alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Anthony Skarpeletzos, Respondent, against Counes & Raptis Corporation et al., Appellants.

*Skarpeletzos*v. *Counes & Raptis Corp.,*185 App. Div.-, affirmed.

(Argued October 2, 1918;

decided October 15, 1918.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered July 12, 1918, affirming an award of the state industrial commission made under the Workmen’s Compensation Law.

*Theodore H. Lord*and *Alfred W. Meldon*for appellants. •

*Merton E. Lewis, Attorney-General (E. C. Aiken*of counsel), for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

This appeal is upon the assumption that the state industrial commission has made an award of *607$8.655 per week, $4.32% to the father and $4.32% to the mother. The notice of the award sent by the state industrial commission to the parties so states. The award, however, as made by the commission is of $4.32% weekly to the father and mother.

As the award is conclusive and the total amount which the insurance carrier is obliged to pay is $4.32% weekly, it is immaterial to it whether it is payable to the father alone or to the father and mother. The amount is correct, being twenty-five per cent of the weekly wage, and it is unnecessary for us now to determine to whom it should be paid, as this appeal involves the amount only.

The order, therefore, should be affirmed, without costs.

Hiscock, Ch. J., Chase, Collin, Cuddeback, Hogan, McLaughlin and Crane, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1996
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        11,464
<OTHER-SE>                                    (11,464)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0



</TABLE>
#### BROOKS, COMR. OF LABOR v. BEST

No. 131 PC.

Case below: 45 N.C. App. 540.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 3 June 1980.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
INCLUDED IN SUCH REPORT.
</LEGEND>

       
<S>                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>         3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>     DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>          MAR-31-1997

<CASH>                       4,950,870 
<SECURITIES>                      0    
<RECEIVABLES>                  264,522 
<ALLOWANCES>                      0    
<INVENTORY>                       0    
<CURRENT-ASSETS>             5,215,392 
<PP&E>                      16,411,837 
<DEPRECIATION>              11,380,217 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>              10,567,655 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>          690,916 
<BONDS>                      2,252,395 
<COMMON>                          0    
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>             0    
<PREFERRED>                       0    
<OTHER-SE>                   5,548,206 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>10,567,655 
<SALES>                        751,853 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>               803,787 
<CGS>                             0    
<TOTAL-COSTS>                  462,845 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                52,105 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                  0    
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              69,321 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                219,516 
<INCOME-TAX>                      0    
<INCOME-CONTINUING>            131,291 
<DISCONTINUED>                    0    
<EXTRAORDINARY>                   0    
<CHANGES>                         0    
<NET-INCOME>                   131,291 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                     6.44 
<EPS-DILUTED>                     6.44 
        


</TABLE>
#### STATE BOARD OF REGISTRATION AND EXAMINATION IN DENTISTRY, PLAINTIFF-PROSECUTOR IN CERTIORARI, v. ARSHAG M. KARAS, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT IN CERTIORARI.

Submitted February 1, 1932

Decided June 16, 1932.

Before Justices Teenchabd and Donges.

*760For the prosecutor in *certiorari, William A. Stevens,*attorney-general, and *Robert Peacock,*assistant attorney-general.

For the respondent in *certiorari, Frederick 0. Vonhof.*

Per Curiam.

The defendant was complained against by the state board of registration and examination in dentistry of a violation of section 11 of the Dental act (chapter 266, laws of 1927), in that he practiced dentistry within the meaning of section 12 of the act without a license. There was a trial before the First District Court of the city of Newark, and the trial judge dismissed the complaint.

The state board thereupon sued out this writ of *certiorari.*

The uncontradicted evidence showed that the defendant upon several occasions took impressions of the gums of the witness, made impressions in wax or rubber compound, and also in plaster paris; made dentures and fitted the teeth in the mouth of the witness. He held himself out as a mechanical dentist. The witness paid him all told $60. It was proved and uncontradieted that he had no license.

There was no denial of these essential matters. On the contrary, the defendant himself testified that the work which he did was of a character which should have been done by a dentist.

