alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Salvatore Di Gregorio, Plaintiff, *v.*Jerry Nicosia, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Nassau County,

February 23, 1956.

*25
      *James G. Blake*for plaintiff.

*David H. Pasternack*for defendant.

Howard T. Hogan, J.

Plaintiff sues to recover a binder of $5,000 paid upon a parcel of real property which he intended to purchase. When he decided against buying the property he demanded the return of this money but it was refused by defendant, who, in her answer to the complaint, alleged by way of an affirmative defense and counterclaim that the $5,000 was in fact given as part payment under an oral contract of sale, and thereupon demanded that specific performance be decreed. Plaintiff now moves to dismiss said counterclaim on the ground that the alleged contract is oral and unenforcible under section 259 of the Real Property Law.

For the purposes of this motion it must be assumed that there was an oral contract between the parties, and not merely a binder. Nevertheless the counterclaim cannot withstand this motion. Defendant has submitted unquestionable authority for the proposition that4 ‘ a vendee cannot recover a payment made to apply on the purchase price of real estate under a parol contract which is void within the Statute of Frauds, unless the vendor has repudiated the contract or is unable or unwilling to perform ”. *(Graham*v. *Healy,*154 App. Div. 76, 82.)

This may constitute a complete defense to the complaint if it is established that the money was paid under an oral contract rather than as a binder, but the only question now before this court is whether *defendant*can obtain specific performance under an oral contract.

It is well settled that specific performance can be decreed in such a case only when there has been part performance unequivocally referrable to the alleged agreement. The payment of a portion o'f the purchase price is not such part performance *(Hummell*v. *Cruikshank,*280 App. Div. 47, 49; *Galletta*v. *Zuckerman,*122 N. Y. S. 2d 10, 14) and no other part performance is alleged.

Accordingly the motion to strike out defendant’s counterclaim is granted.
EXHIBIT
      32.2




CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350




Pursuant
      to the requirements set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange
      Act
      of 1934, as amended, and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United
      States Code (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), the undersigned officer of Aspreva
      Pharmaceuticals Corporation, (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to the best
      of his knowledge, that:





a.
            The
                Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September
                30, 2005 to which this certification is attached as Exhibit 32.2
                (the
                “Form 10-Q”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
                Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and





b.
            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 2, 2005
            /s/
                Bruce G. CousinsBruce
                G. CousinsChief
                Financial Officer
              (Principal
                Financial and Accounting Officer)





A
      signed original of this written statement required by Rule 13a-14(b) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 1350 of Chapter 63
      of
      Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) has been provided
      to
      the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
      and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) or its staff upon request. This certification
“accompanies” the Form 10−Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the
      SEC and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company
      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 Form 10−Q),
      irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such
      filing.
[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Coomes , ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 20 2 4

- Ohio

- 2088 .]

D ISCIPLINARY C OUNSEL v . C OOMES . [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Coomes , ___ Ohio St.3d ___,

20 2 4

- Ohio

- 2088 .] (No. 202 4

- 0199

— Submitted May 29 , 202 4

— Decided May 31
, 20 24 .)

O N A PPLICATION FOR R EINSTATEMENT

.

__________________ __ {¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent, John Joseph Coomes, Attorney Registration No. 0086761, last known business address in Miami, Florida. {¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of March 6, 2024, wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(20), suspended respondent from the practice of law for a period of 45 days and ordered that he would not be reinstated to the practice of law in Ohio u ntil he was reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Indiana, finds that respondent has complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(24)

. {¶ 3} Therefore, it is ordered by this court that respondent is reinstated to the practice of law in the s tate of Ohio. {¶ 4} It is further ordered that the clerk of this court issue certified copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(17)(E)(1) and that publication be made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(17)(E)(2). {¶ 5} For earlier case, see Disciplinary Counsel v. Coomes , __ Ohio St.3d __, 2024

- Ohio

- 79 5 , __ N.E.3d __.
K ENNEDY , C.J., and F ISCHER , D E W INE , D ONNELLY , S TEWART , B RUNNER , and D ETERS , JJ., concur.

_______________ __
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 8, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 20819]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11483]



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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-5501-9]


National Pin Service Site: Notice of Proposed Settlement

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of proposed settlement.

