alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### LENA HARRINGTON v. LEE WALTER TAYLOR.

(Filed 12 December, 1945.)

Contracts § 5—

There is no consideration for a promise to reimburse plaintiff for injuries suffered by her, when plaintiff saved defendant from serious injury or death by interposing herself between defendant and his assailant in a fight.

Appeal by plaintiff from *Olive, Special Judge,*at May, 1945, Civil Term, of RichmoNd.

*George S. Steele, Jr., for plaintiff, appellant.*

*No counsel contra.*

Per Curiam.

Tbe plaintiff in this case sought to recover of tbe defendant upon a promise made by him under tbe following peculiar circumstances :

Tbe defendant bad assaulted bis wife, who took refuge in plaintiff’s bouse. Tbe next day tbe defendant gained access to tbe bouse and began *691another assault upon bis wife. The defendant’s wife knocked him down with an axe, and was on the point of cutting bis bead open or decapitating him while be was laying on the floor, and the plaintiff intervened, caught the axe as it was descending, and the blow intended for defendant fell upon her band, mutilating it badly, but saving defendant’s life.

Subsequently, defendant orally promised to pay the plaintiff her damages; but, after paying a small sum, failed to pay anything more. So, substantially, states the complaint.

The defendant demurred to the complaint as not stating a cause of action, and the demurrer was sustained. Plaintiff appealed.

The question presented is whether there was a consideration recognized by our law as sufficient to support the promise. The Court is of the opinion that however much the defendant should be impelled by common gratitude to alleviate the plaintiff’s misfortune, a humanitarian act of this kind, voluntarily performed, is not such consideration as would entitle her to recover at law.

The judgment sustaining the demurrer is

Affirmed.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 1, 2016

No. 04-16-00025-CV

Beatrice VASQUEZ & Darryl De La Cruz,

Appellant

v.

OLD AUSTIN ROAD LAND TRUST, Joseph Anthony Pizzini Individually and as Trustee of 

Old Austin Road Land Trust, & John Price,

Appellees

From the 438th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015-CI-20809

Honorable David A. Canales, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

After this court granted Appellants’ first motion for extension of time to file their brief, it 

was due on June 1, 2016. On May 31, 2016, Appellants filed an unopposed second motion for 

extension of time to file their brief until June 21, 2016, for a total extension of fifty days. 

Appellants’ motion is GRANTED. Appellants’ brief must be filed with this court by 

June 21, 2016. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(d). 

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 1st day of June, 2016.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
No. 606.

No. 609.

*Edward S. Greenbaum, Harriet F. Pilpel*and *Melvin L. Wulf*on the motion.

#### New York Times Co. *v.*Sullivan; and Abernathy et al. *v.*Sullivan.

Certiorari, 371 U. S. 946, to the Supreme Court of Alabama. The motion of American Civil Liberties Union for leave to file a brief, as *amicus curiae,*is granted.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 335 Reported in Senate (RS)]

<DOC>

                                                        Calendar No. 15
117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 335

 To reauthorize the Tropical Forest and Coral Reef Conservation Act of 
                                 1998.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 22, 2021

 Mr. Portman (for himself, Mr. Coons, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Schatz, and 
   Mr. Burr) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
             referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

                             March 24, 2021

              Reported by Mr. Menendez, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To reauthorize the Tropical Forest and Coral Reef Conservation Act of 
                                 1998.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Tropical Forest and Coral Reef 
Conservation Reauthorization Act of 2021''.

SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION.

    Section 806(d) of the Tropical Forest and Coral Reef Conservation 
Act of 1998 (22 U.S.C. 2431d(d)) is amended by adding at the end the 
following new paragraphs:
            ``(9) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2022.
            ``(10) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2023.
            ``(11) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2024.
            ``(12) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2025.
            ``(13) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2026.''.
                                                        Calendar No. 15

117th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 335

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 To reauthorize the Tropical Forest and Coral Reef Conservation Act of 
                                 1998.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             March 24, 2021

                       Reported without amendment
```
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5681 

To provide for the approval of the Amendment to the Agreement Between 

the Government of the United States of America and the Government 

of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland for Cooperation on the Uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual Defense Purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 12, 2014 

Mr. ROYCE (for himself, Mr. ENGEL, Mr. ROHRABACHER, Mr. SHERMAN, Mr. 

POE of Texas, Mr. CICILLINE, and Mr. HOLDING) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To provide for the approval of the Amendment to the Agreement Between the Government of the United States of 

America and the Government of the United Kingdom 

of Great Britain and Northern Ireland for Cooperation 

on the Uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual Defense Purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5681 IH

1 SECTION 1. APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE 

2 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT 

3 OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND 

4 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED KING5 DOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN 

6 IRELAND FOR COOPERATION ON THE USES 

7 OF ATOMIC ENERGY FOR MUTUAL DEFENSE 

8 PURPOSES. 

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding the provisions 

10 for congressional consideration of a proposed agreement 

11 for cooperation in subsection d. of section 123 of the 

12 Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2153), the amend13 ments to the Agreement Between the Government of the 

14 United States of America and the Government of the 

15 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 

16 for Cooperation on the Uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual 

17 Defense Purposes, done at Washington, July 22, 2014, 

18 and transmitted to Congress on July 24, 2014, including 

19 all portions thereof (hereinafter in this section referred to 

20 as the ‘‘Amendment’’), may be brought into effect on or 

21 after the date of the enactment of this Act as if all the 

22 requirements in such section 123 for consideration of the 

23 Amendment had been satisfied, subject to subsection (b) 

24 of this section. 

25 (b) APPLICABILITY OF ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF

26 1954 AND OTHER PROVISIONS OF LAW.—Upon coming 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5681 IH

1 into effect, the Amendment shall be subject to the provi2 sions of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2011 

3 et seq.) and any other applicable United States law as if 

4 the Amendment had come into effect in accordance with 

5 the requirements of section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act 

6 of 1954. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.2         

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION                  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 QuarterlyReport of Online Vacation Center Holdings Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June30,        2009as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Edward B. Rudner, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  

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

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

Date: August 14, 2009                  

/s/ Edward B. Rudner

Edward B. Rudner        Chief FinancialOfficer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                             999
<SECURITIES>                                        30
<RECEIVABLES>                                      490
<ALLOWANCES>                                        18
<INVENTORY>                                        335
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,407
<PP&E>                                           8,248
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,614
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  11,053
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,669
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              589
<PREFERRED>                                        234
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                         358
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    11,053
<SALES>                                          8,675
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 8,675
