alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

--------------------------------------------------------------------x 

RITCHIE CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, L.L.C., et al., 

 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 07 Civ. 3494 (DLC) 

 

COVENTRY FIRST LLC, et al., 

 

 Defendants. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------x 

DECLARATION OF A.R. THANE RITCHIE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ 

OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS 

I, A.R. Thane Ritchie, hereby declare as follows: 

 1. I am the chief executive officer of Ritchie Capital Management, L.L.C. (which, 

together with its affiliates, is known as “Ritchie Capital”), one of the plaintiffs in this action. I 

am familiar with the facts and circumstances of this lawsuit and make this declaration on 

personal knowledge. 

 2. Discussions between Coventry and representatives of Ritchie Capital who were 

situated in New York began in March 2005. 

 3. From March 2005 until November 2006, the Ritchie Capital employee with 

primary responsibility for Ritchie Capital’s relationship with Coventry was John “Jeff” 

Mulholland. Mr. Mulholland and other Ritchie Capital employees working with him were in 

Ritchie Capital’s New York office. 

 4. During this time period Coventry employees and executives frequently 

communicated by email and telephone with Mr. Mulholland and other Ritchie Capital employees 

in New York. While working for Ritchie Capital in New York, Mr. Mulholland regularly dealt 

Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 24 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 24 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATIONS

I, D. Michael Parker, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Kewaunee Scientific Corporation;

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 officer 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)) for the registrant and we 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) 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 period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) 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 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 officer 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: March 13, 2008

/s/ D. Michael ParkerD. Michael ParkerSenior Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
Case 7:07-cv-03509-SCR-LMS Document 2 Filed 05/02/2007 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE>
                                                                                                 EXHIBIT 12

                     KENTUCKY POWER COMPANY
        Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                (in thousands except ratio data)
<CAPTION>
                                                                                                    Twelve
                                                                                                    Months
                                                              Year Ended December 31,               Ended
                                                  1992       1993       1994       1995      1996   9/30/97 
<S>                                             <C>        <C>        <C>       <C>       <C>       <C>
Fixed Charges:                                                                                    
  Interest on First Mortgage Bonds . . . . . .  $13,275    $17,472    $19,090   $19,090   $14,914   $14,037
  Interest on Other Long-term Debt . . . . . .    7,668      2,033       -        2,422     6,446     8,597
  Interest on Short-term Debt. . . . . . . . .      413      1,001      1,621     2,242     2,849     3,171
  Miscellaneous Interest Charges . . . . . . .      861        523        485       510       555       546
  Estimated Interest Element in Lease Rentals.      800        800        700       700       800       800
       Total Fixed Charges . . . . . . . . . .  $23,017    $21,829    $21,896   $24,964   $25,564   $27,151

Earnings:                                                                                         
  Net Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  $26,537    $18,031    $25,273   $25,128   $16,973   $20,131
  Plus Federal Income Taxes. . . . . . . . . .    1,465      1,620      2,178     3,914     5,119     7,826
  Plus State Income Taxes. . . . . . . . . . .    1,891      1,116      1,154     1,420       598     1,547
  Plus Fixed Charges (as above). . . . . . . .   23,017     21,829     21,896    24,964    25,564    27,151
       Total Earnings. . . . . . . . . . . . .  $52,910    $42,596    $50,501   $55,426   $48,254   $56,655

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges . . . . . .     2.29       1.95       2.30      2.22      1.88      2.08
</TABLE>
#### STATE v. HUGENBERG

No. 52 PC.

Case below: 34 N.C. App. 91.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 20 October 1977.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         3,823,066
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,260,144
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    2,513,157
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               8,127,326
<PP&E>                                         3,365,993
<DEPRECIATION>                                 2,947,003
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 8,127,326
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          491,187
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       243,756
<OTHER-SE>                                     7,392,139
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   8,127,326
<SALES>                                        5,629,591
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               5,629,591
<CGS>                                          5,483,318
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  5,483,318
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (189,883)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   43,636
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (233,519)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.11)



</TABLE>
##### 



Exhibit 23.4 Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm The Members
ARTISTdirect Records, LLC: We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No. 333-122027, No.
333-53208, No. 333-38104, No. 333-63572 and No. 333-68396) on Forms S-8 of ARTISTdirect, Inc. of
our report dated February 14, 2003, except for Note 14, which is
December 31, 2004, with respect to the statements of operations, members deficit
and cash flows of ARTISTdirect Records, LLC (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2002,
which report appears in the December 31, 2004 Annual Report on
Form 10-K/A Amendment No. 1 of ARTISTdirect, Inc. Our report dated February 14, 2003 contains an explanatory paragraph that states that the Company
has incurred substantial operating losses and negative cash flows from operations to date and needs
additional capital to fund its operations, which raise substantial doubt about its ability to
continue as a going concern. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might
result from the outcome of this uncertainty. /s/ KPMG LLP Los Angeles, California
July 26, 2005 
 116
#### PUBLISHING CO. v. HOSPITAL SYSTEM, INC.

No. 162 PC.

Case below: 55 N.C. App. 1.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 3 March 1982.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

September 24, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
134011 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. JUNE UMBARGER, Persona l Representative of Stephen J. Markman, the Estate of Orpha Tower, Deceased, Justices Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 134011 COA: 264699 Eaton CC: 04-001695-NO HAYES GREEN BEACH MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 1, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, it appearing to this Court that the case of Mullins v St Joseph Mercy Hospital (Docket No. 131879) is pending on appeal before this Court and that the decision in th at case may resolve an issue raised in the present application for leave to appeal, we ORDER that the app lication be held in ABEYANCE pending the decision in that case.

t0917 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 24, 2007

Clerk
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-20031 Summary Calendar

DORIS LEE, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus JOHN J. CALLAHAN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-96-CV-774

- - - - - - - - - - July 18, 1997 Before WIENER, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Doris Lee appeals the district court’s summary judgment in favor of the Commissioner of Social Security. She contends that the district court should have applied an equitable tolling provision and permitted her to file a complaint challenging the denial of disability insurance benefits, even though she did not meet the deadline to seek judicial review.No. 97-20031 - 2 - We have reviewed the brief and the record and conclude that thee is no error. For the reasons stated by the district court, this is not the rare case that merits equitable tolling of the limitations period. Lee v. Callahan , No. H-96-CV-774 (S.D. Tex. Dec. 23, 1996). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 38-8 Filed 09/05/2008 Page 1 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 38-8 Filed 09/05/2008 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 38-8 Filed 09/05/2008 Page 3 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 38-8 Filed 09/05/2008 Page 4 of 4
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1810 

To amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act to allow schools 

that participate in the school lunch program to serve whole milk, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 12, 2019 

Mr. TOOMEY (for himself and Mr. JOHNSON) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

A BILL 

To amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch 

Act to allow schools that participate in the school lunch 

program to serve whole milk, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Milk in Lunches for 

5 Kids Act of 2019’’ or the ‘‘MILK Act of 2019’’. 

6 SEC. 2. WHOLE MILK PERMISSIBLE. 

7 Section 9(a)(2)(A) of the Richard B. Russell National 

8 School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1758(a)(2)(A)) is amend9 ed— 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1810 IS

1 (1) in clause (i), by striking ‘‘milk.’’ and all 

2 that follows through ‘‘(7 U.S.C. 5341)’’ and insert3 ing ‘‘milk;’’; and 

4 (2) in clause (ii), by striking ‘‘milk’’ the first 

5 place it appears and inserting ‘‘milk, flavored and 

6 unflavored whole milk, milk with 2 percent fat,’’. 

7 SEC. 3. HEALTHY MILK FAT. 

8 The Secretary of Agriculture shall revise section 

9 210.10 of title 7, Code of Federal Regulations (or suc10 cessor regulations), to exclude milk fat from the calcula11 tion of the average saturated fat content of a meal. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation byreference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 333-91737, 333-34552, 333-49842, 333-52012, 333-65192, 333-82864, 333-113544, 333-120976, 333-123230, 333-132406, 333-142234, 333-144605, 333-146-969, and 333-149601, and Form S-3No. 333-55744) of Blue Coat Systems, Inc. of our reports dated June 27, 2008, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Blue Coat Systems, Inc. and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reportingof Blue Coat Systems, Inc., included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended April 30, 2008. 

/s/ERNST & YOUNG LLP 

San Jose, California 

June 27, 2008
CHIEF JUSTICE

 ROGELIO VALDEZ

JUSTICES

 NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ

 DORI CONTRERAS GARZA

 GINA M. BENAVIDES

 GREGORY T. PERKES

 NORA L. LONGORIA

CLERK

 DORIAN E. RAMIREZ

NUECES COUNTY COURTHOUSE

901 LEOPARD, 10TH FLOOR

CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 78401

361-888-0416 (TEL)

361-888-0794 (FAX)

HIDALGO COUNTY

ADMINISTRATION BLDG.

