alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Pagan *v.*Fort Pitt Gas Company, Appellant.

*Master and servant*— Suit *for .wages*— Day’s. *worlc*— Evidence—Question, *for jury.*

In. an action to recover for a certain number of day’s work, the defendant alleged that the plaintiff was notified to quit work but chose to go on, also that he employed an incompetent assistant, and further that there had been a settlement in full. All of this was denied. *Held,*that the case was for the jury, and that a verdict and judgment for plaintiff should be sustained.

Argued April 14, 1904.

Appeal, No. 60, April T., 1904, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., March T., 1901, No. 550, on verdict for plaintiff in case of R. B. Pagan v. Fort Pitt Gas Company.

Before Rice, P. J., Beaver, Orlady, Smith, Porter, Morrison and Henderson, JJ.

Affirmed.

Assumpsit for seventy-three days’ work on an oil well. Before Collier, P. J.

The opinion of the Superior Court states the case.

Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $1,086.60. Defendant appealed.

*Error assigned*among others was in submitting the case to the jury. ■

*76January 17, 1904:

*Edwin S.*Craig, for appellant.

*A. B. Sag,*with him *C. J. Ligfitenheld,*for appellee.

Opinion by

Oblady, J.,

The defendant had an opportunity before two juries to make good his defense against the plaintiff’s claim, but failed in each instance.

The matter in controversy was purely one of fact, no questions of law having been involved. In the last submission to the jury the whole question was fully and fairly stated as follows : “ If you believe the plaintiff’s theory, as made out by the weight of the evidence, he is clearly entitled to be paid for his seventy-three days’ work at $13.00 a day, for which he has not received one cent. On the other hand, if he was notified to quit but chose to go on he is not entitled to anything; or if he employed an incompetent man and that caused the trouble, he is not entitled to anything; or if he made a settlement of everything up to that day, he is not entitled to anything. All this is denied. Your duty is to treat both sides alike and reconcile the evidence if you can, and if you are satisfied that the weight of the evidence is with the plaintiff, he ought to have a verdict for the amount he claims, if not, the defendant should have the verdict. ”

The question of a bill receipted in full was not in the case. At the request of the defendant’s superintendent a bill was submitted for the “ tearing out and rigging up ” until the well was plugged, which bill was paid in full without a dispute. As to the claim for which this suit was brought, the defendant denied its liability to pay, but in the light of two verdicts against it, a mistake was made in so doing.

Nothing would be gained by a retrial of this case and we find no substantial error in the record. The judgment is affirmed.
#### MILLS v. ENTERPRISES, INC.

No. 186 PC.

Case below: 36 N.G. App. 410.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 29 August 1978.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Martha Stillwagon et al., Appellants, against Callan Brothers et al., Respondents. State Industrial Commission, Respondent.

*Stillwagon*v. *Callan Brothers,*183 App. Div. 141, affirmed.

(Submitted November 12, 1918;

decided November 26, 1918.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered May 7, 1918, reversing an award of the state industrial commission made under the Workmen’s Compensation Law and dismissing the claim. Claimant’s husband (Henry Stillwagon) and another employee of defendant Callan Brothers were engaged in unloading brick from a railroad car. They got into a dispute as to who was first entitled to load, came to blows and Still-wagon was killed. The Appellate Division held that the injury was not a natural incident of the work he was employed to perform.

*Edwin T. Murdoch, William C. Findlay*and *Louis A. Cuvillier*for appellants.

*E. C. Sherwood, William B. Davis*and *Amos H. Stephens*for respondents.

Order affirmed, on opinion of Woodward, J., below.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Collin, Cuddeback, Hogan, McLaughlin and Crane, JJ.
<PAGE>
                                                                   Exhibit 99(b)

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

In connection with the Annual Report of C-COR.net Corp. (the "Company") on Form
10-K for the period ending June 28, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William T. Hanelly,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 that, to 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 result of operations of the Company.

/s/ William T. Hanelly
----------------------
William T. Hanelly
Chief Financial Officer
September 26, 2002
Case 1:06-cv-15011-AKH Document 4 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Century
Properties Fund XVI and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>   1
       
<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      YEAR 
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                                DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                          846,000
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCES>                                          0
<INVENTORY>                                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                      0
<PP&E>                                       14,497,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              (6,414,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                9,471,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                 0
<BONDS>                                       7,550,000
<COMMON>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<OTHER-SE>                                    1,718,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  9,471,000
<SALES>                                               0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              2,636,000
<CGS>                                                 0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 2,102,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              795,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (475,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                          0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (475,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (220,000)
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (695,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (4.98)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (4.98)

        


</TABLE>
#### STATE v. COBB

No. 156 PC.

Case below: 18 N.C. App. 221.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 31 August 1973.
Case 1:06-cv-15020-AKH Document 4 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Luis Manuel BEDOLLA-ALMANZA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-41159.

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided April 20, 2005.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

*604Marjorie A. Meyers, Margaret Christina Ling, Assistant Federal Public Defenders, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before SMITH, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Luis Manuel Bedolla-Almanza appeals from the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to attempted illegal reentry. He argues pursuant to *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), that *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), should be overruled. He concedes that his constitutional argument is foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres,*and he raises it solely to preserve its further review by the Supreme Court.

*Apprendi*did not overrule *Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,*530 U.S. at 489-90, 120 S.Ct. 2348; *United States v. Dabeit,*231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir.2000). The Supreme Court’s recent decisions in *Shepard v. United States,*— U.S.-,-- -& n. 5, 125 S.Ct. 1254, 1262-63 & n. 5, 161 L.Ed.2d 205 & n. 5 (2005), *United States v. Booker,*— U.S.-,-, 125 S.Ct. 738, 756, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), and *Blakely v. Washington,*— U.S. -, -, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 2537, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), also did not overrule *AlmendarezTorres.*We therefore must follow *Almendarez-Torres*“unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” *Dabeit,*231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Smith Barney Futures Management LLC
                         388 Greenwich Street, 7th Floor
                          New York, New York 10013-2396

June 11, 2001


Beacon Management Corporation
47 Hullfish Street
Princeton, N.J. 08542

Attention:  Mr. Mark Stratton

         Re:      Management Agreement Renewals

Dear Mr. Stratton:

We are  writing  with  respect  to your  management  agreements  concerning  the
commodity pools to which reference is made below (the "Management  Agreements").
We are extending the term of the Management Agreements through June 30, 2002 and
all other provisions of the Management Agreements will remain unchanged.

o        Smith Barney Diversified Futures Fund L.P. II
o        Salomon Smith Barney Orion Futures Fund L.P.
o        Smith Barney Diversified 2000 Futures Fund L.P.

Please  acknowledge  receipt of this  modification  by signing  one copy of this
letter and returning it to the attention of Mr. Daniel  McAuliffe at the address
above or fax to  212-723-8985.  If you have any  questions  I can be  reached at
212-723-5435.

Very truly yours,

SMITH BARNEY FUTURES MANAGEMENT LLC


By:
     /s/ Daniel R. McAuliffe, Jr.
         Daniel R. McAuliffe, Jr.
         Chief Financial Officer & Director

AGREED AND ACCEPTED
BEACON MANAGMENT CORPORATION
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
                   -----------------------------------------


     As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation
by reference of our report included in this Form 10-K into Barrett Resources
Corporation's previously filed Registration Statements on Form S-3, File Nos.
333-16229 and 333-12251 and on Form S-8, File Nos. 333-29669, 333-18311, 333-
02529, 33-61097 and 33-52813.


                                          ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

Denver, Colorado
February 26, 1998
Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-5 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 1 of 12 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 6 Filed 12/14/2006 Page 1 of 12

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-5 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 2 of 12 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 6 Filed 12/14/2006 Page 2 of 12

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-5 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 3 of 12 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 6 Filed 12/14/2006 Page 3 of 12

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-5 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 4 of 12 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 6 Filed 12/14/2006 Page 4 of 12

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-5 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 5 of 12 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 6 Filed 12/14/2006 Page 5 of 12

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-5 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 6 of 12 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 6 Filed 12/14/2006 Page 6 of 12

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-5 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 7 of 12 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 6 Filed 12/14/2006 Page 7 of 12

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-5 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 8 of 12 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 6 Filed 12/14/2006 Page 8 of 12

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-5 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 9 of 12 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 6 Filed 12/14/2006 Page 9 of 12

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-5 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 10 of 12 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 6 Filed 12/14/2006 Page 10 of 12

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-5 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 11 of 12 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 6 Filed 12/14/2006 Page 11 of 12

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-5 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 12 of 12 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 6 Filed 12/14/2006 Page 12 of 12
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION ORIGINALLY EXTRACTED FROM
JAMES RIVER CORPORATION OF VIRGINIA'S MARCH 31, 1996, FORM 10-Q FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AS RESTATED IN THE MARCH 30, 1997, FORM 10-Q FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
<CIK> 0000053117
<NAME> JAMES RIVER CORPORATION OF VIRGINIA
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-29-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1996
<CASH>                                              43
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      863
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        798
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,830
<PP&E>                                           6,159
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,152
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   7,071
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,094
<BONDS>                                          2,414
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        740
<COMMON>                                             9
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,477
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     7,071
<SALES>                                          1,555
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,555
<CGS>                                            1,182
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,182
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    23
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  45
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     35
<INCOME-TAX>                                        15
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 21
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        21
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .07
        

</TABLE>
The Declaration of Amy S. Manning, Esq. dated

October 19, 2007, including Exhibits A-C.

Case 7:07-cv-03302-KMK-LMS Document 75 Filed 10/19/2007 Page 1 of 1
Case 7:07-cv-03324-SCR     Document 5      Filed 07/20/2007     Page 1 of 1
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, July 08, 2021.

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, July 08, 2021

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A21D0373. VICTOR BLEVONS v. MARK BUTLER, COMMISSIONER OF GEORGIA 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR et al. .

Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

21A00111
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 218 (Monday, November 14, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 69163]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22530]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


Environmental Statements; Record of Decision: General Management 
Plan for Boston Harbor Islands National Recreation Area

AGENCY: National Park Service, Department of the Interior.

ACTION: Notice of Availability of Record of Decision on Final 
Environmental Impact Statement for General Management Plan, Boston 
Harbor Islands National Recreation Area.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969, Public Law 91-190, 83 Stat 852, as codified as 
amended at 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), the National Park Service announces 
the availability of a record of decision on the abbreviated final 
environmental impact statement for the Boston Harbor Islands general 
management plan. On October 17, 2005 the Northeast Regional Director 
approved the Record of Decision for the project. The Record of Decision 
concludes the environmental analysis of the first general management 
for Boston Harbor Islands National Recreation Area and adopts the plan. 
The plan defines the park's mission and management direction and 
establishes a basic foundation for decision making in consultation with 
stakeholders. The primary action of the plan is to designate specific 
``management areas'' for each area of the Boston Harbor Islands 
National Recreation Area. An extensive participatory process has 
characterized the development of the general management plan, including 
consultation with American Indian tribes. Implementation of the 
proposed general management plan would not result in the impairment of 
park resources and would enable the Boston Harbor Islands Partnership 
to protect park resources and provide for their enjoyment by visitors. 
The National Park Service commits to take all practicable measures to 
avoid or minimize environmental impacts that could result from 
implementation of the general management plan.

    Dated: October 17, 2005.
Mary A. Bomar,
Regional Director, Northeast Region.
[FR Doc. 05-22530 Filed 11-10-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Katy Industries, Inc. (the
registrant);2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
 (a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;(b)
    
    [Omitted in reliance on SEC Release No. 33-8238; 34-47986 Section III.E];(c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; and(d)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
function):
 (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial information; and(b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting.
 Date: August 20, 2007
    By:
    /s/ Anthony T. Castor IIIAnthony T. Castor IIIChief Executive Officer
Case 1:06-cv-15101-AKH Document 3 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
#### RIDGE v. WRIGHT

No. 113 PC.

Case below: 35 N.C. App. 643.

Petition by defendants for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 14 July 1978.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED> 
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       4,774,000
<SECURITIES>                                 3,968,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                8,724,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            17,754,000
<PP&E>                                      63,267,000
<DEPRECIATION>                            (27,460,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              53,561,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,706,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,400,000
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                53,561,000
<SALES>                                     48,227,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            48,227,000
<CGS>                                       41,091,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               41,091,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (486,000)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              7,116,000
<INCOME-TAX>                               (2,546,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          4,570,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 4,570,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.08
        

</TABLE>