alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### JOBIE WILLIAMS v. ERNEST FORREST and GEORGE KNOTT, Trading as FORREST AND KNOTT.

(Filed 5 October, 1932.)

1. Appeal and Error J e — Exclusion of immaterial evidence will not be held for reversible error.

The exclusion of evidence, which if competent, is not material, will not be held for reversible error.,

2. Trial E f — Misstatement of contentions must be brought to trial court’s attention in apt time.

A misstatement of the contentions of a party must be brought to the trial court’s attention in apt time in order to afford an opportunity for correction, and when this has not been done an exception based thereon will not be considered on appeal.

Appeal by defendants from *Granmer,*Jand a jury, at May Term, 1932, of Pitt.

No error.

This is an action brought by plaintiff, a Negro tenant, against the defendants, landlords, to recover $639.02 and interest from 1 January, 1931, for breach of a farm contract. The issues submitted to the jury and their answers thereto, were as follows:

“1. Did the plaintiff have a full settlement of matters and things existing between them on 8 January, 1931? Answer: No.

2. What amount, if any, is the plaintiff entitled to recover of the defendants? Answer: $172.99, with interest at six (6) per cent, from 1 January, 1931.”

Judgment was rendered in the court below in accordance with the verdict. The defendants made numerous exceptions and assignments of error and appealed to the Supreme Court.

*Albion Dunn for plaintiff.*

*F. G. James & Son for defendants.*

Per Curiam.

¥e have examined the exceptions and assignments of error made by defendants, as to the exclusion of certain evidence offered by defendants, and do not think they can be sustained. If the evidence was competent, it does not seem to be to any extent material and we do not think the exclusion of same would have affected the verdict, and therefore prejudicial. The plaintiff’s action for breach of contract against the defendants was for $639.02, and there was evidence to that effect, the jury gave only $172.99.

The exceptions and assignments of error as to the charge cannot be sustained. Some exceptions were made to contentions, and, if erroneous, *274the matter should have been called to the attention of the court at the time, so that correction could have been made. As this was not done, the exceptions and assignments of error cannot be considered. The charge was full and explicit and did not impinge on C. S., 564 by giving an opinion as to whether a fact is fully or sufficiently proven, this being the province of the jury to determine.

The whole matter was one of fact to be determined by the jury. The jury has decided for plaintiff against defendants, and as we find no error in law, we cannot disturb the judgment rendered on the verdict. ¥e find

No error.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

**COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,**

**Respondent**

**v.**

**PATRICK JOSEPH MCLAINE,**

**Petitioner :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 949 MAL 2015** 

**Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 11th day of May, 2016, the Petition for Allow ance of Appeal is** 

DENIED

**.**
EXHIBIT 32: Rule 13a-14(b) Certifications  The undersigned officers certify that this report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Advanced Battery Technologies, Inc.  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Advanced Battery Technologies, Inc. and will be retained by Advanced Battery Technologies, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.  May 12, 2008 /s/ Zhiguo Fu Zhiguo Fu (Chief Executive Officer)  May 12, 2008 /s/ Sharon Xiaorong Tang Sharon Xiaorong Tang (Chief Financial Officer)
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4114 Filed: 10/03/19 Entered: 10/04/19 11:26:02 Page 1 of

2
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4114 Filed: 10/03/19 Entered: 10/04/19 11:26:02 Page 2 of

2
iret_Ex10_2


		
			Exhibit 10.2
		

		
			INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST
		

		
			AMENDMENT TO 2015 INCENTIVE PLAN
		

		
			(Adopted April 19, 2016)
		

		
			 
		

		
			Section 4.02 of the 2015 Incentive Plan shall be replaced in its entirety by the following: 
		

		
			 
		

		
			4.02 Grants.
		

		
			The Administrator will designate Participants to whom Stock Awards, Stock Unit Awards and Incentive Awards are to be granted and will specify the number of shares of Common Stock subject to each award or grant.  In the sole discretion of the Administrator, awards granted under this Plan may be evidenced by Award Agreements which shall be subject to the applicable provisions of this Plan and to such other provisions as the Administrator may adopt, except that Incentive Awards payable solely in cash need not be evidenced by an Award Agreement.
Exhibit D

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3858-5 Filed: 09/10/19 Entered: 09/10/19 11:59:38 Page 1

of 9
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3858-5 Filed: 09/10/19 Entered: 09/10/19 11:59:38 Page 2

of 9
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3858-5 Filed: 09/10/19 Entered: 09/10/19 11:59:38 Page 3

of 9
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3858-5 Filed: 09/10/19 Entered: 09/10/19 11:59:38 Page 4

of 9
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3858-5 Filed: 09/10/19 Entered: 09/10/19 11:59:38 Page 5

of 9
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3858-5 Filed: 09/10/19 Entered: 09/10/19 11:59:38 Page 6

of 9
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3858-5 Filed: 09/10/19 Entered: 09/10/19 11:59:38 Page 7

of 9
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3858-5 Filed: 09/10/19 Entered: 09/10/19 11:59:38 Page 8

of 9
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3858-5 Filed: 09/10/19 Entered: 09/10/19 11:59:38 Page 9

of 9
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

I, Gary Corsi, Principal Financial Officer of Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada (U.S.) (the "Company"), hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
Exhibit 10.1


 





AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


This Amendment, dated
as of June 30, 2016 (the “Amendment”), to Employment Agreement dated as of August 13, 2010 and effective as of July
1, 2010, as amended to date (collectively, the “Agreement”), is by and between WidePoint Corporation (the “Company”)
and Steve L. Komar (“Executive”). Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to
such terms in the Agreement.


 


WHEREAS, the parties
desire to further amend the Agreement as set forth herein.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in
consideration of the mutual covenants and undertakings herein contained, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt
and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto intending to be legally bound do hereby agree as follows:


 


1. Section 2 of the
Agreement is amended to provide that the term of Executive’s employment under the Agreement shall expire on September 30,
2016, with an option by the Company to extend the term until December 31, 2016, provided that the Company provides notice to the
Executive by September 1, 2016 of its decision to not exercise the Option for the additional extended term.  


 


2. Except as expressly
provided in this Amendment, all other terms, conditions and provisions of the Agreement remain unaltered and are in full force
and effect and are expressly hereby ratified and confirmed. The Agreement and this Amendment shall be read and construed as one
agreement.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the parties have executed this Amendment to the Agreement as of the date first written above.


  





	WIDEPOINT CORPORATION	 	EXECUTIVE
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	By:	/s/ James T. McCubbin	 	    /s/ Steve L. Komar
	Name:	James T. McCubbin	 	Steve L. Komar
	Title:  	EVP & CFO	 	Individually
**SECRETARY EVENT/SPEECH REQUEST**

The Secretary relies on those requesting him to participate in events to provide information that will help determine his participation and guide him in preparing his remarks.  Please fill out the following request and return to Natalia Rawls (RawlsN@si.edu) and LeShawn Burrell-Jones (BurrellL@si.edu) as soon as possible. An answer will be provided to you within 7 days of your request. 

*If the Secretary is able to attend and participate, a briefing will need to be provided to the Office of the Secretary no later than 15 days prior to the event. The briefing lead and speechwriter will be in contact to discuss further needs.*
#### Gordon P. Spencer, Respondent, v. Ellza Wait, Appellant.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Boardman, J.
#### Edwin R. Morse and others, Appellants, v. James L Hill, Respondent.

— Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion of

Merwin, J.,

delivered at Special Term.
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2154 Filed: 05/20/19 Entered: 05/21/19 11:33:21 Page 1 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2154 Filed: 05/20/19 Entered: 05/21/19 11:33:21 Page 2 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2154 Filed: 05/20/19 Entered: 05/21/19 11:33:21 Page 3 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2154 Filed: 05/20/19 Entered: 05/21/19 11:33:21 Page 4 of

4
#### Esther Y. McCarthy, Respondent, v. Eugene McCarthy, Appellant.

—Judgment and orders affirmed, with costs of the appeal from the judgment only.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Environmental Protection Agency

          - [Docket# EPA-RO4-SFUND-2010-0447, FRL-9157-5]

# AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency.

# ACTION:

Notice of settlement.

# SUMMARY:

Under Section 122(h)(1) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), the United States Environmental Protection Agency has entered into a settlement for reimbursement of past response costs concerning the Cooksey Brothers Landfill Fire Superfund Site located in Ashland, Boyd County, Kentucky for publication.

# DATES:

The Agency will consider public comments on the settlement until July 2, 2010. The Agency will consider all comments received and may modify or withdraw its consent to the settlement if comments received disclose facts or considerations which indicate that the settlement is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate.

# ADDRESSES:

Copies of the settlement are available from Ms. Paula V. Painter. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-RO4-SFUND-2010- 0447 or Site name Cooksey Brothers Landfill Superfund Site by one of the following methods:
      -  http://www.regulations.gov:                          Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.                    
      - http://www.epa.gov/​region4/​waste/​sf/​enforce.htm.
      - E-mail. Painter.Paula@epa.gov. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Paula V. Painter at 404/562-8887.

Dated: May 14, 2010.

Anita L. Davis,

Chief, Superfund Enforcement & Information Management Branch, Superfund Division.

[FR Doc. 2010-13224 Filed 6-1-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
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 Unizan Financial Corp.s (the Company) Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Roger L. Mann, 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, 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: August 13, 2003 |  | 
|                      |  | 
|                      |  |
|   | 1. | The      Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of      the Company. |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated:      April 15, 2009  |        | /s/ Jana      Whitlock                                                                  |   |
|----------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                             |   | Jana      Whitlock, President, CEO, CFO      and Director (Principal Financial Officer) |   |

----
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

DANIEL ARTHUR HELEVA,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 77 MM 2023

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 27th day of September, 2023, the Application for Leave to File 

Original Process is GRANTED, and the Application for Extraordinary Relief and the 

Application for Relief are DENIED.
Order entered September 2, 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05-14-00947-CV

IN RE COLONY INSURANC E COMPANY, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 429th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 429-00871-2014



### ORDER

Based on the Court’s opinion a nd order of this date, we DENY the petition for writ of

mandamus. We VACATE our order of July 22, 2014 staying discovery. We ORDER relator to

bear the costs of this original proceeding.

/s/ KERRY P. FITZGERALD JUSTICE
#### In the Matter of Daniel McGuinn et al., Appellants, v City of New York et al., Respondents.

Submitted January 29,1996;

decided February 20, 1996

Motion, insofar as it seeks leave to appeal from that portion of the Appellate Division order which reversed and vacated that portion of Supreme Court’s order granting a temporary restraining order, dismissed upon the ground that that portion of the order does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution; motion for leave to appeal otherwise denied. Motion for a stay dismissed as academic.
#### M.J.F.M. Kools, Doing Business as Kools De Visser, Plaintiff, v Citibank, N. A., Defendant.

Decided February 8, 1996

Certification of questions by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, pursuant to section 500.17 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.17), accepted and the issues presented are to be considered after briefing and argument.

Concur: Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith Levine and Ciparick.
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 6 A1 90 9 . I n the I nteres t o f H. F. H. B., a chi l d.

W e gran t ed Lam o n t e J en n i n g s ’ ap pl i cat io n fo r d i scret i o nary rev iew o f t h e ju v en i l e co u rt ’ s o rd er t erm i n at i n g h i s p aren t al ri g h t s t o H. F. H. B.
Aft er rev i ewi n g t h e reco rd i n it s en t i ret y , we fi n d n o erro r i n t he ju v en i l e

c o urt ’ s d eci s io n

. Th u s , t h e ap p l i cat i o n fo r di s cret io n ary rev i ew was im p ro v i d e n t l y
g ran t ed

. Acco rd i n g l y , Jen ni n g s ’ ap p eal i s d is m i ss ed

. See Co l l i er v. D ep t

. o f Hu ma n Res o u r ces , 1 9 6 G a. Ap p

. 8 4 3
, 8 4 4 (3 97 SE2 d 6 3 2 ) (1 9 90 ) (d is m i s s i n g d i s cret i o n ary
ap p eal as i m

p ro vi d en t ly g ran t ed wh er e f u l l co n s i d erat i o n o f t h e reco rd rev eal ed n o

erro r i n l o wer co u rt ’ s ru l i n g).

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti f y t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i t n e s s m y s ig n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o f s a i d c o u r t
h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. March 07, 2017

03/07/2017
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2208 Filed: 05/23/19 Entered: 05/23/19 13:45:12 Page 1 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2208 Filed: 05/23/19 Entered: 05/23/19 13:45:12 Page 2 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2208 Filed: 05/23/19 Entered: 05/23/19 13:45:12 Page 3 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2208 Filed: 05/23/19 Entered: 05/23/19 13:45:12 Page 4 of

4
#### In the Matter of Charles Hinton, Appellant, v Melvin Williams, as Superintendent of the Gowanda Correctional Facility, et al., Respondents.

Submitted January 22, 1996;

decided February 20, 1996

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the Court of Appeals does not have jurisdiction to entertain the motion (NY Const, art VI, § 3 [b]; CPLR 5602).
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 10, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

133903 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 133903 

 COA: 266080 

Allegan CC: 05-014142-FC 

SHAWN MICHAEL ELY, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 22, 2007 

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

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

s0830 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

September 10, 2007 

 Clerk
**Exhibit      31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

|   | a) | designed                such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material                information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated                subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,                particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is                being                prepared; |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | b) | evaluated                the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures                as of the end of the period covered by this quarterly report (the                "Evaluation Date"); and |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | c) | presented                in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness                of the                disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of                the                Evaluation Date; |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | a) | all                significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls                which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,                process,                summarize and report financial data and have identified for the                registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls;                and |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | b) | any                fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other                employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal                controls; and |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/                C. R. Cloutier      |
|--------|----------------------------------------|
|   | Chief                Executive Officer |