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

SUMMARY: Under Section 122(g) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended 
42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq., the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has 
agreed to settle claims for response costs at the National Pin Service 
Site, Saratoga, Wilson County, North Carolina, with the Defense 
Reutilization and Market Service (DRMS), Defense Logistic Agency (DLA), 
U.S. Department of Defense (DoD). EPA will consider public comments on 
the proposed settlements for thirty (30) days. EPA may withdraw from or 
modify the proposed settlements should such comments disclose facts or 
considerations which indicate the proposed settlement is inappropriate, 
improper, or inadequate. Copies of the settlements are available from: 
Ms. Paula V. Batchelor, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 
Waste Management Division, Waste Programs Branch, Cost Recovery 
Section, 345 Courtland Street, NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30365, 404-347-
5059, vmx. 6169. Written comments must be submitted to Mr. Ray 
Strickland at the above address within thirty (30) days from the date 
of publication.

    Dated: April 12, 1996.
James S. Kutzman,
Acting Director, Waste Management Division.
[FR Doc. 96-11483 Filed 5-7-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M
#### Randall E.W. GREEN, Appellant, v. Laura M. GREEN, Respondent.

Nos. WD 44915, WD 44931 and WD 45126.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

March 9, 1993.

Rehearing Denied April 27, 1993.

*624Randall E.W. Green, Blue Springs, pro se.

Gail Berkowitz, Kansas City, for respondent Laura M. Green.

Richard Scaletty, Independence, Guardian ad Litem.

Before BERREY, P.J., and ULRICH and SMART, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Randall E.W. Green appeals, pro se, from the May 1, 1991, judgment granting dissolution of marriage, awarding custody of the minor child born of the marriage to Laura M. Green, and making division of the marital property and the marital debt. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 86 (Thursday, May 2, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19607-19608]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11096]



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

ASSASSINATION RECORDS REVIEW BOARD


Sunshine Act Meeting

DATES: May 13-14, 1996.

PLACE: ARRB, 600 E Street, NW, Washington, DC.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:


[[Page 19608]]


    1. Review and Accept Minutes of Closed Meeting.
    2. Review of Assassination Records.
    3. Other Business.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Thomas Samoluk, Associate Director 
for Communications, 600 E Street, NW, Second Floor, Washington, DC 
20530. Telephone: (202) 724-0088; Fax: (202) 724-0457.
T. Jeremy Gunn,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 96-11096 Filed 4-30-96; 2:21 pm]
BILLING CODE 6118-01-P
exv10w1



 





Exhibit 10.1




AMENDMENT TO

GENERAL GROWTH PROPERTIES, INC.

1998 INCENTIVE STOCK PLAN, AS AMENDED AND RESTATED

EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2007




     This Amendment to the General Growth Properties, Inc. 1998 Incentive Stock Plan, as amended
effective May 4, 2005 (the “1998 Plan”) is dated as of November 9, 2006. Capitalized terms
not defined herein shall have the meaning set forth in the 1998 Plan.



     1. The definition of Fair Market Value set forth in Section 1 of the 1998 Plan is hereby
amended in its entirety to read as follows:




     “Fair Market Value” means, as of any given date, the closing market price of the
Common Stock on the New York Stock Exchange Composite Tape or, if not then listed on such
exchange, on any other national securities exchange on which the Common Stock is then
listed or on NASDAQ. If there is then no regular public trading market for such Common
Stock, The Fair Market Value of the Common Stock shall be determined by the Committee in
good faith.”




     2. The 1998 Plan is not otherwise modified and is hereby ratified and confirmed.




     3. The effective day of this Amendment shall be January 1, 2007.




     4. This Amendment and the 1998 Plan shall be considered, for all intents and purposes, one
instrument. In the event of any conflict between the terms and provisions of this Amendment and
the terms and provisions of the 1998 Plan, the terms and provisions of this Amendment shall, in all
instances, prevail. If any provision of this Amendment or the application thereof to any person or
circumstance is or becomes illegal, invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions hereof shall
remain in full force and effect and this Amendment shall be interpreted as if such illegal, invalid
or unenforceable provision did not exist herein.
<PAGE>

September 29, 2000


Ms. Gillian Hobson,
Managing Director
Cook Covington Enterprises, Inc.
P.O. Box 679 Main Street
Charlestown, Nevis, West Indies


Dear Ms. Hobson:

We are requesting that the payment due October 1, 2000 of $83,333 be deferred
and paid with the $41,667 (a total payment of $125,000) payment due April 30,
2004.

