alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### STATE v. MRS. MARGIE MARSHALL McIVER.

(Filed 3 January, 1940.)

Indictment and Warrant § 20 — Held: There was fatal variance between the warrant and special verdict and judgment of not guilty was proper.

Defendant was tried upon a warrant charging that she permitted persons in her employ to practice as apprentices without certificate of registration as registered apprentices or registered cosmetologists. The jury returned a special verdict to the effect that defendant permitted unlicensed students to work in her school. *Held,:*There is a fatal variance between the warrant and the special verdict and a failure of proof, and the adjudication that defendant was not guilty is affirmed.

Appeal by tbe State from *Alley, J.,*at October Term, 1939, of Forsyth.

Affirmed.

*Attorney-General McMullan for the State.*

*Jones & Brassfield for plaintiff, appellant.*

*Roy L. Deal and Eugene Trivette for defendant, appellee.*

Devin, J.

Tbe defendant was charged in tbe warrant witb violation of tbe act regulating tbe practice of cosmetic art (ch. 179, Public Laws *7351933), in that she permitted persons in her employ to practice as apprentices without certificates of registration as registered apprentices, or registered cosmetologists. Upon a special verdict the defendant was adjudged not guilty, and the State appealed.

The following findings were contained in the special verdict: “The defendant in connection with the operation of her school of beauty culture in "Winston-Salem, North Carolina, has employed two or more licensed beauticians approved as teachers by the State Board. Students in the defendant’s school work under the personal supervision and direction of said instructors, including defendant herself. The defendant has made certain charges for work done by students in her school, . . . the work in each instance being done by an unlicensed student in the school under the supervision of one of said instructors. ... It is necessary that students in such schools have actual practice on patrons of the school, it not being practical for them to get such practice by giving treatments to each other.”

The defendant is not charged with violation of the regulations prescribed by the State Board of Cosmetic Art Examiners prohibiting charges by students, nor does it appear that these regulations have been approved by the State Board of Health as required by section 23 of the act. The charge set out in the warrant relates only to apprentices and cosmetologists. The special verdict relates to students, and finds facts not specifically charged in the warrant. Hence there is a variance and failure of proof, and the ruling of the court below that the defendant is not guilty as charged must be upheld. The question of the power of the State Board of Cosmetic Art Examiners to make regulations prohibiting charges by students is not presently presented, nor is the constitutionality of the act itself raised in this appeal. *Associated Cosmetologists v. Ritchie,*206 N. C., 808, 175 S. E., 308.

The judgment of the court below is

Affirmed.
#### HERMAN NEWBERN v. C. R. PUGH et al.

(Filed 22 September, 1943.)

Contracts § 4—

Acceptance must be unqualified and in tbe terms of the offer; otherwise no contract results.

Appeal by plaintiff from *Bone, J.,*at March Term, 1943, of Pasquo-TANIC.

Civil action to. recover damages for alleged breach of contract or option to sell the “Pugh” house and lot in Elizabeth City.

From judgment of nonsuit entered upon consideration of all the evidence, the plaintiff appeals, assigning errors.

*J. W. J ennette and B. Clarence Dozier for plaintiff, appellant.*

*J. Henry LeBoy for defendants, appellees.*

Per Curiam.

A careful perusal of the record fails to disclose any consummated contract upon which the plaintiff predicates his right of action. The plaintiff did not “sign the papers,” as he was required to do by defendant’s letter of 6 February, 1942, but returned them for modification, giving as his reason that the option “would be without effect” unless the defendant’s husband joined in the agreement. The defendant then sold the property to another.

The case is not like *McAden v. Craig,*222 N. C., 497, 24 S. E. (2d), 1, or *Samonds v. Cloninger,*189 N. C., 610, 127 S. E., 706. It is more nearly in line with *Bichardson v. Warehouse and Storage Co., ante,*344, herewith decided.

Affirmed.
No. 842, Misc.

Petitioner *pro se. Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Miller*and *Beatrice Rosenberg*for the United States.

#### Popeko *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
EXHIBIT 32(i)

                            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 Monroe Bancorp (the "Company") 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, Mark D. Bradford,
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 operation of the
Company.



/s/ Mark D. Bradford
--------------------

Mark D. Bradford
President, Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
August 13, 2003


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 and is not being filed for any other purpose.
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 this Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report of ChromaDex
Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year
ending December 31, 2019 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we,
Robert Fried, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Kevin
Farr, 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, to our
knowledge:





1. The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





2. The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations
of the Company.





Date:
May 18, 2020


/s/ ROBERT
FRIED


Robert
Fried


Chief
Executive Officer





/s/ KEVIN
FARR


Kevin
Farr


Chief
Financial Officer











This
certification accompanies the Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on
Form 10-K to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by
reference into any filing of ChromaDex Corporation under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the
Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-K), irrespective of any
general incorporation language contained in such
filing.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 1069** 

JOHN JAY HUMPHREY , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,
v. COURT CLERK OF U.S. SUPREME COURT , Defendant

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria
. Anthony John Trenga , District Judge. ( 1:11

- cv - 01411

- AJT

- JFA )

Submitted : May 31, 2012 Decided: June 5, 2012

Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. John Jay Humphrey , Appellant Pro Se
. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: John Jay Humphrey appeals the district court ’ s order denying relief on his compl aint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics , 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Humphrey v. Court Clerk of U.S. Supreme Court , No. 1:11

- cv - 01411

- AJT

- JFA (E.D. Va. filed Jan. 4, 2012, and entered Jan. 5, 2012) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

In re:

PG&E CORPORATION

-andPACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY,

Debtors.

Case No, 19-30088 (DM)

Chapter 11

(Lead Case)

(Jointly Administered)

TRANSFER OF CLAIM OTHER THAN FOR SECURITY

A CLAIM HAS BEEN FILED IN THIS CASE or deemed filed under 11 U.S.C. §1111 (a). Transferee hereby gives notice 

pursuant to Rule 3001(e) (2), Fed. R. Bankr. P., of the transfer, other than for security, of the claim referenced in this notice.

CONTRARIAN FUNDS, LLC

Name of Transferee

Address for all Communications/Notices:

CONTRARIAN FUNDS, LLC

411 WEST PUTNAM AVE., SUITE 425

GREENWICH, CT 06830

ATTN: ALISA MUMOLA

Phone: 203-862-8211

Fax: 203-485-5910

Email: tradeclaimsgroup@contrariancapital.com

Address for all Payments/Distributions:

CONTRARIAN FUNDS, LLC

ATTN: 392426

500 ROSS ST 154-0455

PITTSBURGH, PA 15262

GORDON CREED KELLEY HOLL & SUGERMAN LLP

Name of Transferor

Name and Current Address of Transferor:

GORDON CREED KELLEY HOLL & SUGERMAN LLP 

101 MONTGOMERY ST., STE 2650

SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94104

ATTN: KEVIN HOLL

I declare under penalty of perjury that the information provided in this notice

is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

By:_______/s/ Alisa Mumola_________

 Transferee/Transferee’s Agent

Date: October 29, 2019

Penalty for making a false statement: Fine of up to $500,000 or imprisonment for up to 5 years, or both. 18 U.S.C. §§ 152 & 3571.

Schedule/Claim No. Creditor Name Amount Debtor Case No.

Schedule F GORDON-CREED KELLEY 

HOLL & SUGERMAN

$14,247.00 Pacific Gas and Electric Company 19-30089

Claim No. 3351 Gordon Creed Kelley Holl & 

Sugerman LLP

$32,870.49 Pacific Gas and Electric Company 19-30089

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4506 Filed: 10/29/19 Entered: 10/29/19 14:05:02 Page 1 of

2
xxxx

3351

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4506 Filed: 10/29/19 Entered: 10/29/19 14:05:02 Page 2 of

2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS INCLUDED IN THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE
PERIOD ENDING APRIL 30, 1999, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          Oct-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             Nov-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               Apr-30-1999
<CASH>                                         943,822
<SECURITIES>                                   150,000
<RECEIVABLES>                               10,959,831
<ALLOWANCES>                                    86,000
<INVENTORY>                                  7,807,092
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            20,763,325
<PP&E>                                       6,023,631
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,304,003
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              50,336,972
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       12,438,613
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,392
<OTHER-SE>                                  37,767,915
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                50,336,972
<SALES>                                     21,152,424
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            21,152,424
<CGS>                                       16,476,026
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               16,476,026
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                39,502
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             399,853
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                818,259
<INCOME-TAX>                                   225,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            593,259
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   593,259
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.07


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

Northern District of California

In re:

Debtor(s)

Bankruptcy No.:

R.S. No.:

Hearing Date:

Time:

Relief From Stay Cover Sheet

Instructions: Complete caption and Section A for all motions. Complete Section B for mobile homes, motor vehicles, and personal property.

Complete Section C for real property. Utilize Section C as necessary. If moving party is not a secured creditor, briefly summarize the nature

of the motion in Section D.

(A) Date Petition Filed: Chapter:

Prior hearings on this obligation: Last Day to File §523/§727 Complaints:

(B) Description of personal property collateral (e.g. 1983 Ford Taurus):

Secured Creditor [ ] or lessor [ ]

Fair market value: $________________ Source of value:__________________

Contract Balance: $________________ Pre-Petition Default: $_______________

Monthly Payment: $________________ No. of months: ___________

Insurance Advance: $________________ Post-Petition Default: $_______________

No. of months: ___________

 (C) Description of real property collateral (e.g. Single family residence, Oakland, CA):

Fair market value: $_______________ Source of value:_______________ If appraisal, date:___________

Moving Party's position (first trust deed, second, abstract, etc.):

Approx. Bal. $_______________ Pre-Petition Default: $_______________

As of (date): _______________ No. of months: ____________

Mo. payment: $_______________ Post-Petition Default: $_______________

Notice of Default (date): __________ No. of months: ____________

Notice of Trustee's Sale: __________ Advances Senior Liens: $_______________

Specify name and status of other liens and encumbrances, if known (e.g. trust deeds, tax liens, etc.):

Position Amount Mo. Payment Defaults

1st Trust Deed:_____________________ $_______________ $_______________ $_______________ 

2nd Trust Deed: ____________________ $_______________ $_______________ $_______________

_________________________________:

_________________________________:

_________________________________:

(Total) $_______________ $_______________ $_______________

(D) Other pertinent information:

______________________________________

Signature

______________________________________

Print or Type Name

Attorney for___________________________________

CANB Documents Northern District of California 

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY 19-30089(DM)

11

N/A 06/29/2019

01/29/2019

Relief is sought as to litigation against the Debtor in the Superior Court of California, County of Alameda, CAse No. RG17866484. 

Yosef Peretz

Cara Feneis

January 29, 2020

10:00 a.m.

12/26/19

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5207-2 Filed: 12/26/19 Entered: 12/26/19 16:55:40 Page 1

of 1
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 Carreker Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ending July 31, 2003
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Frank W. Tilley, Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|/s/FRANK W. TILLEYFrank W. Tilley, Chief Financial Officer |  | 
|---------------------------------------------------------- |  | 

Dated:
September 11, 2003

---

QuickLinks
|   | /s/ Westley V. Thompson                                         |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Westley V. Thompson                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     |
|   | President, SLF U.S.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     |
|   | (principal executive officer)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           |
#### Thomas McCraith, Respondent, v. The National Mohawk Valley Bank, Appellant.

— Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Opimou by

Merwin. J.;

Hardin, P. J., not voting.
#### W. F. BETTS v. T. F. BULLA, ALBERT TAYLOR and JOHN G. PREVETTE.

Appeal by plaintiff from *Bobbitt, J.,*March Term, 1950, RaNdolpu.

Motion by defendants, appellees, to - dismiss on the ground that the election sought to be restrained has been held and therefore the question involved has become moot. “ ' \ • • •

BabNhill, J.,

for the Court: Motion allowed- and appeal dismissed on authority of *Saunders v. Bulla, ante,*578. This 1 November, 1950.
4818-5545-8734.1

EXHIBIT A

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5227-1 Filed: 12/31/19 Entered: 12/31/19 07:28:24 Page 1

of 3
4818-5545-8734.1 Exhibit A

COMPENSATION BY COBLENTZ PATCH DUFFY & BASS LLP PROFESSIONALS

NOVEMBER 1, 2019 THROUGH NOVEMBER 30, 2019

The Coblentz attorneys and paraprofessionals who rendered legal services for the Debtors 

during these Chapter 11 Cases from November 1, 2019 through November 30, 2019 (the “Fee 

Period”)1 are:

Name of 

Professional Position

Primary 

Practice 

Group2

Year 

Admitted

Reduced 

Hourly 

Rate for 

Debtors

Total 

Hours 

Billed

Total 

Compensation

Barbara Milanovich Partner RE 1980 $648.00 100.00 $64,800.00 

Doug Sands Partner RE 1987 $648.00 75.40 $48,859.20

Ficks, Gregg Partner BCR/LIT 1990 $643.00 29.20 $18,775.60

O'Brien, Harry Partner RE 1984 $900.00 0.60 $540.00

Sean Coyle Partner LIT 2004 $500.00 32.40 $16,200.00

Robert B. Hodil Counsel RE 2003 $520.00 1.20 $624.00

Mark Hejinian Associate LIT 2011 $400.00 28.70 $11,480.00

James F. McKee Associate LIT 2014 (TX);

2019 (CA)

$400.00 45.80 $18,320.00

Daniel P. Barsky Associate RE 2017 $334.00 35.30 $11,790.20

Michael R. Wilson Paralegal RE N/A $302.00 22.40 $6,764.80

Dianne M. Sweeny Paralegal RE N/A $210.00 4.20 $882.00

Jordan V. Mendoza Paralegal LIT N/A $250.00 3.00 $750.00

Viet Doan Paralegal LIT N/A $175.00 16.00 $2,800.00

 

1 See footnote 1 in the main part of the Monthly Fee Statement. 

2 RE = Real Estate; LIT = Litigation; BCR = Bankruptcy and Creditors' Rights; 

CORP = Corporate

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5227-1 Filed: 12/31/19 Entered: 12/31/19 07:28:24 Page 2

of 3
4818-5545-8734.1 Exhibit A

Name of 

Professional Position

Primary 

Practice 

Group2

Year 

Admitted

Reduced 

Hourly 

Rate for 

Debtors

Total 

Hours 

Billed

Total 

Compensation

Additional 

Discount Per 

Engagement 

Agreement

($1,517.12)

Total 

Professionals:

394.20 $201,068.68

PROFESSIONALS

TOTALS

BLENDED RATE TOTAL HOURS 

BILLED

TOTAL 

COMPENSATION

Partners and Counsel $627.30 238.80 $149,798.80

Associates $378.78 109.80 $41,590.20

Blended Attorney Rate $549.02 348.60 $191,389.00

Paraprofessionals and other 

non-legal staff

$245.54 45.60 $11,196.80

Additional Discount Per 

Engagement Agreement

($1,517.12)

Total Fees Incurred $510.07 394.20 $201,068.68

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5227-1 Filed: 12/31/19 Entered: 12/31/19 07:28:24 Page 3

of 3
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 109 (Tuesday, June 8, 2010)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 32245]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-13844]







                        Presidential Documents 







Federal Register / Vol. 75 , No. 109 / Tuesday, June 8, 2010 / 

Presidential Documents



___________________________________________________________________



Title 3--

The President



[[Page 32245]]



                Memorandum of June 1, 2010



                
 Delegation of Authority to Appoint Commissioned 

                Officers of the Ready Reserve Corps of the Public 

                Health Service



                Memorandum for the Secretary of Health and Human 

                Services



                By virtue of the authority vested in me as President by 

                the Constitution and the laws of the United States, 

                including section 301 of title 3, United States Code, I 

                hereby assign to you the functions of the President 

                under section 203 of the Public Health Service Act, as 

                amended by Public Law 111-148, to appoint commissioned 

                officers of the Ready Reserve Corps. The exercise of 

                this authority is limited to appointments of 

                individuals who were extended offers of employment for 

                appointment and call to active duty in the Reserve 

                Corps of the Public Health Service with an appointment 

                date subsequent to March 23, 2010, the date of 

                enactment of Public Law 111-148, but who were not on 

                active duty on that date, and those individuals who are 

                selected for the 2010 Commissioned Officer Student 

                Training and Extern Program. This authority may not be 

                re-delegated.



                You are authorized and directed to publish this 

                memorandum in the Federal Register. 

                <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>

                

                    (Presidential Sig.)



                THE WHITE HOUSE,



                    Washington, June 1, 2010



[FR Doc. 2010-13844

Filed 6-7-10; 8:45 am]

Billing code 4150-42-P Folio: 1635
#### James Danaher, Appellant, v. Emily Russett and Julius Russett, Respondents.

— Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and printing disbursements.