We think that the dismissal of the complaint was erroneous, and that the statutory essentials were proved by uncontradicted evidence. The finding of the trial judge that the work was “procured by the pleading of the witness” did not justify the dismissal.

On the record presented the dismissal of the complaint was unjustified, and it will be set aside and the case remanded for retrial, costs to abide the event.
#### REFINING CO. v. BOARD OF ALDERMEN.

No. 70 PC.

Case below: 17 N.C. App. 624.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 1 June 1973. .
Exhibit 32.1

          Section 1350 Certification of Principal Executive Officer


The undersigned, Chairman, President and Treasurer, of Jaco Electronics, Inc.
(the "Company"), hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my
knowledge, that: (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the
quarterly period ended March 31, 2005 (the "Quarterly Report") accompanying this
certification 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and
for the periods presented as required by such report. The foregoing
certification is based upon, among other things, my responsibilities as
principal executive officer of the Company, my own due diligence and
representations made by certain other members of the Company's senior
management.

Date:  May 16, 2005

                                   /s/ Joel H. Girsky
                                   ------------------------------------------
                                   Joel H. Girsky
                                   Chairman, President and Treasurer
                                   (Principal Executive Officer)
The HONORABLE DONALD D. ALSOP, United States District Judge

for the District of Minnesota.

___________

No. 95-2457

___________

Bart Albert Sanquist, *

 *

Appellant, *

 * Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

 * District of Minnesota.

United States of America, *

 * [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellee. *

___________

 Submitted: May 22, 1996

 Filed: May 28, 1996

___________

Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

After authorities found marijuana plants drying in a locked shed on

Bart Albert Sanquist's property, he pleaded guilty to possessing more than

one hundred marijuana plants with intent to distribute, in violation of 21

U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B). Sanquist's plea agreement stipulated

that he knowingly possessed "approximately 330 marijuana plants." The

district court imposed the sixty-month mandatory minimum prison sentence 1

for a violation involving "100 or more marijuana plants,"

§ 841(b)(1)(B)(vii), rejecting defense counsel's contention that this

penalty should not apply because Sanquist had merely picked marijuana

plants growing wild along a country road. Sanquist did not appeal, but he

later brought this 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his sentence. The

district court denied the motion, and Sanquist appeals. Having 
-2-

reviewed the denial de novo, see Holloway v. United States, 960 F.2d 1348,

1351 (8th Cir. 1992), we affirm.

Although Sanquist raises numerous issues, we conclude that the appeal

turns on his contention that the mandatory minimum sentence was improperly

imposed because there was no evidence that he had grown the drying plants.

The statute applies to offenses "involving . . . plants," language that

plainly encompasses the harvesting as well as the growing components of

agricultural production. See United States v. Haynes, 969 F.2d 569 (7th

Cir. 1992). Sanquist stipulated that he possessed "approximately 330

marijuana plants," thereby conforming his plea agreement to the plain

language of § 841(b)(1)(B)(vii). In these circumstances, the sentencing

court was clearly correct in imposing the mandatory minimum five-year

sentence. That being so, Sanquist's claim that trial counsel rendered

ineffective assistance by failing to argue at sentencing that the plants

were not alive when seized, and his additional claim under 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(2) that the sentence should be reduced because of a recent

amendment to U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c), see U.S.S.G. App. C at 417 (Amend. No.

516), afford him no basis for postconviction relief. See U.S.S.G.

§ 5G1.1(b). 

Accordingly, we affirm. Sanquist's motions for appointment of

counsel and for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) are

denied.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Exhibit 32.2


            Section 1350 Certification of Principal Financial Officer


The undersigned, the Executive Vice President, Finance and Secretary of Jaco
Electronics, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, to the best of my knowledge, that: (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
of the Company for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2006 (the "Quarterly
Report") accompanying this certification 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company as of the dates and for the periods presented as required by such
report. The foregoing certification is based upon, among other things, my
responsibilities as principal financial officer of the Company, my own due
diligence and representations made by certain other members of the Company's
senior management.


