alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 99-3802

___________

Teri Louise Graves, as Trustee for the *

Heirs of James Robert Graves, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

County of Beltrami; David Fallis, * District of Minnesota.

individually; William J. Siems, *

individually; Randy W. Posner, * [UNPUBLISHED]

individually; Randy Fitzgerald; *

individually; John Does I-X, *

individually, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: November 6, 2000 

 Filed: November 14, 2000

___________

Before LOKEN, FAGG, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

When the Beltrami County Sheriff’s Department learned of an underage-drinking

party at a home on a peninsula extending into Turtle Lake, several officers responded.

Using dogs, they pursued party-goers to test them for alcohol consumption and, if

appropriate, to arrest them. Some of the party-goers fled into the nearby woods, and
1The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for the

District of Minnesota.

-2-

18-year-old party-goer James Graves fled into the lake. The officers left the scene, and

Graves drowned.

Teri Graves, trustee for Mr. Graves’s heirs, sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and

brought a state-law negligence cause of action in federal court. The district court1

dismissed the complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), concluding

that the federal claim against the officers was barred by qualified immunity, the state

claim against the officers was barred by official immunity, and the county was not

liable because its officers were not liable. Ms. Graves appeals.

Having reviewed the district court's decision de novo, see Stanbury Law Firm

v. IRS, 221 F.3d 1059, 1061 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (standard of review), we

affirm the dismissal of the federal claim against the officers for the reasons stated by

the district court. Cf. S.S. v. McMullen, 225 F.3d 960 (8th Cir. 2000) (en banc). Ms.

Graves acknowledges that she did not assert a section 1983 claim against the county,

and we agree that one is not stated by the allegations in her complaint. See Monell v.

Department of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 694 (1978) (municipal liability premised on

official policy or custom which causes injury). We also affirm the court’s dismissal of

the state-law negligence claim against the officers, see Starks v. City of Minneapolis,

6 F. Supp. 2d 1084, 1087 (D. Minn. 1998) (Minnesota doctrine of official immunity for

discretionary acts), and against the county, see Olson v. Ramsey County, 509 N.W.2d

368, 372 (Minn. 1993) (when municipal employee enjoys official immunity, so does

municipality).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.
-3-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### ENGLISH v. ENGLISH

No. 73 PC.

Case below: 34 N.C. App. 193.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 6 December 1977.
#### BURNS v. MEYERS

No. 108 PC.

Case below: 54 N.C. App. 191.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 12 January 1982.
#### FREIGHT LINES v. POPE, FLYNN & CO.

No. 1 PC.

Case below: 42 N.C. App. 285.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 25 September 1979.
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 19-10 Filed 10/22/2007 Page 1 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 19-10 Filed 10/22/2007 Page 2 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 19-10 Filed 10/22/2007 Page 3 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 19-10 Filed 10/22/2007 Page 4 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 19-10 Filed 10/22/2007 Page 5 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 19-10 Filed 10/22/2007 Page 6 of 6
#### STATE v. SMITH

No. 111PC

Case below: 50 NC App 746

Petition by defendants for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 5 May 1981.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                                                5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted
from the contained quarterly 10-Q and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such Form 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                                             1

<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                       3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                               Jul-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                                                  Aug-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                                    Jan-31-2001
<CASH>                                                            1,097,186
<S>
<SECURITIES>                                                         42,764
<RECEIVABLES>                                                       345,795
<ALLOWANCES>                                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                  2,542,088
<PP&E>                                                           54,372,560
<DEPRECIATION>                                                   24,067,349
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                   43,095,328
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                             1,736,723
<BONDS>                                                                   0
<COMMON>                                                          2,178,297
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                                               0
<OTHER-SE>                                                       30,067,865
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                     43,095,328
<SALES>                                                                   0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                  5,548,457
<CGS>                                                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                             0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                  4,653,911
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                  286,034
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                     730,302
<INCOME-TAX>                                                        283,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                 447,302
<DISCONTINUED>                                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                                        447,302
<EPS-BASIC>                                                          0.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                          0.00