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,072
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    66
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     6
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 234
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    537
<INCOME-TAX>                                       212
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                325
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       325
<EPS-BASIC>                                       3.93
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     3.52


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Vitesse
Semiconductor Corporation
Camarillo, California

We
hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-167604, 333-55466,
333-53463, 333-69631, 333-105156, 333-84660, 333-33918, 333-108230, 333-61576 and 333-40822) of Vitesse
Semiconductor Corporation of our reports dated December 1, 2010, relating to the consolidated financial statements and schedule, and the effectiveness of Vitesse Semiconductor Corporation's
internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K.

BDO
USA, LLP
Los Angeles, California

December 1,
2010

---



QuickLinks
Exhibit 10.2(b)
  
  Re:
    
    Management Agreement Renewals
   
    
    Diversified Multi-Advisor Futures Fund L.P.
    
    Orion Futures Fund L.P.
    
    CMF Winton Feeder I LP
    
    CMF Winton Master Fund L.P.
    
    Tactical Diversified Futures Fund L.P.
    
    Institutional Futures Portfolio LP
    
    Abingdon Futures Fund L.P.
    
    Global Futures Fund Ltd.
    
    Orion Futures Fund (Cayman) Ltd.
  Very truly yours,
CERES MANAGED FUTURES LLCBy:
    /s/ Jennifer MagroJennifer MagroChief Financial Officer & Director WINTON CAPITAL MANAGEMENTBy: Print Name:
    
    /s/ Peter Jauhal

PETER JAUHALJM/sr
    
    DIRECTORWINTON CAPITAL MANAGEMENT
Exhibit 99.2

                            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 on Form 10-Q of Florida Banks, Inc. (the
"Company") for the period ended  September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the "Form  10-Q"),  I, T. Edwin
Stinson,  Jr., Chief Financial 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 Form 10-Q 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 Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date:  November 12, 2002                        By:  /s/ T. Edwin Stinson, Jr.
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                         T. Edwin Stinson, Jr.
                                                         Chief Financial Officer
#### Christian Linck v. Mathew C. Whipple et al.

Nuisances—Instructions—Evidence,

An instruction stating that the jury may disregard the uncorroborated evidence of a witness, if they believe he has sworn falsely upon a material question, without specifying that, they must be satisfied that the false statement wa» knowingly and wilfully made, is erroneous.

[Opinion filed February 21, 1889.]

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Montgomery County; the Hon. J. A. Creighton, Judge, presiding.

Messrs. A. N. Kingsbury and Lane & Cooper, for appellants.

Messrs. George L. Zink and James M. Truitt, for appellee.

Conger, J.

This was an action on the case. The declaration in the first count alleged an injury to the dwelling house of appellant from water flowing against it from appellees’ buildings, caused by defective drain pipes and tiles; and the second alleged that appellees used a certain back yard as a privy, and allowed and suffered filth, foul water, etc., to accumulate therein, causing offensive odors to prevail in the immediate vicinity of appellant’s dwelling- house and kitchen.

The questions were sharply contested, and the evidence conflicting, and the jury found against appellant.

We are not entirely satisfied with the verdict, but should not feel called upon to interfere had the jury been properly instructed.

The ninth instruction for appellees was as follows: “No. 9. The jury are the judges of the value of the testimony of each witness who has testified in this case, and if any one of the *156witnesses has, in the judgment of the jury, sworn falsely upon a material question involved in the case, they may, if they see proper, disregard the whole of such witness’ testimony, except as to such matters as such witness is corroborated by other creditable witnesses, or facts and circumstances proven on that trial.”

This form of instruction has so frequently been condemned that it is not necessary to refer to authorities. The essential thing necessary to discredit a witness, under the case supposed in the instruction, is, that such false statements must be knowingly made.

Honest witnesses may state things from the witness stand by mistake, or from want of knowledge, that are false, and still the jury would not be warranted in disregarding the whole of tlu testimony of such witnesses for that cause alone, but in addition thereto the jury must be satisfied that such witnesses make them intentionally and wilfully.

The weight to be given to certain witnesses was a vital question in the case, and hence the jury should have been correctly and carefully instructed upon it.

From a careful reading of the testimony we are of opinion injustice may have been done by this instruction, and that justice requires a new trial.

The judgment of the Circuit Court will therefore be reversed, and the cause remanded.

*Reversed and remanded.*
| 2005 OASDI Trustees Report |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|----------------------------|--|--|--|--|--|--|
|                            |

 II. OVERVIEW

II.D1 Short-Range OASDI Trust Fund Ratios

II.D2 OASDI Income and Cost Rates Under Intermediate Assumptions

II.D3 Number of Covered Workers Per OASDI Beneficiary

II.D4 Cumulative OASDI Income Less Cost, Based on Present Law Tax Rates and Scheduled Benefits

II.D5 OASDI Cost and Scheduled Tax Revenue as a Percentage of GDP

II.D6 OASDI Annual Balances: 2004 and 2005 Trustees Reports

II.D7 Long-Range OASDI Trust Fund Ratios Under Alternative Assumptions

 IV. ACTUARIAL ESTIMATES

IV.A1 Short-Range OASI and DI Trust Fund Ratios

IV.B1 Long-Range OASI and DI Annual Income Rates and Cost Rates

IV.B2 Number of OASDI Beneficiaries Per 100 Covered Workers

IV.B3 Long-Range OASI and DI Trust Fund Ratios

IV.B4 Long-Range Test of Close Actuarial Balance

IV.B5 OASDI Annual Balances: 2004 and 2005 Reports

 V. ASSUMPTIONS AND METHODS UNDERLYING ACTUARIAL ESTIMATES

V.C1 Primary-Insurance-Amount Formula for the 2005 Cohort

V.C2 Maximum-Family-Benefit Formula for the 2005 Cohort

V.C3 DI Disabled Worker Incidence Rates, 1970-2014

 VI. APPENDICES

VI.E1 Annual Trust Fund Ratios

VI.E2 Annual Cost Rates

VI.F1 Estimated OASDI Income and Cost in Constant Dollars, Based on Intermediate Assumptions

----

|  |  |  |  |  |  |   |
|--|--|--|--|--|--|--------|

|        |
|--------|
|   | Privacy Policy        | Website Policies & Other Important Information        | Site Map        | Actuarial Publications | 3/23/2005 |
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

The Board of Directors 

Genaera Corporation: 

We consent to the incorporation byreference in the registration statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 33-52882, 33-71984, 333-10889, 333-62073, 333-69824 and 333-121163) and on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-73798, 333-106678 and 333-121577) of Genaera Corporation of our report dated March 3, 2009, withrespect to the balance sheets of Genaera Corporation as of December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the related statements of operations, changes in stockholders’ equity and comprehensive loss, and cash flows for the years then ended, which reportappears in the December 31, 2008 annual report on Form 10-K of Genaera Corporation. 

Our report dated March 3, 2009 contains anexplanatory paragraph that states that the Company has suffered recurring losses from operations, has limited resources available to fund current research and development activities, and will require substantial additional financing to continue tofund its research and development activities. These conditions raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

/s/ KPMG LLP 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

March 3, 2009
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 245 (Thursday, December 21, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66336-66337]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-31052]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Docket 37554]


Notice of Order Adjusting the Standard Foreign Fare Level Index

    Section 41509(e) of Title 49 of the United States Code requires 
that the Department, as successor to the Civil Aeronautics Board, 
establish a Standard Foreign Fare Level (SFFL) by adjusting the SFFL 
base periodically by percentage changes in actual operating costs per 
available seat-mile (ASM). Order 80-2-69 established the first interim 
SFFL, and Order 95-10-9 established the currently effective two-month 
SFFL applicable through November 30, 1995.
    In establishing the SFFL for the two-month period beginning 
December 1, 1995, we have projected non-fuel costs based on the year 
ended September 30, 1995 data, and have determined fuel prices on the 
basis of the latest available experienced monthly fuel cost levels as 
reported to the Department.
    By Order 95-12-23 fares may be increased by the following 
adjustment factors over the October 1979 level:

[[Page 66337]]

      

Atlantic......................................................   1.4085.
Latin America.................................................   1.4448.
Pacific.......................................................   1.4717.
                                                                        

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Keith A. Shangraw (202) 366-2439.

    By the Department of Transportation.

    Dated: December 14, 1995
Patrick V. Murphy,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs.
[FR Doc. 95-31052 Filed 12-20-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-62-P
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: James Deaver Services, Inc. v. Don Mafrige

Appellate case number: 01-22-00194-CV

Trial court case number: 21-CV-0386

Trial court: 56th District Court of Galveston County

Appellant James Deaver Services, Inc. (“JDSI”) has filed a motion indicating that trial of

the case underlying this interlocutory appeal is set for September 26, 2022. JDSI seeks a stay of 

trial court proceedings pending determination of this appeal. 

The Court requests a response. Appellee Don Mafrige’s response is due Wednesday,

September 7, 2022.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: _____/s/ Peter Kelly_______

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Panel consists of Justices Kelly, Rivas-Molloy, and Guerra

Date: ____September 2, 2022___