We are also requesting the $125,000 payment due December 31, 2000 be waived.

These adjustments are being requested as the company wishes to fund the
enhancement of the software and make other modifications to the Gallop system,
all of which should improve the value of the software.

FOR COLLEGE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, INC. AS LICENSEE BY CBSA OR ITS ASSIGNS:



--------------------------------
By: John J. Grace
Title: Chief Financial Officer



FOR COOK COVINGTON ENTERPRISES, INC.:



--------------------------------
By: Ms. Gillian Hobson
Title: Managing Director
**Exhibit 32**

CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANTTO18 U.S.C. §1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Terry G. Roussel andSharon C. Kaiser, do each hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that tothe best of his knowledge, the Quarterly Report of Cornerstone Core PropertiesREIT, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the nine-month period ended September 30, 2006fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition andresults of operations of  CornerstoneCore Properties REIT, Inc.
|                         |   | /s/ TERRY G. ROUSSEL                                   |
|-------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------|
| Date: November 10, 2006 |   | Terry G. Roussel                                       |
|                    |   | Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive  Officer) |

 
|                         |   | /s/ SHARON C. KAISER                                   |
|-------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------|
| Date: November 10, 2006 |   | Sharon C. Kaiser                                       |
|                    |   | Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial  Officer) |

 

 

----
EXHIBIT 99


           CERIFICIATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Annual Report of i Crystal, Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the
period ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the capacities
and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the SARBANES-OXLEY ACT of 2002, that
to the best of his 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 results of operation of
         the Company.


                                               /s/ LARRY HRABI
                                               ____________________
     Dated: April 11, 2003                         Larry Hrabi
                                                   Chairman and CFO
#### The STATE of Texas, Appellant, v. John Henry RODRIGUEZ, Appellee.

No. 1364-96.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc.

Dec. 18, 1996.

Laura Angelini, San Antonio, for appellee.

Edward Shaughnessy, III, Asst. Dist. Atty., San Antonio, Matthew Paul, State’s Atty., Austin, for State.

MANSFIELD, Judge,

dissenting to refusal of State’s Petition for Discretionary Review.

For the reasons expressed in *Smith v. State,*897 S.W.2d 348 (Tex.Crim.App.1995), I respectfully dissent to the refusal of the State’s Petition for Discretionary Review in this cause.
118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5640 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 12804 Chillicothe Road in Chesterland, Ohio, 

as the ‘‘Sgt. Wolfgang Kyle Weninger Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 5640 EH

1 SECTION 1. SGT. WOLFGANG KYLE WENINGER POST OF2 FICE BUILDING. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

4 Postal Service located at 12804 Chillicothe Road in 

5 Chesterland, Ohio, shall be known and designated as the 

6 ‘‘Sgt. Wolfgang Kyle Weninger Post Office Building’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

9 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

10 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Sgt. Wolfgang Kyle 

11 Weninger Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 3, 2024. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5640 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostWeninger Post Office Building’’. Chesterland, Ohio, as the ‘‘Sgt. Wolfgang Kyle al Service located at 12804 Chillicothe Road in
Order issued i)ecember 5, 2012

in i’he

nurt nf ppia1

fift1! iitrict Ut at Ja11wi

No. 05-12-01601-CV

IN RE HOLLINGSWORTII SAND & GRAVEL, LLC, Relator

original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 5

Dallas County. Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-12-05735-E

ORDER

Before Justices Bridges. Lang, and Fillmore

Based on the Court’s opinion ofthis date, we DENY relator’s petition for writ ofmandamus.

We ORDER that relator bear the costs of this original proceeding.

/4

/ 4’

( /

DOUGLA S. LANG

JUSTIC’
#### STATE of Missouri, ex rel., MISSOURI HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, Respondent, v. R.W. JACOBSMEYER et al., Exceptions of Michael Bailey, Appellant.

No. 63845.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.

April 18, 1995.