Date: February 14, 2006

                            /s/ Jeffrey D. Gash
                            ----------------------------------------------
                            Jeffrey D. Gash
                            Executive Vice President, Finance and Secretary
                            (Principal Financial Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           9,458
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   34,081
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,919
<INVENTORY>                                     35,758
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                84,354
<PP&E>                                          29,004
<DEPRECIATION>                                  16,457
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 156,067
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           45,676
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,586
<OTHER-SE>                                      84,504
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   156,067
<SALES>                                        112,503
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               112,503
<CGS>                                           89,151
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                21,496
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   173
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,760
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,811
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,488
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,257
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,257
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.22
        



</TABLE>
Case 1:06-cv-14947-AKH Document 6 Filed 11/15/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:06-cv-14947-AKH Document 6 Filed 11/15/2007 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5606 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.5606

                      One Hundred Eleventh Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
             the fifth day of January, two thousand and ten

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
47 South 7th Street in Indiana, Pennsylvania, as the ``James M. `Jimmy' 
                     Stewart Post Office Building''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. JAMES M. ``JIMMY'' STEWART POST OFFICE BUILDING.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 47 South 7th Street in Indiana, Pennsylvania, shall be known 
and designated as the ``James M. `Jimmy' Stewart Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``James M. 
`Jimmy' Stewart Post Office Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
#### CODY v. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION

No. 142 PC.

Case below: 45 N.C. App. 471.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 3 June 1980.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 218 (Monday, November 14, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 69135]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22511]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    The Department of Commerce has submitted to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for 
collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
    Agency: National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
    Title: U.S. Measurement Systems Biophotonics Survey.
    Form Number(s): None.
    OMB Approval Number: None.
    Type of Review: Regular submission.
    Burden Hours: 10.
    Number of Respondents: 60.
    Average Hours Per Response: 10 minutes.
    Needs and Uses: NIST would like to determine the industry 
expectations for metrology needs of biophotonics applied to cell and 
tissue diagnostics aspects of health care over the next 10 years. To 
begin this process, NIST will sponsor a workshop entitled Biophotonic 
Tools for Cell and Tissue Diagnostics. This workshop will focus on 
diagnostic techniques involving the interaction between biological 
systems and photons. The survey will collect limited background 
information (e.g., professional training and interests).
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit organizations.
    Frequency: One-time only.
    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.
    OMB Desk Officer: Jasmeet Seehra, (202) 395-3123.
    Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained 
by calling or writing Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance 
Officer, (202) 482-0266, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e185a9988f848aa1858e82cf868e97"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8befc3f2e5eee0cbefe4e8a5ece4fd">[email protected]</span></a>).
    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information 
collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice 
to Jasmeet Seehra, OMB Desk Officer, FAX number (202) 395-3123, or 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#fcb69d8f91999988a3b7d2a3af9999948e9dbc93919ed299938cd29b938a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="eca68d9f81898998b3a7c2b3bf8989849e8dac83818ec289839cc28b839a">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: November 7, 2005.
Gwellnar Banks,
Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 05-22511 Filed 11-10-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-13-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF JOURNAL COMMUNICATIONS,
INC. AS OF AND FOR THE PERIOD ENDED OCTOBER 6, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   OTHER<F1>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-06-1996
<CASH>                                           7,773
<SECURITIES>                                    32,646
<RECEIVABLES>                                   92,604
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     26,792
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               177,594
<PP&E>                                         389,725
<DEPRECIATION>                                 225,514
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 448,744
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          107,017
<BONDS>                                          2,419
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,600
<OTHER-SE>                                     334,519
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   448,744
<SALES>                                        465,781
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               465,781
<CGS>                                          269,647
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  418,395
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 296
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 49,909
<INCOME-TAX>                                    20,858
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             29,051
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    29,051
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.21
<FN>
<F1>10 accounting periods
</FN>
        

</TABLE>