</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Alton Thomas Davis, 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

September 27, 2010 

0920 

Order 

 

September 27, 2010 

141453-5 

ROBERT RIGGS, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 141453-5 

 COA: 290771, 293218, 293831 

Saginaw CC: 07-063214-CL 

JACK B. ANDERSON and ANDERSON 

NWTT, L.L.C., d/b/a NORTHERN 

WHOLESALE TRAILERS RV WORLD USA, 

Defendants-Appellees. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 17, 2010 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-20495

Summary Calendar 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee 

v. 

JERMAINE CLARK STEPHENS, 

Defendant-Appellant 

Appeals from the United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Texas 

USDC No. 4:14-CR-576-2 

Before KING, DENNIS, and COSTA, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Jermaine Clark Stephens pleaded guilty to interference with commerce 

by robbery and was sentenced to serve 168 months in prison and a three-year 

term of supervised release. He argues that trial counsel rendered ineffective 

assistance by not challenging the inclusion of certain convictions in his 

criminal history score. Because he did not raise this issue in the district court, 

the record is not sufficiently developed to permit a fair evaluation of the claim, 

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fif h Circuit

FILED

July 13, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-20495 Document: 00514070847 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/13/2017
No. 16-20495

2 

and we decline to consider it without prejudice to collateral review. See United 

States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014). 

Additionally, Stephens argues that the district court’s guidelines 

calculations were plainly erroneous. The Government argues that 

consideration of this claim is precluded by the appeal waiver in the plea 

agreement. To determine whether an appeal of a sentence is barred by a

waiver provision in a plea agreement, we analyze whether the waiver was 

knowing and voluntary and whether the waiver applies to the appeal, based 

on the plain language of the agreement. United States v. Bond, 414 F.3d 542, 

544 (5th Cir. 2005). The record shows that the waiver was knowing and 

voluntary, and the waiver covers Stephens’s sentencing claim. Accordingly, 

consideration of this claim is barred by the appeal waiver. See id. 

 AFFIRMED. 

 Case: 16-20495 Document: 00514070847 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/13/2017
EXHIBIT 23.1





CONSENT OF KPMG LLP, INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM




The Board of Directors


Geeknet, Inc.:




We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration
statements Nos. 333-92409, 333-92391, 333-59096, 333-71944, 333-101965,
333-116778, 333-148056 and 333-171522 on Form S-8 of Geeknet, Inc. of our report
dated February 24, 2011, with respect to the consolidated balance sheet of
Geeknet, Inc. as of December 31, 2010, and the related consolidated statements
of operations, stockholders’ equity and other comprehensive income (loss)
and cash flows for the year then ended, and the related financial statement
schedule, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as
of December 31, 2010, which report appears in the December 31, 2010 annual
report on Form 10-K of Geeknet, Inc.




/s/ KPMG LLPMountain View, CaliforniaFebruary 24, 2011
STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA

VERSUS

VICTOR COVINGTON

NO. 2022 Kw 0542

JULY 18, 2022

In Re: Victor Covington, applying for supervisory writs, 20th

Judicial District Court, Parish of East Feliciana, No. 

96 - CR - 1253. 

BEFORE: HOLDRIDGE, PENZATO, AND LANIER, JJ. 

WRIT DENIED. 

GH

AHP

WIL

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

01• C04

DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT

FOR THE COURT
#### David Ruslander, Respondent, *v.*Evangelical Lutheran St. Johannes Gemeinde in Middle Ebenezer, Appellant.

*Ruslander*v. *Evangelical Lutheran St. J. O. M. E.,*171 App. Div. 975, affirmed.

