alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Charles D. Smith, Jr., Respondent, *v.*Commercial Construction Company, Appellant.

Second Department,

June 29, 1911.

Highway — injury to trees hy moving house — rights of owner of land — treble damages.

A contractor who cuts down trees along a street while moving a building is hable for treble damages to the owner of the property on which the trees stood when the property is bounded by the center of the highway.

Appeal by the defendant, the Commercial Construction Company, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Kings on the 20th day of June, 1910, upon the verdict of a jury, and also from an order entered in said clerk’s office on the 11th day of November, 1910, denying the defendant’s motion for a new trial made upon the minutes.

*Charles 8. Taber,*for the appellant.

*Eugene N. L. Young,*for the respondent.

*604Hirschberg, J.:

The plaintiff is the owfler in fee of two acres of land on Second street, in Brentwood, Suffolk county. The land is hounded by the center of the highway and is occupied by the plaintiff as a residence. It is heavily wooded and at the time of the acts complained of there was a heavy growth of white and natural pine upon the street and within the line of the plaintiff’s ownership.. In the month of July, 1907, while the plaintiff was absent from his home, the defendant was engaged in moving a school building upon the street to land owned by it opposite the plaintiff’s property, and in moving the building cut down a large number of trees on the plaintiff’s side of the street and On the plaintiff’s property.. In the action, brought under sections 1667 and. 1668 of the Code of Civil Procedure the plaintiff has recovered a verdict for $500 damages, which amount was trebled by the court.

On the . question of the location and boundaries of the plaintiff’s property, the nature and extent of the spoliation and the extent of the damages incurred, there was conflicting evidence and many alleged errors in ruling by the trial court are presented in the appellant’s brief. All the questions and points raised have been carefully examined- and no ground appears for a reversal. In the. circumstances, the right of action is undoubted and has often been upheld. A somewhat similar case was early presented in *McCruden*v. *Rochester R. Co.*(5 Misc. Rep. 59), and the opinion of Mr. Justice Eumsey, rendered therein on a motion for a new trial, was adopted by the General Term (77 Hun, 609) and by the Court of Appeals (151 N. Y. 623). (See, also, *Van Siclen*v. *Jamaica Electric Light Co.,*45 App. Div. 1; affd. by the Court of Appeals, 168 N. Y. 650, on the opinion of Mr. Justice Hatch in this court, and *Donahue*v. *Keystone Gas Co.,*181 N. Y. 313.)

The judgment and order should be' affirmed.

Present — Jenks, P. J., Hirschberg, Burr, Woodward and Eich, JJ.

Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           6,058
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,150
<PP&E>                                              89
<DEPRECIATION>                                      20
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   6,292
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              373
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            53
<OTHER-SE>                                      11,207
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     6,292
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,429
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 153
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,582)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   (848)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,431)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.18)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           1,020
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   32,355
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,520)
<INVENTORY>                                     38,105
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                73,489
<PP&E>                                          72,342
<DEPRECIATION>                                (23,827)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 206,607
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           81,851
<BONDS>                                        164,647
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            78
<OTHER-SE>                                    (10,874)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   206,607
<SALES>                                         40,510
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                40,510
<CGS>                                           28,107
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,868
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   406
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,603
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,068)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       441
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,587)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,587)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.46)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.46)


</TABLE>
#### August Oppenheimer and Others, Respondents, *v.*Henry B. Billings, Individually, and Sarah Billings and Others, as Executors and Trustees under the Last Will and Testament of Chester Billings, Deceased, Appellants.

*Trust-^assignment of interest*— accounting.

Appeal from an interlocutory judgment, entered on the 10th day of January, 1911, overruling the defendants’ demurrers to an amended complaint.

Judgment affirmed, with costs, on the prevailing opinion in *National Park Bank*v. Billings, decided May 19, 1911 (144 App. Div. 536), with leave to defendants to withdraw demurrers and to answer upon payment of costs in this court and in the court below.

Present—Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Miller and Dowling, JJ. McLaughlin, J., dissented for reasons stated in opinion of Scott, J., in *National Park Bank*v. *Billings.*

Ingraham, P. J.

