alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### STATE v. BEASLEY

No. 343P82.

Case below: 57 N.C. App. 208.

Petition by Attorney General for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 3 August 1982. Motion by defendant to dismiss appeal for lack of significant public interest allowed 3 August 1982.
Case 1:07-cv-03587-MGC Document 16 Filed 09/05/2008 Page 1 of 10Case 1:07-cv-03587-MGC Document 16 Filed 09/05/2008 Page 2 of 10Case 1:07-cv-03587-MGC Document 16 Filed 09/05/2008 Page 3 of 10Case 1:07-cv-03587-MGC Document 16 Filed 09/05/2008 Page 4 of 10Case 1:07-cv-03587-MGC Document 16 Filed 09/05/2008 Page 5 of 10Case 1:07-cv-03587-MGC Document 16 Filed 09/05/2008 Page 6 of 10Case 1:07-cv-03587-MGC Document 16 Filed 09/05/2008 Page 7 of 10Case 1:07-cv-03587-MGC Document 16 Filed 09/05/2008 Page 8 of 10Case 1:07-cv-03587-MGC Document 16 Filed 09/05/2008 Page 9 of 10Case 1:07-cv-03587-MGC Document 16 Filed 09/05/2008 Page 10 of 10
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                   [STONEFIELD JOSEPHSON, INC. LETTEREHEAD]


                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
                        -------------------------------

Board of Directors
One Voice Technologies, Inc.
San Diego, California

We consent to the incorporation by reference by our Independent Auditors' Report
dated February 27, 2001 on the financial statements of One Voice Technologies,
Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2000, and to the reference to us as experts
in the Registration Statements Form S-8 No. 333-51206 filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on December 4, 2000, Form S-8 No. 333-47236 filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 4, 2000 and Form SB-2 No.
333-50256 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 20,
2000.


/s/ Stonefield Josephson, Inc.

CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
Santa Monica, California
April 17, 2001
Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 15 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 15 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 32.1



KREISLER MANUFACTURING CORPORATION



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

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 Kreisler Manufacturing Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30,
2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael D. Stern, Chief Executive Officer 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 and belief:



(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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: November 12, 2004 |  | /s/ Michael D. Stern   
|                        |  | Michael D. Stern       
|                        |  | Chief Executive Officer





17
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     5733
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  5733
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    5733
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1070498
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          2500
<OTHER-SE>                                         840
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1073838
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               1064085
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (1064085)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (1064085)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.42)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.42)



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

No. 14 PC.

Case below: 27 N.C. App. 642.

Petition for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 3 February 1976.
#### David Parker et al., Respondents, v Vista Construction Concepts, Inc., Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,

April 10,1986

*2APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Probstein & Napolitano (Jon M. Probstein*and *Howard D. Leib*of counsel), for appellant. *Thomas A. Williams*for respondents.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Order affirmed, with $10 costs.

In our opinion, the plaintiff subcontractors, notwithstanding their failure to obtain a home improvement license, may enforce their contract against the defendant contractor, since the purpose of the requirement of a license is to "safeguard and protect the home owner” (Administrative Code of City of New York § B32-350.0; *see also, Rosasco Creameries v Cohen,*276 NY 274, 280; 12 NY Jur 2d, Business and Occupations, § 43; *cf. Zimmett v Professional Acoustics,*103 Misc 2d 971). We do not construe the term, "owner”, as used in the code, to include a contractor vis-á-vis a subcontractor *(see,*Administrative Code § B32-351.0 [4]).

Kassoff, J. P., Monteleone and Lerner, JJ., concur.
#### STATE v. EMORY

No. 124 PC.

Case below: 40 N.C. App. 381.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 5 June 1979.
##### 



13.1
    
    Certifications pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 Pursuant to section 906 (Section 906) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States
Code), each of the undersigned officers of ENEL S.p.A. (the Company), does
hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that: The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003
of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form
20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company. Dated: June 30, 2004 /S/ PAOLO SCARONI
Name: Paolo ScaroniTitle: Chief Executive Officer
 Dated: June 30, 2004 /S/ FULVIO CONTI
Name: Fulvio ContiTitle: Chief Financial Officer
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to ENEL S.p.A. and will be retained by ENEL S.p.A. and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Antonio Scarpinato, Respondent, *v.*W. L. Cosgrove Company, Appellant.