Joe Bill Carter, Kirkwood, for appellant.

Paul R. Sterrett, Chesterfield, for respondent.

Before SMITH, P.J., and PUDLOWSKI and WHITE, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Michael Bailey appeals from a judgment entered on a jury verdict awarding damages of $92,000 in this condemnation ease. We have read the briefs and reviewed the legal file and transcript. We find no error of law and no jurisprudential purpose would be served by an extended written opinion. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
April 16, 1973 The Honorable Clayton T. Garrison Opinion No. H- 30 Executive Director of the Texas Parks andWildlife Department Re: Is the multi-colored John H. Reagan Building feral pigeon a variety Austin, Texas 78701 ofwild pigeon within the meaning ofArticle 872 of the Texas Penal Dear Mr. Garrison: Code? Inyour recent letter to this office you requested a formal opinion on the following question: .Is the multi-colored feral pigeon a variety ofwild pigeon within the meaning of Article 872 of the Texas Penal Code? Article 872, Vernon’s Texas Penal Code, as amended in 1961 provides as follows:

“Wild, turkey, .wild ducks of all varieties, wild geeseof all varieties, wild brant, wild grouse, wild prairie chickens or pinnated grouse, wild pheasants of all varieties, wild partirdge andwild quail of all varieties, wild pigeons of all varieties, wild mourning doves andwild white-winged doves, wild snipe of all varieties, wild shore birds ofall varieties, wild Mexican pheasants or chachalacas, wild plover of all varieties, andwild sand-hill cranes, are hereby declared to be game birds within the meaning ,.. of this Act. I’ Clearly all varieties ofwild pigeon are within the language of Article 872, and if the multi-colored ferdl pigeon is awild pigeon, then it is within that statute.

p. 127The Honorable Clayton T. Garrison, page 2 (H-30)

Webster’s Third New International Dictionary (1961) defines

“feral” as “having escaped from domestication andbecome wild”
. Itwould therefore appear that the multi-colored feral pigeon is awild creature within the scope ofArticle 872. There are no Texas cases onthis question. Inthe Missouri case of State v. Willers, 130S.W. 2d 256 (Mo.App. 1939) the defendant was convicted of having killed pigeons without a permit. The birds shotwere the “common every&y pigeon”, andthe question was whether they were within the protected class of “the , columbae, commonly knownas doves and pigeons”
. The Court concluded that they were within the order Columbae, andthat

“it at once becomes manifest that the pigeons of this region in the feral state fall within the protection of the statute”
. Although the Texas statute does not use the biological name, it does, as does tk Missouri statute, protect only wild birds, and includes within that protection wild pigeons of all varieties. It is therefore our opinion that feral pigeons are within the scope of Article 872, V. T. P. C. Since, by definition, feral pigeons are wild pigeons, the statute does not protect domesticated pigeons, such are bred and raised by farmers, for table consumption, sometimes classified as poultry. State v. Willers. supra. “Feral” refers to a state rather thana breed. Therefore, multi-colored feral pigeons are within the scope of the statute.

The multi-colored feral pigeon is a variety ofwild pigeon within the meaning ofArticle 872, Vernon’s Texas Penal Code. :: Very truly yours,

Attorney General of Texas

p. 128The Honorable Clayton T. Garrison, page 3 (H-30)

DAVID M. KENDALL, Chairman Opinion Committee

p. 129
# Exhibit 32

Section 1350
Certifications

---

# Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, the Chief Executive
Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of Independence Bancshares, Inc. (the
Company), each certify that, to his or her knowledge on the date of this
certification:

| | 1. | The quarterly report of the Company for the period ended March 31, 2005 as
          filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date (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 10, 2005 |  | By:  /s/ Lawrence R. Miller
       Lawrence R. Miller
       Chief Executive Officer
|------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|Date:  May 10, 2005 |  | By:  /s/ Kimberly D. Barrs
       Kimberly D. Barrs
       Chief Financial Officer
|------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 quarterly report of Frontier Beverage Company, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ending June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 16,  2010 (the “Report”), I, Terry Harris, Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the Company.





/s/ Terry Harris


Terry Harris


Principal Executive Officer


August 16,  2010





This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of § 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A signed original of this certification has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.