(concurring): The decision of this case is controlled by the case of *National Park Bank*v. *Billings (supra).*Personally, I concur with Mr. Justice Scott in his dissenting opinion on that appeal. The trust consisted entirely of personalty, and the title to the trust property vested in the trustees. The only interest that the judgment debtor has in the property is, at the termination of the trust, to call the trustees to account and require them to pay to him, one-half of the trust estate, and that fight depends upon his surviving the life beneficiary. This right to call a trustee to account seems to me a mere personal right which the beneficiary could not assign, for the assignee would have no right to enforce the trust at law, and, except by way of estoppel, would have no right to enforce it in equity. It is one, therefore, that the court could not under a decree sell to a purchaser. The judgment debtor has not now any title in remainder, either vested or contingent, to the trust property. In his hands it is not property, but merely right, contingent upon his surviving the life beneficiary, to call the trustees to account and compel them tc obey the direction of the will and pay him a sum. of money which would then become due. It seems to me to'be a contradiction in terms to speak of a contingent remainder in personal property where the whole title to the property vests in the trustee, and the only right that' a person has is to call the trustee to account upon the happening of a contingency which may or may not occur in the future. The whole title vests in the trustee. He ean, as trustee, convey the property to á *bona fide*purchaser and give a good title, and the sole right of those interested in the estate would be to apply to a court of equity to enforce the trust. This right, as I understand it, is not assignable; certainly not when contingent upon the happening of an event which is in the future.' As, however, I am bound by the former decision, I concur in the affirmance of this judgment.

McLaughlin, J.

(dissenting): I dissent for the reasons stated in the opinion of Mr. Justice Scott in *National Park Bank*v. *Billings (supra).*
# George Norris: A Featured Biography

**

----

Nebraska’s George Norris was a teacher, county attorney, district judge, and five-term member of the U.S. House of Representatives before he was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1912. Throughout his political career, Norris was a leading progressive voice championing efforts to reform corrupt practices in government and industry, improve labor conditions, and modernize infrastructure. Widely considered one of the greatest senators in history, Norris’ legislative accomplishments included the Norris-La Guardia Act of 1932, which strengthened labor unions, and the creation of the Tennessee Valley Authority in 1933. A staunch isolationist, Norris opposed American involvement in the First World War and became one of the “Irreconcilables” who fought President Woodrow Wilson’s efforts to join a League of Nations in 1919. Fiercely independent, this western progressive routinely bucked the leaders of his Republican Party. In 1936, he left the party and ran as an Independent in his successful bid for a fifth Senate term. His independence and political courage later prompted Senator John F. Kennedy to include Norris in his 1957 Pulitzer Prize-winning book, *Profiles in Courage*. 

All Featured Biographies

        -  Contact 
        -  Leadership & Officers 
        -  Former Senators 
        -  Qualifications & Terms of Service 
        -  Facts & Milestones 
        -  States 

### Organizational Chart 

This chart shows the relationships among Senate leaders and officers who manage the flow of legislative and administrative business in the Senate.  

### Contact Your Senator 

Can't find your senator's name in the list of Senators?  Perhaps he or she is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, or a Senator in your State Legislature.

### Biographical Directory 

The Directory provides information about former and current senators.
Exhibit 4.1


 


AMENDED AND RESTATED


CERTIFICATE OF TRUST


OF


UNIONBANCAL FINANCE TRUST II


 


This Amended and
Restated Certificate of Trust of UnionBanCal Finance Trust II (the “Trust”) is
being duly executed and filed by the undersigned, as trustee, for the purpose
of amending and restating the Certificate of Trust of the Trust filed with the
Office of the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware (the “State Office”)
on November 17, 1998, as corrected by the Corrected Certificate of Trust
filed with the State Office on November 20, 1998 and as further corrected
by the Corrected Certificate of Trust filed with the State Office on January 7,
1999, pursuant to the Delaware Statutory Trust Act, 12 Del. C.
§§ 3801 et  seq. (the “Act”).


 


The undersigned
hereby certifies as follows:


 


1.             Name.  The name of the Trust is UnionBanCal Finance
Trust II.


 


2.             Resident Trustee.  The name and business address
of the trustee of the Trust with a principal place of business in the State of
Delaware meeting the requirements of Section 3807 of the Act are as
follows:


 


BNY Mellon Trust of Delaware


White Clay Center,
Route 273


Newark,
Delaware  19711


 


3.             Effective.  This Amended and Restated Certificate of
Trust shall be effective immediately upon filing in the State Office.


 

















 


IN WITNESS
WHEREOF, the undersigned, being a trustee of the Trust, has duly executed this
Amended and Restated Certificate of Trust as of June 4, 2009.


 


	
   

  	
  BNY
  MELLON TRUST OF DELAWARE, not in its individual capacity but solely as
  Delaware Trustee of the Trust

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Kristine K. Gullo

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Name:
  Kristine K. Gullo

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Title:
  Vice President
**Exhibit 23.1**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

The Board of Directors and Stockholders 

Mirant Corporation: 

We consent to the incorporation byreference in the registration statement (No. 333-130935) on Form S-8 of Mirant Corporation of our reports dated February 26, 2009, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Mirant Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31,2008 and 2007, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity (deficit), comprehensive income, cash flows and related financial statement schedules for each of the years in the three-year period endedDecember 31, 2008, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008, which reports appear in the December 31, 2008 annual report on Form 10-K of Mirant Corporation. 