*Scarpinato*v. *Cosgrove Co., 172*App. Div. 950, affirmed.

(Submitted October 25, 1918;

decided November 12, 1918.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered *677February 11, 1916, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by plaintiff through the negligence of defendant, his employer. The plaintiff, at the time of the accident complained of, was engaged in breaking flagstones with a steel sledge hammer. It was the plaintiff’s claim that the edges of both the striking surfaces of the hammer had become burred or mushrooned; that before using it he pointed out the condition of the hammer and the danger of using it to the defendant’s foreman, who directed him nevertheless to use it; that in the course of his work a burr or chip from the edge of the hammer flew off and struck him in the eye, ultimately causing total blindness of that eye. Defendant contended that the notice of injury was insufficient under the Labor Law in that it failed to state the cause of the injury; and in that it was misleading and inconsistent with the facts later pleaded and proved by the plaintiff; that there was no evidence either that the condition of the hammer caused the injury, or that the defendant knew or ought to have known of the condition of the hammer; that no cause of action was made out either under the statute or at common law; that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence and assumption of risk as a matter of law; that there was no evidence before the jury from which negligence could be imputed to the defendant; and that errors were made in the admission of testimony over the objection and exception of the defendant which were so prejudicial to the defendant as to require a reversal of the judgment.

*Clayton J. Heermance*and *Alfred E. Holmes*for appellant.

*Herbert C. Smyth, William S. Evans*and *David M. Fink*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Chase', Collin, Cuddeback, Hogan and McLaughlin, JJ, Absent: Crane, J.
# EUR-Lex - 52011PC0373 - EN

*|*

# 52011PC0373

**Proposal for a DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on the Mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument /* COM/2011/0373 final */**

			*

			*

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

The Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May
2006[1] allows for the mobilisation of
the Flexibility Instrument to allow the financing of clearly identified
expenditure which could not be financed within the limits of the ceilings available
for one or more headings of the multiannual financial framework.

In accordance with point 27 of the
Interinstitutional Agreement, and after having examined all possibilities for
re-allocating appropriations under heading 4, the Commission proposes to
mobilise the Flexibility Instrument for the financing of the European
Neighbourhood Policy, for an amount of EUR 153,3 million beyond the
ceiling of heading 4.

The two arms of the budgetary authority are
reminded that the publication of the Decision in the Official Journal of the
European Union shall not intervene later than the publication for the General
Budget for the year 2012.

Proposal for a

DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
AND OF THE COUNCIL

on the Mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE
COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Interinstitutional
Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the
Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management[2], and in particular the fifth
paragraph of point 27 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European
Commission,

Whereas, after having examined all
possibilities for re-allocating appropriations under heading 4, it appears
necessary to mobilise the flexibility instrument to complement the financing in
the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2012, beyond
the ceiling of heading 4, of EUR 153,3 million towards the financing
of the European Neighbourhood Policy,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

For the general budget of the European
Union for the financial year 2012, the flexibility instrument shall be used to
provide the sum of EUR 153,3 million in commitment appropriations in
heading 4.

That amount shall be used to complement the
financing of EUR 153 343 576 for the European Neighbourhood Policy under
heading 4.

Article 2

This decision shall be published in the Official
Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels,

For the European Parliament                       For
the Council

The President                                                 The
President

[1]               OJ C 139, 14.06.2006, p. 1

[2]               OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1.
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-12-0000681

20-FEB-2015

08:07 AM
#### HUNT v. REINSURANCE FACILITY

No. 5

Case below: 49 NC App

Petition by defendants for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-*52831 allowed 2 December 1980.
Case 1:06-cv-15024-AKH Document 5 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT JANUARY 31, 2000 AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF
OPERATIONS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JANUARY 31, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-2000
<CASH>                                          58,476
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  897,621
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    768,654
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,204,466
<PP&E>                                       1,758,744
<DEPRECIATION>                                 960,705
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,967,467
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,883,573
<BONDS>                                      1,295,798
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      2,053
<COMMON>                                        45,552
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,337,624
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,967,467
<SALES>                                      2,719,793
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,719,793
<CGS>                                        2,176,214
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,176,214
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                94,361
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              54,875
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                151,881
<INCOME-TAX>                                    62,271
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             89,610
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                      (2,777)
<NET-INCOME>                                    86,833
<EPS-BASIC>                                     1.90
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.87


</TABLE>
# C_2011003EN.01000401.xml

| 6.1.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 3/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.1.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 3/4

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries

2011/C 3/06

In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:

1

| Date and time of closure | 24.9.2010 |
| --- | --- |
| Duration | 24.9.2010-31.12.2010 |
| Member State | Spain |
| Stock or Group of stocks | POK/561214 |
| Species | Saithe (Pollachius virens) |
| Zone | VI; EU and international waters of Vb, XII and XIV |
| Type(s) of fishing vessels | — |
| Reference number | 834196 |

Date and time of closure

24.9.2010

Duration

24.9.2010-31.12.2010

Member State

Spain

Stock or Group of stocks

POK/561214

Species

Saithe (Pollachius virens)

Pollachius virens

Zone

VI; EU and international waters of Vb, XII and XIV

Type(s) of fishing vessels

—

Reference number

834196

Web link to the decision of the Member State:

http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/fishing_rules/tacs/index_en.htm

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

1

---
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 12 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 1 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 12 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 2 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 12 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 3 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 12 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 4 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 12 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 5 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 12 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 6 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 12 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 7 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 12 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 8 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 12 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 9 of 9
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Lancer
Orthodontics, Inc.'s second quarter 10-Q and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such 10-Q.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1999
<CASH>                                         128,498
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,408,027
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (170,752)
<INVENTORY>                                  2,224,411
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,621,464
<PP&E>                                       2,396,227
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,247,648)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,049,148
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          847,309
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    185,242
<COMMON>                                     4,602,735
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,586,138)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,049,148
<SALES>                                      2,658,914
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,658,914
<CGS>                                        1,765,669
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,765,669
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,171
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (141,282)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (142,082)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (142,082)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.07)


</TABLE>
Figueira Declaration Tab 129

Filed Under Seal Pursuant to Protective Order at 

Request of Defendants
#### William T. Russell, plaintiff in error, *vs.*William F. McCarty *et al.,*defendants in error.

Duress which will avoid a contract must consist of threats of bodily or other harm, or other means amounting to coercion, or tending to coerce the will of another, and actually inducing him to do an act contrary to his free will.

Contracts. Duress. Before Judge Harvey. Whitfield Superior Court. October Term, 1871.

The facts of this cause are sufficiently full in the opinion of the Court, delivered from the bench.

McCutchen & Shumate, for plaintiff in error.

J. A. R. Hanks, for defendant.

Warner, Chief Justice.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff against the defendants on a promissory note for $113, payable to the plaintiff. The defendants alleged in their plea that the note was executed under duress. On the trial the jury found a verdict for the defendants. A motion was made for a new trial on several grounds specified in the record, which was overruled by the Court, and the plaintiff excepted. The evidence shows that in the fall of 1864 McCarty, the principal maker of the note, was in the Confederate service in Tennessee, that he was one of a squad of ten men who were surprised by the Federal army and lost their horses, that Captain Abbott, who was in command of the squad, advised them to mount themselves as best they could, that he took a horse from the stable of one Wommack, and rode him off. After the surrender’, in 1865, he was told by one Cook that Wammack had threatened to prosecute him for taking his horse, when he gave his note to Wammack for the horse rather than be prosecuted. Wommack traded the note to Russell, the plaintiff, for cattle, in December, 1867. Plaintiff presented the note to McCarty, in January or February, 1868, in this State, where he *198resided, for payment, who said he was sorry plaintiff had traded for the note, had not intended to pay "Wornmack who lived in Tennessee, but as plaintiff could collect the note in this State, if he would give him a few months’ time he would give him a new note, with security, which was done, and that is the note now sued on.

Duress which will avoid a contract must consist of threats of bodily or other harm, or other means amounting to or tending to coerce the will of another, and actually inducing him to do an act contrary to his free will: Code, 2595. The evidence contained in this record is not sufficient, tin law, to avoid the payment of the note on the ground of duress.

Let the judgment of the Court below be reversed.
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

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 on Form 10-Q of Kewaunee Scientific Corporation (the Company) for the period ending October 31, 2003, I, D. Michael Parker, Senior Vice President, Finance and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, 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 my knowledge:



| | (1) | such Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended October 31, 2003, 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 such Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended October 31, 2003, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: December 15, 2003



/s/    D. MICHAEL PARKERD. Michael Parker Senior Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer