alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Mercantile Bank National Association       Mercantile Tower
Timothy W. Hassler                         P. O. Box 524
Vice President                             St. Louis, MO 63166-0524
Large Corporate
314-418-8046
314-418-2203 Fax

January 22, 1999

Mr. Ronald L. Krutzman
Treasurer and Assistant Secretary
Laclede Gas Company
720 Olive Street
St. Louis, MO  63101

Dear Ron:

Mercantile Bank of St. Louis National Association is pleased to provide a
$10,000,000 line of credit maturing January 31, 2000 to Laclede Gas Company
for general corporate purposes and for commercial paper backup.

All borrowings will be priced at your option, at Mercantile's Prime rate,
floating, IBOR adjusted +3/8%, or CD's adjusted +1/2% for available
maturities to 90 days.  Notes issued under this line shall not exceed 90
days.  If a whole note is outstanding with a maturity after January 31,
2000, the note shall be renewed in whole or in part provided no note shall
mature later than June 30, 2000.

Interest shall be payable at maturity or on date of repayment.  Interest
shall be computed on the basis of actual 365/366 for prime borrowings and
actual 360 basis for IBOR or CD loans.  Notes issued may be prepaid at any
time without penalty, subject to standard funding loss provisions.

We may terminate this agreement at any time if we determine, in good faith,
that we are not satisfied with your conditions, operations or performance,
financial or otherwise.

It is understood that any loans obtained by any subsidiary of Laclede Gas
Company, whether or not they are guaranteed by Laclede Gas Company, are
excluded from this agreement and shall not be charged against the line of
credit described above.

Nothing in this letter is intended to alter the arrangements set forth in
the agreement dated August 20, 1998 or the availability of up to $35,000,000
of advances thereunder from Mercantile Bank of St. Louis National
Association on the terms set forth in said August 20, 1998 agreement.












                                   Page 24<PAGE>
<PAGE>
Page 2
Laclede Gas Company
January 22, 1999


We appreciate the opportunity to service your credit needs and to continue
the long standing relationship between our companies.  If the foregoing is
acceptable to you, please sign below.

                         MERCANTILE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

                         By: s/Timothy W. Hassler
                         Name: Timothy W. Hassler
                         Title: Vice President

Accepted this 22nd day of January, 1999

LACLEDE GAS COMPANY

By: s/Ronald L. Krutzman
Name: Ronald L. Krutzman
Title: Treasurer & Asst. Secretary






































                                   Page 25
#### ROBERT S. BENSON v. WALTER F. SAWYER.

(Filed 10 October 1962.)

Automobiles § 41k—

Evidence tending to show that plaintiff bad opened tbe door to a parked vehicle to speak to bis estranged wife’s sister, wbo was sitting on tbe front seat as a passenger, that defendant got into tbe driver’s seat, backed tbe car suddenly and rapidly so that plaintiff did not bave time to step aside, and was struck by tbe open door and drug to bis injury, and that defendant then drove forward and left tbe scene, *is held*sufficient to be submitted to tbe jury on tbe issue of negligence and not to show contributory negligence as a matter of law, there being no evidence of any menace by plaintiff by word or demeanor.

*766Appeal by plaintiff from *Cowper, J.,*March 1962 Civil Term of New HANOVER.

Action to recover for personal injuries suffered by plaintiff by reason of the alleged negligence of defendant.

From judgment of involuntary nonsuit, plaintiff appeals.

*Solomon B. Sternberger and Addison Hewlitt, Jr., for plaintiff.*

*Poisson, Marshall, Barnhill & Williams for defendant.*

Per Curiam.

The case was nonsuited at the close of plaintiff’s evidence. His evidence, considered in the light most favorable to him, tends to show:

Shortly after midnight on 17 October 1960 plaintiff parked his truck in the parking area in front of the Oleander Fruit stand in a suburban district of New Hanover County. Plaintiff entered the Fruit Stand, which was open for business, and remained there about 30 minutes. When he came out he saw his wife’s sister-in-law, Mary Fender, sitting in a Cadillac automobile parked near his truck. She was sitting in the right front seat of the Cadillac. About this time defendant got in the Cadillac on the driver’s side. Plaintiff called Mary’s name loudly, and opened the right front door of the Cadillac to speak to her. She and her husband were estranged. Plaintiff’s manner was not menacing, and he was not cursing. Defendant started the motor. Plaintiff was standing behind the open door. Defendant began backing the Cadillac “real fast.” Plaintiff didn’t have time to step aside, and was knocked down and was dragged about 30 feet to the edge of the highway. Defendant drove forward and left the scene. Plaintiff was injured.

The complaint narrates the occurrence in substantial accord with the foregoing summary of the evidence, and alleges that plaintiff’s injury was proximately caused by defendant’s negligence consisting *inter alia*of reckless driving in violation of G.S. 20-140, excessive speed in violation of G.S. 20-141 (a), failure to keep a reasonable lookout, and failure to keep the automobile under proper control.

Defendant denies that he was negligent, and pleads contributory negligence.

Plaintiff’s evidence makes out a *prima facie*case of actionable negligence. *Adams v. Service Co.,*237 N.C. 136, 74 S.E. 2d 332. Contributory negligence does not appear as a matter of law from plaintiff’s evidence.

The judgment below is

Reversed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                               5
<MULTIPLIER>                        1,000
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                JAN-1-1997
<PERIOD-END>                  DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 12-MOS
<CASH>                                186
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                      42,694
<ALLOWANCES>                        2,412
<INVENTORY>                        82,806
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  124,512
<PP&E>                            239,670
<DEPRECIATION>                    128,652
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    313,820
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              68,613
<BONDS>                           109,157
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                            83
<COMMON>                               41
<OTHER-SE>                         20,977
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      313,820
<SALES>                           325,029
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  325,029
<CGS>                             296,230
<TOTAL-COSTS>                     302,939
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                   13,654
<LOSS-PROVISION>                      (32)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                 10,046
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    (4,950)
<INCOME-TAX>                       (1,943)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                (3,007)
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                       (3,007)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                       (0.83)
<EPS-DILUTED>                       (0.83)

</TABLE>
Exhibit 21.1

interWAVE COMMUNICATIONS INTERNATIONAL, LTD.    LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

|Subsidiary                                       |  | Incorporated   
|------------------------------------------------ |  | ---------------
|interWAVE Communications, Inc.                   |  | Delaware, USA  
|interWAVE Communications Australia Pty. Ltd.     |  | Australia      
|interWAVE Communications B.V.                    |  | Netherlands    
|interWAVE Communications India Private Limited   |  | India          
|interWAVE Communications Ireland, Ltd.           |  | Ireland        
|interWAVE Communications Lanka (Private) Limited |  | Sri Lanka      
|interWAVE Communications Networks, S.A.          |  | Uruguay        
|interWAVE Communications International S.A.      |  | France         
|interWAVE Communications (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd.    |  | P.R. China     
|interWAVE Communications UK, Ltd.                |  | United Kingdom 
|interWAVE Services (Thailand) Limited            |  | Thailand       
|Microcellular Systems Limited                    |  | Ireland        
|Microcellular Systems USA                        |  | California, USA
|Wireless, Inc.                                   |  | Delaware, USA  
|interWAVE Advanced Communications, Inc.          |  | Delaware, USA  
|International Wave Communications Networks, Inc. |  | Philippines    

100

---

QuickLinks
Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 28-17      Filed 05/30/2008     Page 1 of 14

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 28-17      Filed 05/30/2008     Page 2 of 14

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 28-17      Filed 05/30/2008     Page 3 of 14

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 28-17      Filed 05/30/2008     Page 4 of 14

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 28-17      Filed 05/30/2008     Page 5 of 14

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 28-17      Filed 05/30/2008     Page 6 of 14

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 28-17      Filed 05/30/2008     Page 7 of 14

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 28-17      Filed 05/30/2008     Page 8 of 14

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 28-17      Filed 05/30/2008     Page 9 of 14

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 28-17      Filed 05/30/2008     Page 10 of 14

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 28-17      Filed 05/30/2008     Page 11 of 14

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 28-17      Filed 05/30/2008     Page 12 of 14

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 28-17      Filed 05/30/2008     Page 13 of 14

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 28-17      Filed 05/30/2008     Page 14 of 14
Case 1:07-cv-03525-PKL Document 9-6 Filed 05/09/2008 Page 1 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03525-PKL Document 9-6 Filed 05/09/2008 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03525-PKL Document 9-6 Filed 05/09/2008 Page 3 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03525-PKL Document 9-6 Filed 05/09/2008 Page 4 of 4
#### In the Matter of the Application of Fred F. French et al., Respondents, for the Voluntary Dissolution of Knapp and French, Inc. Edward J. Knapp, Appellant; Nathaniel Phillips, Respondent.