Our report refers to the adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 157, *Fair Value Measurements,*the measurement provisionsof Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 158, *Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit and Other Postretirement Plans*, and FASB Staff Position FIN 39-1,*Amendment of FASB Interpretation No. 39*in 2008 and FASBInterpretation No. 48, *Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes,*in 2007. 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

Atlanta, Georgia 

February 26, 2009
---

---

EXHIBIT 13.2

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 Annual Report of G. Willi-Food International Ltd. (the
Company) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Gil Hochboim, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 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, 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 30, 2005

| |                                  |                 
| | -------------------------------- | ----------------
| | By:                              | /s/ Gil Hochboim
| |                                 
| | Name: Gil Hochboim              
| | Title: Chief Financial
  Officer
| | (Principal Financial
  Officer) 

A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to G. Willi-Food
International Ltd. and will be retained by G. Willi-Food International Ltd. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---

---
EXHIBIT 11

                COMPUTATION OF (LOSS) EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                   Years Ended June 30,
                                                                           1997            1996            1995
<S><C>
Weighted average of common shares outstanding during the period
  (adjusted to reflect two-for-one stock split)                         3,345,397       3,063,205       3,000,000
Net (loss) earnings                                                  $(14,800,050)    $(6,612,113)    $(1,755,685)
Dividends and issuance costs on Series A, B and C Redeemable,           1,382,083         552,531         113,300
    Convertible Preferred
Net (loss) earnings as adjusted                                       (16,182,133)     (7,164,644)     (1,868,985)
Net (loss) earnings per common share                                       $(4.84)         $(2.34)          $(.62)
</TABLE>

All outstanding options and warrants as of June 30, 1997, 1996 and 1995 have
been excluded as they are anti-dilutive.
#### Martha Adams, plaintiff in error, *vs.*Holland A. Adams *et al.,*defendants in error.

When dower had been assigned to a widow in a tract of land, and she afterward applied and had the same land set apart to her and the minor child of her deceased husband as a homestead, and an execution founded on a debt of the deceased husband and father was levied on the reversion, after the termination of the dower, and the widow, for herself and minor child, filed a claim :

*Held,*That under the facts, as stated, the property was properly found not subject.

Claim. Homestead. Dower. Before Judge Habeell. Stewart Superior Court. April Term, 1872.

This case was tried upon the following agreed state of facts: “That Samuel Adams, at the timeof his death, about 1865, was the owner of the land now levied on; that Holland A. Adams was his widow, and administratrix, and Charles B. Adams, his administrator. The judgment of plaintiff was obtained in Stewart Superior Court, October Term, 1866; a *fi fa.*was issued thereon, and a levy made upon the lands claimed, in February, 1872, to wit: “the remainder interest of the estate of Samuel Adams, after the death of said widow.” That in 1866 said Holland A. Adam’s widow had said land set apart to her as dower, and on her application, as the widow of Samuel Adams, and one minor child of Samuel Adams, the same land as included in said dower, was set apart as a homestead by the Ordinary of Stewart county, to-wit: on July 6th, 1869. That the claim under said homestead was regularly interposed.”

The Court, under the above statement of facts, decided that the claimant, Hollin A. Adams, in behalf of herself and said minor child, was entitled to a homestead on the land, and under instructions to this effect the jury found said property not subject.

Whereupon plaintiff in error excepted and assigns error upon the following grounds:

1st. In holding that claimant was entitled to have a home*631stead in the lands which had been set apart to her as dower.

2d. In holding that the property was not subject to the execution under the above statement of facts.

E. G. Raiford; Herbert Fielder; E. H. Worrill, for plaintiff in error.

Beall *&*Tucker, for defendants.

McCay, Judge.

We have held, in several cases, that the homestead provision of the Constitution was not intended to be an addition to dower, but that it was subject to the dower. The object was to secure a provision for the family. The wife in this ease had taken dower. She has now applied in behalf of her children and had a homestead in the same lands. We see nothing inconsistent in this action with our decision. She might, if she pleased, waive her rights in behalf of her children, and, instead of dower, permit them to have a homestead. We do not say she has done this. Holding to her dower she might, as guardian of her children, take a homestead for them in the same land, or including the same, at the discretion of the appraisers, and she and they retain their interest — she her dower, they their homestead. In either event the land would not be subject, and the verdict would be right.

Judgment affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM BOTH
THE JUNE 30, 1997 BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF INCOME AND EXPENSES
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000745061
<NAME> AMRECORP REALTY FUND II
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         393,438
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       5,127,368
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,482,376
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,306,846
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                      2,409,762
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     815,504
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,306,846
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               412,066
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               334,903
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             155,493
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              1,293,522
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,238,315
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    85.14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>