alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Morris J. Grossmann, Plaintiff, *v.*Constantin Wagner, Sr., and R. A. Freed & Co., Inc., Defendants.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Bronx County,

November 10, 1936.

*Kadel, Van Kirk & Trencher [Harold L. Leddy*of counsel], for the plaintiff.

*Philip J. Dunn [Arthur J. O’Leary*of counsel], for the defendant R. A. Freed & Co., Inc.

*Morrison & Lynn [Archie B. Morrison*and *Charles Roden*of counsel], for the defendant Wagner.

Cotillo, J.

These two motions to vacate notices of examinations before trial may be considered together.

*2Plaintiff, a real estate broker, by this action seeks to hold both lessor and lessee liable for commissions alleged to have been earned by plaintiff by reason of the fact that after having been introduced to each other by plaintiff and having failed to consummate a proposed leasing agreement defendants thereafter did enter into a .lease without the knowledge or assistance of plaintiff.

Immediately after serving the summons herein plaintiff moved for leave to examine both defendants in order to frame his complaint. This motion was denied, and he thereupon served the present complaint. Issue was joined by the service of separate answers by the two defendants, who appear herein separately and by different attorneys. Plaintiff again sought to examine both defendants and served separate notices upon each, specifying a number of matters concerning which he desires to examine. Each defendant independently moves to vacate the notice addressed to him. The contention made by both, that the complaint fails to state a cause of action and that the examination is, therefore, unnecessary and not sought in good faith, is not wholly without merit. I should be inclined to hold that no cause of action is stated, were it not for the rule that on motions of this character a pleading will not be scrutinized with the same care and strictness as on a motion to dismiss. Unless prevented by objections based on the paucity of his pleading, plaintiff may be able on the trial to make out a *prima facie*case on some theory. The right to an examination is not usually denied unless the complaint is so obviously bad that no cause of action may be spelled out from the facts alleged and the reasonable inferences that may be drawn therefrom.

Without ruling on the legal sufficiency of the complaint, I will grant a limited examination as follows: As to the defendant Wagner, items in the notice addressed to him, numbered (1) and (10), are stricken out and the examination will be limited to the matters stated in the remaining items. As to the defendant R. A. Freed & Co., Inc., whose answer raises no issue as to the matters set forth in items (7) and (9) of the notice addressed to it, these items, in addition to (1) and (2), are stricken out and the examination confined strictly to matters set forth in the remaining items. Settle order fixing time and place of examination.
Filed 8 / 1 / 24 P. v. Carroll CA2/6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or or dered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

ROBERT LEE CARROLL,

Defendant and Appellant. 2d Crim. No. B334489

(consolidated with

B334491, B334492,

B334493)

(Super. Ct. Nos.

21F

- 04890

, 2 3 F

- 07178,

2 3 F

- 04 8 84, 21F

- 06462)

(San Luis Obispo County)

Robert Lee Carroll had four pending cases. He entered into

a global plea agreement resolving all four cases.

In c ase number B334489

, Carroll pled no contest to a felony

count of failing to annually update his registration as a sex

offender. (Pen. Code 1 § 290.012, subd. (a).) He was placed on

formal probation for two years.

In case number B334491

, Carroll pled no contest to identity

theft (§ 530.5, subd. (a)) and forgery of a drivers license (§ 470,

1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code unless

otherwise indicated.2

subd. (a)). The offenses were reduced to misdemeanor s and he

was sentenced to time served.

In case number B334492 , Carroll pled no contest to vehicle

theft (Veh. Code § 10851, subd. (a)). The offense was reduced to a

misdemeanor and he was sentenced to time served.

In case number B334493 , Carroll pled no contest to writing

a check on insufficient funds. (§ 476 a , subd. (a).) He was placed

on probation for two years.

We agreed to consolidate the appeals.

We appointed counsel to represent Carroll in these appeals.

After counsel’s examination of the reco rds, counsel filed an

opening brief raising no issues.

On May 29, 2024, we advised Carroll by mail that he had

30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or

issues that he wished to raise on appeal. We received no reply.

We reviewed the e ntire record and are satisfied that

Carroll’s attorney has fully complied with her responsibilities and

that no arguable issue exists. ( People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d

436, 441.)

The judgment (order) is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

GILBERT, P. J.

We concur:

YEGAN, J. CODY, J.Teresa Estrada

- Mullaney and Jesse J. Marino , Judge s

Superior Court County of San Luis Obispo

______________________________

Teresa Biagini , under appointment by the Court of Appeal,

for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
ex10_2.htm






  



  







Exhibit 10.2





FIRST AMENDMENT TO ASSET PURCHASE AGREEMENT









THIS FIRST AMENDMENT (the “Amendment” to the Asset Purchase Agreement by and between CELSION CORPORATION and BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION dated April 17, 2007 (the ‘Original Agreement”) is executed this 5th
day of June, 2008.





The parties, for good and valuable consideration, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree as follows:





1.           The definition of “Second Payment” is amended to mean the relevant amount set forth on Exhibit A attached hereto.





2.           Section 2.07 of the Original Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:






	
  
	
SECTION 2.07  Second Payment.  On or prior to June 9, 2008:









	
  
	
(a)
	
the Purchaser shall deliver to the Seller the Second Payment by wire transfer in immediately available funds to an account designated by the Purchaser (see Exhibit B attached hereto);









	
  
	
(b)
	
the Seller shall deliver to the Purchaser a receipt for the Second Payment; and









	
  
	
(c)
	
for the avoidance of doubt, Purchaser shall have no right to withhold the Second Payment or otherwise offset against the Second Payment with respect to any Purchaser Amounts or Conditional Amounts.









	
  
	
3.
	
Except for the provisions of this Amendment, the Original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.









	
  
	
4.
	
This Amendment shall automatically terminate and be of no further legal force or effect if Celsion Corporation has not received confirmation of receipt of the wire transfer by Boston Scientific Corporation by 5:00 p.m. on June 9, 2008.








IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused their duly authorized representatives to execute this Amendment as of the date first written above.





BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION





By: /s/ Vance Brown

Name (print):Vance Brown

Title: VP & Corporate Counsel









CELSION CORPORATION





By: /s/M. H. Tardugno

       Michael Tardugno, President
#### Kaspar Muller and Another, Respondents, v. Manhattan Railway Company, Appellant.

Judgment modified by reducing fee damage to $1,000 and past damages to $250 and by striking out allowance, and as modified affirmed, without costs. No opinion.
Summary of Non-Employee Director Compensation



 Exhibit 10.1 
 Summary of Non-Employee Director Compensation for CNX Gas Corporation 
  

					
	 Element of Compensation
	  	Dollar Value	 
	 Annual Board Retainer*
	  	$	70,000	  
		
	 Audit Committee Chair Retainer*
	  	$	15,000	  
		
	 Audit Committee Member Retainer
	  	$	10,000	  
		
	 Annual Equity Award*
	  	$
  
	120,000
 (restricted stock units
	  
 ) 


  

	*	Applicable solely to John R. Pipski, the only CNX Gas director who does not serve on the Board of Directors of CONSOL Energy Inc.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 234 (Wednesday, December 6, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62383-62384]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-29714]



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


DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Southwestern Region: Arizona, New Mexico, West Texas and 
Oklahoma; Notice To Extend Public Comment Period to January 12, 1996; 
Final Environmental Impact Statement for Amendment of Forest Plans in 
the Southwestern Region

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice to Extend Public Comment Period, Final Environmental 
Impact Statement [FEIS].

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

SUMMARY: The Southwestern Region of the Forest Service published a 
notice of availability for public comment on a final environmental 
impact statement in the Federal Register (Vol. 60, No. 213, pages 
55841) on November 3, 1995. This notice is issued to extend the comment 
period from December 4, 1995 to January 12, 1996 regarding that FEIS. 
The FEIS concerns Amendment of Forest Plans in the Southwestern Region, 
and implementation, standards and guidelines for Northern Goshawk and 
Mexican Spotted Owl.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This notice is effective December 6, 1995.

RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: The Regional Forester, Southwestern Region, is 
the responsible official for decisions that affect Southwestern Region 
Forest Land and Resource Management Plans.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Director of Ecosystem Management Planning, Arthur S. Briggs, 

[[Page 62384]]
Southwestern Regional Office, (505) 842-3210.

    Dated: November 29, 1995.
Milo Larson,
Acting Deputy Regional Forester, Southwestern Region.
[FR Doc. 95-29714 Filed 12-5-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
#### Horace F. Bush, Respondent, v. William H. H. Clague and others, Appellants.

Judgment affirmed. Opinion by

Lewis, J ;

Haight, J., not sitting.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 239 (Wednesday, December 13, 1995)]
[Sunshine Act Meetings]
[Page 64101]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-30519]








FEDERAL RETIREMENT THRIFT INVESTMENT BOARD

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m. (EST), December 18, 1995.

PLACE: 4th Floor, Conference Room, 1250 H Street, N.W., Washington, 
D.C.

STATUS: Open.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

1. Approval of the minutes of the November 20, 1995, Board meeting
2. Thrift Savings Plan activity report by the Executive Director
3. Review of audit reports:
    ``Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration Review of the 
        Thrift Savings Plan Annuity Operations at the Metropolitan 
        Life Insurance Company and the Federal Retirement Thrift 
        Investment Board.''
    ``Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration Review of the 
        Policies and Procedures of the Federal Retirement Thrift 
        Investment Board Administrative Staff.''
``Federal Pensions: Thrift Savings Plan has Key Role in Retirement 
        Benefits.''

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Thomas J. Trabucco, Director, 
Office of External Affairs (202) 942-1640.

    Dated: December 11, 1995.
Roger W. Mehle,

Executive Director, Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board.

[FR Doc. 95-30519 Filed 12-11-95; 3:14 pm]

BILLING CODE 6760-01-M
Exhibit 32.2




SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION




I, Edwin F. Heinen, Chief Financial Officer of Glowpoint, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), do hereby certify, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




1)           The accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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: November 10, 2009




/s/ Edwin F. Heinen


Edwin F. Heinen


Chief Financial Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“Section 906”), or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided
to Glowpoint, Inc. and will be retained by Glowpoint, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### The People of the State of New York *ex rel.*Ernest Lesche, Appellant, v. Same Respondents.
## NUMBER 13 - 15 - 00 353 - C R 

## COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

ANTONIO SANTOS , APPELLANT ,

v. THE STATE OF TEXAS , APPELLEE

.

On appeal from the 138th District Court of Cameron County, Texas.



## ORDER OF ABATEMENT
Before Justices Benavides , Perkes, and Longoria

Order Per Curiam This cause is before the Court on appellant's unopposed motion to supplement the record and abate the appeal , or in the alternative, extend the deadline for filing appellant’s
brief . Appellant’s counsel states that a ppellant was indicted in 1998 and the records from that cause number, 98

- CR

- 1421

- B are necessary for a complete appellate record. Without supplementation of both the clerk’s and reporter’s record s, counsel states he2

cannot prepare the brief.
The clerk ’ s record was filed on September 14, 2015. Counsel has requested that the clerk supplement the record to include missing portions of the record and include the 1998 prior case. A supplemental cler k’s record containing the missing documents was filed on April 13, 2016. Accordingly, appellant’s motion to supplement the clerk’s record is DISMISSED AS MOOT. The reporter’s record was filed on March 8, 2016 . Counsel states that documents requested to be included in the reporter’s record: pretrial hearings on February 13, 2014, May 8, 2014, April 7, 2015, and May 8, 2015; have not been filed. When a relevant item has been omitted from the reporter’s record , the appellate court may by letter direct the trial court clerk to prepare, certify, and file in the appellate court a supplemental reporter’s record containing the omitted items. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 34.6(d). Accordingly, the appellant’s motion to suppl ement the appellate record and to abate the appeal is GRANTED and the briefing deadlines are suspended. The court reporter of the 138th District Court of Cameron County is directed to prepare supplemental reporter’s record in this cause to include pretrial hearings held on February 13, 2014, May 8, 2014, April 7, 2015, and May 8, 2015. The supplemental
repo rter’s record shall be filed with this Court within 45 days from the date of this order.
Th is appeal will be reinstated upon receipt of the supplemental clerk’s and reporter’s record , or upon further order of this Court. IT IS SO ORDERED.3 PER C URIAM

Do not publish. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b).
D elivered and filed the 21s t day of April , 20 16

.
Exhibit 32.2











CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE


SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








I,  Geoffrey William Smethurst, as the Chief Financial Officer of Consorteum Holdings, Inc., certify that (i) Amendment Number 1 to the Form 10-K/A fully complies with the requirements of  Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained  in Amendment Number 1 to the Form 10-K/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Consorteum Holdings, Inc.


/s/ Geoffrey William Smethurst
 Geoffrey William Smethurst,  Chief  Financial  Officer
 November 16, 2010
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 filing of China Crescent Enterprises, Inc.’s (the “Company”) Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, 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.





Dated:  November 19, 2010





/s/ James Jiang


Name:  James Jiang, PhD


Title:  Chief Executive Officer





Dated:  November 19, 2010





/s/ Philip J. Rauch


Name:  Philip J. Rauch


Title:  Chief Financial Officer
#### Karl Boldin and Another, Plaintiffs, *v.*Howard C. Smith and Others, Defendants.

Supreme Court, Trial Term, Greene County,

November 23, 1936.

*N. Joseph Friedman,*for the plaintiffs.

*Brown & Gallagher,*for the defendant Lacy.

*Rosendale & Dugan,*for defendants Smith and Addis. .

Poster, J.

Plaintiff Otto Boldin was the owner of an automobile, in which he and the plaintiff Karl Boldin were passengers, and which, at the time of the accident, was being driven by another. The owner, of course, was liable for the negligence of his driver ; the other passenger was not. The other car was owned by the defendants Smith and Addis, and operated by an agent of the defendants Lacy, with the consent of the former. If actionable negligence was shown against the defendants’ driver, all defendants were liable.

The jury found a verdict in favor of the plaintiff Karl Boldin, and no cause of action against the plaintiff Otto Boldin, indicating, of course, that both drivers were negligent. Under the circumstances, and irrespective of authorities which appear to be conflicting, I do not think the defendants entitled to costs.

*697But on the basis of authority it seems to me that principles enunciated in *Salimoff & Co.*v. *Standard Oil Co. of New York*(259 N. Y. 219) ought to control. As indicated in such case, section 209 of the Civil Practice Act was enacted to avoid unnecessary litigation and expense, and under it all persons whose claims involve a common question of law and of fact may be joined as plaintiffs in one action. In this action, in so far as the plaintiffs were concerned, there was the common question of fact as to the negligence of defendants’ driver. This was a sufficient unity of interest, and differences on the question of contributory negligence or the form of the complaint did not destroy the entity. As one entity the plaintiffs or either of them could recover but one bill of costs, and by the same token the same rule must apply to the defendants or any of them.

Motion granted, with ten dollars costs.
FACT SHEET 

U.S.-Brazil defense partnership highlights 

Updated: March 7, 2020 

HISTORIC NATURE OF BRAZILIAN PRESIDENT JAIR BOLSONARO’S VISIT   

Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro’s historic visit marks the first time a Brazilian president has visited

U.S Southern Command.

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TESTING AND EVALUATION AGREEMENT (signed March 8, 2020)   

The agreement will expand opportunities for both countries to collaborate and share information

on the development of new defense capabilities and pave the way for potential future cooperation on

applied research, development of emerging technologies, analysis, operational studies, demonstrations,

and the testing and evaluation of prototypes.

BRAZIL’S CONTRIBUTIONS TO ALLIED WAR EFFORTS IN WWI AND WWII, AND STATUS AS A MAJOR

NON‐NATO ALLY TO THE UNITED STATES

During World War II, Brazil supported allied naval operations in the Atlantic and deployed an

expeditionary force to Italy. In World War I, Brazil’s armed forces conducted convoy operations and

security patrols with allied nations. U.S. President Donald Trump designated Brazil a Major Non‐NATO

Ally on July 19, 2019.

EXAMPLES OF HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE COLLABORATION   

In 2019, Brazilian medical professionals served as part of the multinational crew aboard the

hospital ship USNS Comfort, treating more than 68,000 patients in a dozen countries. That same year,

Brazil also hosted U.S. Navy doctors aboard a Brazilian hospital ship for a riverine medical mission,

helping our doctors gain unique tropical medicine expertise and experience in conditions unique to the

Amazon. Ten years ago, U.S. and Brazilian troops worked together to aid hundreds of thousands of

Haitian victims in the aftermath of one of our hemisphere’s worst earthquake disasters.

MULTINATIONAL EXERCISES   

Last year, Brazil hosted UNITAS, the world’s longest running multinational maritime security

exercise. This was six decades after our navies first came together to build readiness and interoperablity

during the very first UNITAS exercise in 1960. Brazil also hosted the amphibious phase of the exercise.

STATE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM   

Brazil’s Armed Forces recently (March 2019) established state partnership with the New York

National Guard. Since then, they have exchanged expertise covering safe air operations in polar

weather conditions, and a New York National Guardsman became the 30th U.S. Soldier to graduate

Brazil’s reknowned Jungle Operations International Course.

BRAZIL’S SUPPORT FOR REGIONAL SECURITY COOPERATION AND DEFENSE DIALOGUE   

In August, Brazil hosted defense leaders from more than a dozen countries during the SOUTHCOM‐

sponsored South American Defense Conference in Natal to discuss regional security cooperation.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 235 (Thursday, December 7, 1995)]
[Sunshine Act Meetings]
[Page 62925]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-29953]








COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

TIME AND DATE: 11:00 a.m., Friday, December 29, 1995.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC 9th Floor Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.
Jean A. Webb,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 95-29953 Filed 12-5-95; 1:35 pm]

BILLING CODE 6351-01-M