(Argued November 14, 1918;

decided December 3, 1918.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of- the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered April 25, 1916, modifying and affirming as modified a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the Erie County Court on trial without a jury. The plaintiff commenced this action for the purpose of foreclosing a mechanic’s hen against the defendant’s church assigned to the plaintiff by one Alexander M. Bellony, an architect and contractor. The principal issues upon appeal were: *First,*whether Bellony performed the contract between him and the defendant, or violated it in important particulars and failed to' complete the church; and *second,*whether the plaintiff was an attorney at law and bought the lien unlawfully, with the intent and for the purpose of bringing an action thereon. The trial court found that plaintiff was not entitled to a lien, *723but directed a money judgment in his favor, which the Appellate Division modified by disallowing interest.

*Edward W. Hamilton*for appellant.

*Martin Clark*and *David Ruslander*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Collin, Cuddeback, Hogan, McLaughlin and Crane, JJ.
---

---

Exhibit 13.1

Certification of
Principal Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,as adopted pursuant
to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act

In connection with the annual report
on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 of ECtel Ltd. (the
Company) as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the
Commission) on the date hereof (the Report) and pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
I, Itzik Weinstein, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify that:

| | (1) | the
Report 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 Report fairly presents, in all material
               respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: June 18, 2008

/s/ Itzik Weinstein
Itzik WeinsteinPresident and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)



---

---
#### SMITH v. STATON

No. 211 PC.

Case below: 41 N.C. App. 395.

Petition by defendants for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 23 August 1979.
Exhibit 14.1




CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
  
 We consent
to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8
(Registration Nos. 333-111303, 333-34420 and 333-73650), pertaining to the
Jacada Ltd. 2003 Share Option and Incentive Plan, Jacada Ltd. 1999 Share Option
and Incentive Plan, the Jacada Ltd. 1996 Share Option Plan and to the Jacada
Ltd. 1994 Stock Option Plan, of our report dated June 17, 2008 with respect to
the consolidated financial statements of Jacada Ltd. included in this Annual
Report (Form 20-F) for the year ended December 31, 2007.
 
 
  Tel-Aviv,
      Israel
              KOST,
      FORER, GABBAY and KASIERERJune
      17, 2008
              A
      member of Ernst & Young Global
#### LOWDER, INC. v. HIGHWAY COMM.

No. 56 PC.

Case below: 26 N.C. App. 622.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 7 October 1975.
Exhibit 13.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F of Jacada Ltd. (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), the undersigned, Thomas H. Clear, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Caroline Cronin, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of our knowledge:



|1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: June 30, 2011



|    |  |                        
|--- |  | -----------------------
|By: |  |                        
|    |  | /s/Thomas H. Clear     
|    |  | Thomas H. Clear        
|    |  | Chief Executive Officer



| |  |                        
| |  | -----------------------
| |  | /s/ Caroline Cronin    
| |  | Caroline Cronin        
| |  | Chief Financial Officer
#### KAPLAN SCHOOL SUPPLY v. HENRY WURST, INC.

No. 271P82.

Case below: 56 N.C. App. 567.

Petition by defendants and third-party plaintiffs for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 13 July 1982.
Case 1:07-cv-03479-AKH     Document 6      Filed 09/05/2007     Page 1 of 1
#### STATE v. WELLS

No. 225P82.

Case below: 54 N.C. App. 192.

Petition by defendant for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 13 July 1982.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

-% 

In re Fosamax Froducts Liability : 

Lit lgdt ion 

- - - - - - - - . .. - - - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X 

This Gocutnent Re2ates to: 

All Actions. ----.----------------------------- -X 

JOHN F. KEENAN, United States District 3udge: 

After considering the letters subinltted 

the !:our-t w:ll r,ot enter M~rck's propc~ed order regarding rases 

filed by BeatFe and Osbdrrt, LLP that involve less t!~an three 

zcntinuous years of Fosamax use. Whether fir not Fcsa~nax call cause 

ONJ in anyone before three years of use remains an open quest-ion 

that should be resolved uniformly on the basla of the scientific 

evidence generated a£ ter a f gll opporturli tls for dir;covery. 

Thc parties are directed tc7 agree upsn and submit to the 

Court by October 7, 20ila a case managemuilt order Froposlng: (1) a 

sckdule to con~plete all generic expert discovery In this MDL; and 

(2) a schedule for summary judqn-tent mot-ions. In the event that the 

parties cannot reach agreement, by the same date each shall submit 

~ts own PI-oposal dlcng with a letter brief In support of it, and 

appear for a conference in ~ourtrooni 20C on Octobei- 16, 2005 at 

1G:30 am. 

SO ORDERED. 

Dated: New York, New York 

September 9, 2008 

I 

1 

JOHN F. KEENAN 

United States District Judge 

Case 1:07-cv-03465-JFK Document 37 Filed 09/09/2008 Page 1 of 1
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

JOHN TRIPODI,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D20-658

[May 21, 2020]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.800 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Martin County; Sherwood Bauer, Judge; 

L.T. Case No. 432016CF000692A.

John Tripodi, Perry, pro se.

No brief filed for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

LEVINE, C.J., GROSS and FORST, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
exv10w25w1






Exhibit 10.25.1




AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT




     Shaun McFall (“Executive”) and Stratex Networks, Inc., formerly DMC Stratex Networks, Inc.
(the “Company”), are parties to an Employment Agreement of May 14,
2002 (the “Agreement”). Executive and the Company now wish to amend the
Agreement, and thus they agree as set forth below. This Amendment shall be deemed
effective as of April 1, 2006.



     1. Wherever the phrase “DMC Stratex Networks, Inc.” appears in the
Agreement, it is hereby deleted and replaced with “Stratex Networks, Inc.”



     2. In Paragraph 1 of the Agreement, Executive’s title (Vice President, Product Marketing”) is
hereby deleted and replaced with the title “Corporate Vice President, Marketing.”



     3. The following is added to Paragraph 5(c)(ii) of the Agreement: “provided, however that if
you are 60 years of age or older on the date of your termination without cause, and if you have
been employed by the Company for not less than three years as of the date of your termination
without cause, the Company will pay the premiums necessary to continue your Company group health
insurance coverage under COBRA (or to provide you with comparable health insurance coverage) until
you reach the age of 65 or until you are eligible to participate in another employer’s group health
insurance plan, whichever comes first;”.



     4. In Paragraph 5(e) of the Agreement, the phrase “(ii to a maximum of 18 months)” is modified
to read as follows: “(ii to a maximum of 18 months, unless you are 60 years of age or older on the
date of your termination/resignation and you have been employed by the Company for not less than
three years as of the date of your termination/resignation, in which case the last clause of
subparagraph 5(c)(ii) shall apply)”.



     5. In Paragraph 11 of the Agreement, the last sentence (”Provided, however ...”) is
hereby deleted and replaced with the following sentence: “Any arbitration conducted under this
Paragraph will be pursuant to the American Arbitration Association’s (“AAA”) National Rules for the
Resolution of Employment Disputes, a copy of which can be found on the AAA website at
www.adr.org.”



 









 





     Except as modified by this Amendment, the Agreement will remain in full force and effect.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Dated: April                    , 2006

	 	 	 	/s/ Shaun McFall 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 

Shaun McFall
	 	 






	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Dated: April                    , 2006	 	 	 	Stratex Networks, Inc.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	By:
	 	/s/ Charles D. Kissner	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	Its:
	 	 

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Case 1:07-cv-03531-CM-DCF Document 18-8 Filed 06/05/2008 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03531-CM-DCF Document 18-8 Filed 06/05/2008 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-28-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-29-1998
<CASH>                                             506
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   18,160
<ALLOWANCES>                                       181
<INVENTORY>                                     20,557
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                42,545
<PP&E>                                          11,023
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,373
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  60,858
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           22,100
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           156
<OTHER-SE>                                      28,168
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    60,858
<SALES>                                         70,692
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                70,692
<CGS>                                           54,807
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   64,843
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    73
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   121
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 624
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,154
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,902
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,252
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,252
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .21
        

</TABLE>