100 E. CANO, 5TH FLOOR

EDINBURG, TEXAS 78539

956-318-2405 (TEL)

956-318-2403 (FAX)

www.txcourts.gov/13thcoa

Court of Appeals 

Thirteenth District of Texas 

April 02, 2015

Hon. Charles Walker Bailey

1108 Lavaca St Ste 700

Austin, TX 78701-2180

Hon. Dolores A. Hibbs

1700 N. Congress

11th Floor

Austin, TX 78701

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Hon. Cynthia Woelk

Assistant Attorney General

Environmental Protection Division MC 066

P. O. Box 12548

Austin, TX 78711-2548

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Hon. Priscilla M. Hubenak

Assistant Attorney General

Environmental Protection Division - MC 

066

P. O. Box 12548

Austin, TX 78711-2548

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Hon. Douglas G. Caroom

Bickerstaff, Heath, Delgado, Acosta, LLP

3711 S. Mopac, Bldg. 1, Ste. 300

Austin, TX 78746

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Re: Cause No. 13-13-00415-CV

Tr.Ct.No. D-1-GN-12-003937

Style: TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY v. TEXAS FARM 

BUREAU, FRANK VOLLEMAN, FRANK DESTEFANO, DAVID AND MARY 

BALLEW, RON AND SHERIE BURNETTE, SAM JONES, THEODORE AND MARY 

KALLUS, GLEN MARECEK, JOHN GAULDING, AND CHARLES AND KATHERINE 

HARLESS

Enclosed please find the opinion and judgment issued by the Court on this date.

Very truly yours,

Dorian E. Ramirez, Clerk

DER:ch

Enc.

cc: 53rd District Court

Hon. Amalia Rodriguez-Mendoza, Travis County District Clerk (DELIVERED VIA 

E-MAIL)

Hon. Billy Ray Stubblefield, Presiding Judge, Third Administrative Judicial 

Region (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)
116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1759 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 456 North Meridian Street in Indianapolis, 

Indiana, as the ‘‘Richard G. Lugar Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

†S 1759 ES

1 SECTION 1. RICHARD G. LUGAR POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 456 North Meridian Street in 

4 Indianapolis, Indiana, shall be known and designated as 

5 the ‘‘Richard G. Lugar Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Richard G. Lugar 

10 Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the Senate July 30, 2019. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1759 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostLugar Post Office Building’’. in Indianapolis, Indiana, as the ‘‘Richard G. al Service located at 456 North Meridian Street
Case 1:07-cv-03554-RPP     Document 13      Filed 03/07/2008     Page 1 of 2

Case 1:07-cv-03554-RPP     Document 13      Filed 03/07/2008     Page 2 of 2
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, *v.*Bertha Schwartz, Appellant.

*People*v. *Schwartz,*183 App. Div. 367, affirmed.

(Argued October 16, 1918;

decided November 1, 1918.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered April 12, 1918, which affirmed a judgment of the Court of Special Sessions of the city of New York convicting defendant of a violation of the Liquor Tax Law in selling liquor, to wit, hard cider, without having paid a liquor tax, and without having obtained and posted the required liquor tax certificate.

*A. S. Gilbert*and *Francis Gilbert*for appellant.

*Harry E. Lewis, District Attorney {John E. Ruston*of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment affirmed; no opinion.

Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Chase, Hogan, Caedozo, Pound and McLaughlin, JJ. Absent: Andrews, J.
#### SELF v. SELF

No. 22 PC.

Case below: 37 N.C. App. 199.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 4 October 1978.
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATIONS

I, William A. Shumaker, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Kewaunee Scientific Corporation;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

4. The registrants other certifying officer
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)) for the registrant and we 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 quarterly report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about
the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter 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
officer 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: December 10, 2007



/s/ William A. ShumakerWilliam A. ShumakerPresident and Chief Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-6619

EDWIN K. HARTZLER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Columbia. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge.

(CA-99-3914-3-13BC)

Submitted: July 13, 2000 Decided: July 25, 2000

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Edwin K. Hartzler, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* We express no opinion as to the merits of any such petition.

2

PER CURIAM:

Edwin K. Hartzler appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000)

complaint seeking monetary damages against the State of South

Carolina based on his continued involuntary confinement in a mental

institution. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. See Hartzler v. South Carolina, No. CA-99-3914-3-

13BC (D.S.C. Apr. 24, 2000). This disposition is without prejudice

to Hartzler’s ability to file a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241

(1994) challenging his continued confinement without a competency

hearing.* We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED