,975
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,975
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .004
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .004
        


</TABLE>
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, December 27, 2018. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, December 27, 2018 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A19D0206. SHAMIM RENEE RODGERS v. JEFFREY CRANE. Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: 17FM5287
amendmentno3toslcleasema






 





 






 





 






 





 






 





 






 





 






����������                     ����������
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

July 24, 2012

s0716

Order 

July 24, 2012

144199

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 144199

COA: 304263

Monroe CC: 96-027286-FH;

BASIL PERRY, 96-027985-FH

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 16, 2011 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant’s 

motion for relief from judgment is prohibited by MCR 6.502(G).
Johannes T. MARTIN, petitioner, v. LIVING ESSENTIALS, LLC.

No. 17-8352.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
**Schedule to Exhibit 10.24**

**Stock Options Amendment Agreement**

 

 

The following executive officers named in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 were parties to a Stock Options Amendment Agreement with TurboChef Technologies, Inc., the form of which was filed with the SEC and is listed as Exhibit 10.24 to this Report:

 

| Officer | Date of Grant | Amended Exercise Price | # of Options |
|---------|---------------|------------------------|--------------|

 

| J. Miguel Fernandez | 4/19/04 | $14.58 | 33,333 |
|---------------------|---------|--------|--------|

| de Castro | 5/3/05 | $11.95 | 15,000 |
|-----------|--------|--------|--------|

 

| Paul P. Lehr | 5/25/04 | $14.58 | 4,666 |
|--------------|---------|--------|-------|

 

| Stephen J. Beshara | 11/21/03 | $12.99 | 46,667 |
|--------------------|----------|--------|--------|

|   | 5/3/05 | $11.95 | 40,000 |
|--------|--------|--------|--------|

 

 

----