alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### KELLY KORNEGAY and CHARLES C. HOOKS, Trading as GOLDSBORO NEON SIGN COMPANY v. B. S. WARREN, Trading as BOBBY’S CHICKEN KING.

(Filed 24 March, 1965.)

Evidence § 58—

In an action to recover the contract price of an advertising sign erected for defendant, it is competent upon cross-examination to question defendant concerning a prior transaction in which defendant did not pay plaintiffs for a sign until suit was brought, the question being within the bounds of permissible cross-examination as bearing on credibility.

Appeal by defendant from *Parker, J.,*September-October 1964 Session Of WAYNE.

Plaintiffs alleged they constructed and installed a billboard sign for defendant in full compliance with the terms of their written contract (Exhibit A) for which defendant, as provided in said contract, was obligated to pay the sum of $772.44 but refused to do so. Defendant, answering, admitted it entered into said contract, but asserted the billboard constructed and installed by plaintiffs did not comply in certain particulars with the specifications set forth therein. Appropriate issues were submitted to the jury and answered in favor of plaintiffs. Judg*149ment for plaintiffs in accordance with the verdict was entered. Defendant excepted and appealed. -

*Langston •& Langston for plaintiff appellees.*

*Edmundson & Edmundson for defendant appellant.*

Pee CuRiam.

The court, during the cross-examination of defendant, permitted plaintiffs’ counsel, over objection, to question defendant concerning a prior transaction in which defendant did not pay plaintiffs for a sign until plaintiffs brought suit and recovered judgment therefor. All of defendant’s assignments of error are based on exceptions to said rulings. When considered in the context of all the evidence herein, the questions to which defendant objected were permissible on cross-examination as bearing on the credibility of his testimony. Moreover, the testimony elicited thereby was of minimal significance.

No error.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

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

RITCHIE CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, L.L.C., 

RITCHIE RISK-LINKED STRATEGIES 

TRADING (IRELAND), LIMITED, RITCHIE 

RISK-LINKED STRATEGIES TRADING 

(IRELAND) II, LIMITED, WALKERS SPV 

LIMITED, as trustee for Ritchie Risk-Linked 

Life Strategies Trust I and Ritchie Life Strategies 

Master Trust, and RITCHIE RISK-LINKED 

STRATEGIES TRADING, LTD., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

COVENTRY FIRST LLC, THE COVENTRY 

GROUP, INC., MONTGOMERY CAPITAL, 

INC., LST I LLC, ALAN BUERGER, 

CONSTANCE BUERGER, REID S. 

BUERGER, ANTONIO MUNIZ, ALEX 

SELDIN, NEAL JACOBS, EILEEN SHOVLIN, 

and JIM DODARO, 

Defendants. 

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

 

07 Civ. 3494 (DLC) 

ECF Case 

NOTICE OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION 

FOR RECONSIDERATION AND FOR LEAVE TO FILE THEIR 

PROPOSED SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, upon the Revised Memorandum of Law submitted 

herewith, and all the prior proceedings herein, Plaintiffs Ritchie Capital Management, L.L.C., 

Ritchie Risk-Linked Strategies Trading (Ireland), Limited, Ritchie Risk-Linked Strategies 

Trading (Ireland) II, Limited, Walkers SPV Limited, and Ritchie Risk-Linked Strategies 

Trading, Ltd. will move this Court before the Honorable Denise L. Cote, United States District 

Judge, United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York, under Federal Rule of 

Civil Procedure 59(e) and Local Civil Rule 6.3 for reconsideration of the Court’s Opinion and 

Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 53 Filed 08/24/2007 Page 1 of 2
2 

Order dated July 17, 2007 insofar as it dismissed Counts Four, Five, and Six of the Complaint 

without leave to amend and rules that personal jurisdiction has not been established over 

Montgomery Capital, Inc., and for leave to file their Proposed Second Amended Complaint. 

 

 

 

Dated: August 24, 2007 

Respectfully submitted, 

LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS P. PUCCIO 

Thomas P. Puccio (TPP-8403) 

230 Park Avenue 

New York, NY 10169 

Tel: (212) 883-6383 

Fax: (212) 883-6388 

ROBBINS, RUSSELL, ENGLERT, ORSECK & 

UNTEREINER LLP 

By: /s/ Lawrence S. Robbins 

Lawrence S. Robbins (LR-8917) 

Gary A. Orseck 

Rachel S. Li Wai Suen 

Daniel R. Walfish 

1801 K Street, N.W. 

Suite 411 

Washington, D.C. 20006 

Tel: (202) 775-4500 

Fax: (202) 775-4510 

Counsel for Plaintiffs 

Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 53 Filed 08/24/2007 Page 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 232 (Monday, December 5, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 72434]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-23622]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Federal Open Market Committee; Domestic Policy Directive of 
November 1, 2005