*Matter of French,*181 App.. Div. 719, affirmed.

(Argued May 27, 1918;

decided June 11, 1918.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered February 21, 1918, modifying and affirming as modified five orders of Special Term made in a proceeding for the voluntary dissolution of a corporation. The first order required all persons interested in the corporation to show cause before a designated referee why it should not be dissolved.. The second granted a motion to confirm the report of the referee and that the temporary receiver be appointed permanent receiver. The third recited the proceedings, dissolved the corporation, made the temporary receiver permanent receiver and awarded costs and disbursements to the petitioners including the fees of the referee and stenographer to be taxed and required that they be paid by the appellant. The fourth and fifth granted a motion for a re-settlement of both orders of dissolution by incorporating therein a provision staying appellant from proceeding with the foreclosure of a mortgage until the further order of the court.' The only points raised by appellant on appeal were that the Special Term had no power to restrain the foreclosure of the mortgage and that costs should have been awarded appellant in the Appellate Division.

*Edgar J. Treacy*for appellant.

*John Neville Boyle*and *R. R. Rasquin*for petitioners, respondents.

*556
      *Henry Marx*for Nathaniel Phillips, respondent.

Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Hogan, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ.
Exhibit 32.2

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
Quarterly Report of K-V Pharmaceutical Company (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Thomas S. McHugh, Chief Financial
Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: March 10, 2011



/s/ Thomas S. McHughThomas S. McHugh Chief Financial Officer


A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has
been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The foregoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as our exhibit to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and shall not be deemed to be considered filed as part of the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.
**Exhibit 32.1**

** **

**FORM 10-Q**

 

**Section 1350Certifications**

 

**Quarter ended September 30,2010**

 

I, Dan W. Snyder, Chief Executive Officer, ChiefFinancial Officer, President, Treasurer and Director of Kenilworth SystemsCorporation (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of myknowledge:

 

(1)               the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the thirdquarter ended September 30, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

 

(2)               the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Dated:  November 15, 2010

 
|   | /s/ Dan W. Snyder                                                                    |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer,  President, Treasurer and Director |

 

1

----
#### LELIA CURTIS CAMPBELL v. MARCUS E. CAMPBELL.

(Filed 3 May, 1967.)

Divorce and Alimony § 13—

In this suit by the wife for divorce on the ground of separation, the husband’s evidence is held insufficient to warrant the submission of the issue of the wife’s wrongful abandonment of him, interposed by him as a defense to her action.

Appeal by defendant from *Farthing, J.,*January 2, 1967 Conflict Civil Session, Randolph Superior Court.

The plaintiff (wife) instituted this civil action on September 15, 1965 against the defendant (husband) for absolute divorce on the ground the parties are separated' and have continuously lived separate and apart from each other since August 1, 1962. The parties were married June 3, 1934 and six- children were born of the marriage, four are emancipated. The two youngest are ages 10 and 12. They spend most of the time with the defendant.

The defendant filed answer and testified as a witness. Both in the answer and as a witness, he admitted the marriage and the separation as alleged. As a further defense, however, he alleged the plaintiff, without cause or excuse, abandoned him. Some rather nebulous allegations of wrongdoing were set out in the further defense.

In his testimony, the defendant admitted the parties had some differences, that the plaintiff wanted to leave, and that he actually moved her household furnishings to her new apartment. He testified:' “As to her taking the money she earned and buying clothing and food for the family and me, she was laying up; that’s what the biggest trouble ... . I didn’t try to keep her from leaving me on August 1,. 1962, except that I. said, ‘You can stay on my terms and conditions; that you be a good wife and mother.”* The defendant *299tendered the issue of abandonment which the Court refused to submit. The jury answered the other issues in plaintiff’s favor. From .the judgment of absolute, divorce, the defendant excepted and appealed.

*Ottway Burton for defendant appellant.*

*Walker, Anderson, Bell & Ogburn by John N. Ogburn, .Jr., for plaintiff appellee.*

Per Curiam.

The defendant’s evidence showed a separation of the parties because the wife would not stay “on his terms”. He admitted moving her and her furnishings to a new apartment. Thereafter, the parties lived separate and apart for more than three years before the wife instituted this action. For at least four months dur>-ing the separation, the plaintiff kept and supported the two minor children. The defendant did not claim he contributed anything to the plaintiff’s support, or the children’s while they were with the plaintiff. He remained in the house both had purchased. These facte established by the defendant’s evidence were insuffi'cient to warrant an issue of wrongful abandonment. . .

No error.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 190 (Tuesday, October 2, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 56107]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-4870]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT CORPORATION


Submission for OMB Review--Comment Request

AGENCY: Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC).

ACTION: Request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 
Chapter 35), agencies are required to publish a Notice in the Federal 
Register notifying the public that the Agency is preparing an 
information collection request for OMB review and approval and to 
request public review and comment on the submission. Comments are being 
solicited on the need for the information; the accuracy of the Agency's 
burden estimate, practical utility and clarity of the information to be 
collected; and on ways to minimize the reporting burden, including 
automated collection techniques and uses of other forms of technology. 
The proposed form, OMB control number 3420-0011, under review is 
summarized below.

DATES: Comments must be received within 60 calendar-days of publication 
of this Notice.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the subject form and the request for review 
prepared for submission to OMB may be obtained from the Agency 
submitting officer. Comments on the form should be submitted to the 
Agency Submitting Officer.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: OPIC Agency Submitting Officer: Essie 
Bryant, Record Manager, Overseas Private Investment Corporation, 1100 
New York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20527; (202) 336-8563.

Summary Form Under Review

    Type of Requests: Revised form.
    Title: Application for Political Risk Insurance.
    Form Number: OPIC-52.
    Frequency of Use: Once per investor per project.
    Type of Respondents: Business or other institution (except farms); 
individuals.
    Standard Industrial Classification Codes: All.
    Description of Affected Public: U.S. companies or citizens 
investing overseas.
    Reporting Hours: 9 hours per project.
    Number of Responses: 100 per year.
    Federal Cost: $24,300.00
    Authority for Information Collection: Sections 231, 234(a), 239(d), 
and 240A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended.
    Abstract (Needs and Uses): The application is the principal 
document used by OPIC to determine the investor's and the project's 
eligibility for political risk insurance, assess the environmental 
impact and developmental effects of the project, measure the economic 
effects for the U.S. and the host country economy, and collect 
information for insurance underwriting analysis.

    Dated: September 23, 2007.
John Crowley III,
Senior Counsel, Administrative Affairs, Department of Legal Affairs.
[FR Doc. 07-4870 Filed 10-1-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3920-11-M
#### WOODHOUSE v. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

No. 244 PC.

No. 112 (Fall Term).

Case below: 41 N.C. App. 473.

Petition by plaintiffs for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 10 September 1979.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Furnished (but not filed) as an exhibit to the periodic report identified in the Certification.**

**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 of Gentiva HealthServices, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended January 3, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Tony Strange, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company,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 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 results of operations of the Company. 

Date: March 16, 2010
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 195 (Wednesday, October 10, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 57595]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-4993]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Center for Scientific Review; Amended Notice Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the 
Pathobiology of Kidney Disease Study Section, October 11, 2007, 8 a.m. 
to October 12, 2007, 5 p.m., Hotel Rouge, 1315 16th Street, NW., 
Washington, DC 20036 which was published in the Federal Register on 
September 21, 2007, 72 FR 54051-54054.
    The meeting will be held one day only--October 11, 2007, 8 a.m. to 
6 p.m. The meeting location remains the same. The meeting is closed to 
the public.

    Dated: October 2, 2007.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-4993 Filed 10-9-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
#### STONE v. HOMES, INC.

No. 14 PC.

Case below: 37 N.C. App. 97.

Petitions by plaintiffs and defendants for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 4 October 1978.