    In accordance with Sec.  271.25 of its rules regarding availability 
of information (12 CFR part 271), there is set forth below the domestic 
policy directive issued by the Federal Open Market Committee at its 
meeting held on November 20, 2005.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Copies of the Minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee 
Meeting on November 1, 2005, which includes the domestic policy 
directive issued at the meeting, are available upon request to the 
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, DC 
20551. The minutes are published in the Federal Reserve Bulletin and 
in the Board's annual report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Federal Open Market Committee seeks monetary and financial 
conditions that will foster price stability and promote sustainable 
growth in output. to further its long-run objectives, the Committee in 
the immediate future seeks conditions in reserve markets consistent 
with increasing the federal funds rate to an average of around 4 
percent.
    The vote encompassed approval of the paragraph below for inclusion 
in the statement to be released shortly after the meeting:

    The Committee perceives that, with appropriate monetary policy 
action, the upside and downside risks to the attainment of both 
sustainable growth and price stability should be kept roughly equal. 
With underlying inflation expected to be contained, the Committee 
believes that policy accommodation can be removed at a pace that is 
likely to be measured. Nonetheless, the Committee will respond to 
changes in economic prospects as needed to fulfill its obligation to 
maintain price stability.


    By order of the Federal Open Market Committee, November 28, 
2005.
Vincent R. Reinhart,
Secretary, Federal Open Market Committee.
[FR Doc. 05-23622 Filed 12-2-05; 8:45am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-M
Order entered March 6, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-01423-CR

KEITH ALLEN WILLIAMS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F01-46409-H

ORDER

The Court REINSTATES the appeal.

On January 10, 2014, we ordered the trial court to make findings regarding why the 

clerk’s and reporter’s records had not been filed. On January 28, 2014, we received the clerk’s 

record and on March 5, 2014, we received the reporter’s record. Therefore, in the interest of 

expediting the appeal, we VACATE the January 10, 2014 order requiring findings.

Appellant’s brief is due within thirty days of the date of this order.

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
#### STATE v. SMITH

No. 67 PC.

Case below: 28 N.C. App. 411.

Petition for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 6 April 1976.
#### STATE v. TEACHEY

No. 68 PC.

Case below: 26 N.C. App. 338.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 5 November 1975. Motion of Attorney General to dismiss appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 5 November 1975.
Case 1:09-cv-00257-MP -AK Document 150 Filed 09/14/10 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:09-cv-00257-MP -AK Document 150 Filed 09/14/10 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03579-LTS-MHD Document 3 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03579-LTS-MHD Document 3 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 2 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03579-LTS-MHD Document 3 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 3 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03579-LTS-MHD Document 3 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 4 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03579-LTS-MHD Document 3 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 5 of 5
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-18-0000874

28-JUN-2019

10:12 AM
#### CUMMINGS v. LOCKLEAR

No. 67 PC.

Case below: 12 N.C. App. 572.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 7 December 1971.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

   Schedule of Year-To-Date Principal and Interest Distributions
                           to
                  Certificateholders

                                                                     Ending
Class          Interest         Principal          Losses            Balance
<S>              <C>               <C>               <C>               <C>
A1            2089943.72       7833312.64                0       350442754.39
A2             203124.83        309800.17                0        34511600.95
A3             147069.99                0                0           25212000
A4                630000                0                0          108000000
A5             309800.17       -309800.17                0        53418399.05
A6                695625                0                0          119250000
APO                    0            11276                0         9263983.06
AR                  0.58              100                0                  0
B1              87643.12         11656.82                0         15012878.4
B2              37246.58          4953.91                0         6380173.78
B3              19707.47          2621.16                0         3375800.86
B4              13132.47          1746.66                0         2249535.46
B5               8760.82          1165.22                0         1500688.76
B6               8795.83           904.21           265.67         1506687.15


</TABLE>
Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. CASE NO. 4:10cr12-SPM

JACK L. YATES, JR.,

 

Defendant.

 /

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Defendant proposed to enter a guilty plea to Count One of this indictment. The

district judge referred this matter to me for purposes of hearing Defendant's proposed

change of plea pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 11 and to enter a report and recommendation

as to whether to accept the change of plea. All parties consented to this procedure, and

the written consent has been entered. After hearing, it is found that:

1. Defendant understands the nature of the charge or charges as to which the

plea is offered.

2. Defendant understands the right to trial by jury, to persist in a plea of not

guilty, to assistance of counsel at trial, and to confront and cross examine adverse

witnesses, and understands the right against compelled self-incrimination.

3. Defendant understands the maximum possible sentence if the guilty plea is

accepted, including the effect of a supervised release term, understands that the
Page 2 of 3

sentencing guidelines are advisory, and understands that the court has discretion to

depart from those guidelines and sentence up to the statutory maximum sentence.

4. The plea of guilty by the Defendant has been knowingly and voluntarily made,

and is not the result of force or threats, or of promises except for promises contained in

the written plea agreement between the parties.

5. Defendant is competent to plead guilty.

6. Defendant understands that answers given by the Defendant during the plea

colloquy, which were under oath, may be later used against the Defendant in

prosecution for perjury or false statement.

7. There is a factual basis for Defendant's guilty plea.

8. There is a plea agreement which should be accepted by the court. Defendant

understands the terms of the plea agreement.

9. Defendant has voluntarily consented to go forward with this plea of guilty

before me. Defendant knowingly and voluntarily has waived the ten day period for filing

objections to this report and recommendation, and agrees that written objections, if any,

must be filed within twenty-four hours from receipt of a copy of this report and

recommendation. The United States also consents to this procedure, including the

shorter period for objections.

Case No. 4:10cr12-SPM/WCS
Page 3 of 3

Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that the court ACCEPT the plea agreement

and defendant's plea of guilty.

IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on April 5, 2010. 

s/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. 

WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 24 hours after receiving a copy of this report and

recommendation.

Case No. 4:10cr12-SPM/WCS
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1647 

To amend title V of the Social Security Act to extend funding for familyto-family health information centers, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 23 (legislative day, MAY 22), 2019 

Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Mr. MENENDEZ) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend title V of the Social Security Act to extend funding for family-to-family health information centers, 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 ‘‘Supporting Family5 to-Family Health Information Centers Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 Congress finds that family-to-family health informa8 tion centers— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•S 1647 IS

1 (1) assist families of children with disabilities 

2 or special health care needs to improve the well3 being of children; 

4 (2) provide information to families regarding 

5 resources available to help children with disabilities 

6 or special health care needs; 

7 (3) work with representatives of health care or8 ganizations to facilitate collaboration between fami9 lies of such children and professionals and organiza10 tions in the health care system; 

11 (4) since fiscal year 2007, the first year the 

12 Secretary of Health and Human Services began to 

13 develop and support such centers, they have spread 

14 to the extent that family-to-family information cen15 ters now operate in all 50 States; and 

16 (5) since fiscal year 2018, these centers have 

17 been, and continue to be, developed in the territories 

18 and for Indian tribes. 

19 SEC. 3. EXTENSION FOR FAMILY-TO-FAMILY HEALTH IN20 FORMATION CENTERS. 

21 Section 501(c) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

22 701(c)) is amended— 

23 (1) in paragraph (1)(A)(vii), by striking ‘‘and 

24 2019’’ and inserting ‘‘through 2024’’; and 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•S 1647 IS

1 (2) in paragraph (3)(C), by striking ‘‘fiscal 

2 years 2018 and 2019’’ and inserting ‘‘fiscal year 

3 2018 and each fiscal year thereafter’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
Case 1:07-cv-03560-LAK Document 3 Filed 05/18/2007 Page 1 of 1
#### HINES v. PIERCE

No. 128 PC.

Case below: 23 N.C. App. 324.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 3 December 1974.
Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 27-5      Filed 05/22/2008     Page 1 of 3

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 27-5      Filed 05/22/2008     Page 2 of 3

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 27-5      Filed 05/22/2008     Page 3 of 3
<PAGE>

                                                                 EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                 ------------

                          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 quarterly report of K-V Pharmaceutical Company (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2005, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Marc S. Hermelin, Vice Chairman and 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:

     (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: February 7, 2006                          /s/ Marc S. Hermelin
                                     -----------------------------------------
                                                  Marc S. Hermelin
                                     Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
                                           (Principal Executive Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL
INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM SEC FORM 10-Q
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                              FEB-2-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                MAY-3-1997
<CASH>                                           2,498
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,150
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     72,545
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                81,193
<PP&E>                                         134,158
<DEPRECIATION>                                (67,685)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 191,784
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           53,966
<BONDS>                                         95,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            87
<OTHER-SE>                                      25,553
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   191,784
<SALES>                                        112,595
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               112,595
<CGS>                                           77,489
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                28,868
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,972
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    402
<INCOME-TAX>                                        22
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                402
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       380
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.04
        

</TABLE>
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-28 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 1 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-28 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 2 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-28 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 3 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-28 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 4 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-28 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 5 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-28 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 6 of 6
#### SHEPHERD v. CONNESTEE

No. 377P82.

Case below: 57 N.C. App. 371.

Petition by plaintiffs for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 25 August 1982.
**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 LaBarge, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 3, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Donald H. Nonnenkamp, Vice President, CFO and Secretary of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: |
|      | 1. |     | 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. |
|                           |      |                                                   |
|--------------------------------|--------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------|
|                                |                          |                                                        |
| Dated:  May 11, 2005 | /S/DONALD H. NONNENKAMP  |
|                           |                     | Donald H. Nonnenkamp Vice President, CFO and Secretary |