alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### INTER-AMERICAN LIFE INSURANCE CO., Petitioner-Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 71-2766.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Dec. 5, 1972.

Jack E. Evans (argued), Phoenix, Ariz., for petitioner-appellant.

Abbott M. Sellers, Atty. (argued), Bennet N. Hollander, Issie L. Jenkins, Meyer Rothwaeks, Attys., Scott P. Crampton, Asst. Atty. Gen., Washington, D. C., Sheldon Sisson, Atty., K. Martin Worthy, Chief Counsel, IRS, Washington, D. C., for respondent-appellee.

Before DUNIWAY and WRIGHT, Circuit Judges, and RENFREW, District Judge.*

*

 Honorable Charles B. Renfrew, United States District Judge, Northern District of California, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM:

The judgment of the Tax Court is affirmed for the reasons stated by it in Inter-American Life Ins. Co. v. C. I. R., 1971, 56 T.C. 497.
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Michael G. Todd,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350,  as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  that the Annual
Report of Capitol  First  Corporation  on Form  10-KSB for the fiscal year ended
September  30, 2003 fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 and that information  contained in
such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB fairly  presents in all material  respects the
financial condition and results of operations of Capitol First Corporation.


                                  By: /s/ Michael G. Todd
                                      -------------------
                                  Name:   Michael G. Todd
                                  Title:  President & Chief Executive Officer
|   |                                |                                                                                                                        |   |
|--------|-------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Date:  September 24, 2010 | By:   /s/  Bruce A. Shear__________                                                                |   |
|   |                                |                 Bruce A. Shear, President   |   |
|   |                                |                 and Chief Executive Officer |   |
|   |                                |                                                                                                                        |   |
|   | Date:  September 24, 2010 | By:   /s/  Paula C. Wurts__________                                                                |   |
|   |                                |                 Paula C. Wurts,             |   |
|   |                                |                 Chief Financial Officer     |   |
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

IN RE: Case No. 09-MC-50750

RICHARD A. SABO, JR. Honorable Robert H. Cleland

Honorable Marianne O. Battani

Honorable Gershwin A. Drain

________________________________/

ORDER DISMISSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE

PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT

Before the court is a “Petition for Reinstatement,” filed on November 30,

2012, by Petitioner Richard A. Sabo, Jr. The petition was assigned to the

undersigned panel, and the court set a hearing for Aprill 17, 2013. Petitioner did

not appear for the hearing. Inasmuch as Petitioner appears to have elected to

forego his petition for the time being, 

IT IS ORDERED that the “Petition for Reinstatement” [Dkt. # 5] is

DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 

s/Robert H. Cleland 

ROBERT H. CLELAND

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

s/Marianne O. Battani 

MARIANNE O. BATTANI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

s/Gershwin A. Drain 

GERSHWIN A. DRAIN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: May 8, 2013

2:09-mc-50750-RHC-MOB-GAD Doc # 15 Filed 05/08/13 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 81
S:\Cleland\JUDGE'S DESK\C3 ORDERS\09-MC-50750.SABO.AttorneyReinstatementMatter.wpd

2

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of

record on this date, May 8, 2013, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Lisa G. Wagner 

Case Manager and Deputy Clerk

(313) 234-5522

2:09-mc-50750-RHC-MOB-GAD Doc # 15 Filed 05/08/13 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 82
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sloud, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Gene Sokolov, Chief 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, as amended; 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:  November 18, 2008 |  | By   /s/ Gene Sokolov                                                    
|------------------------ |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                         |  |                                                                          
|                         |  | Gene Sokolov                                                             
|                         |  | Chairman, President Chief Executive Officer (Principle Executive Officer)
(173 La. 311)

#### WADE v. WADE.

No. 31191.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

July 17, 1931.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 6, 1931.

R. L. Williams, of Arcadia, for appellant.

Hugh Tullís, of Vidalia, and Jeff B. Snyder, of Tallulah, for appellee.

ROGERS, J.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of separation of bed and board rendered against her. ■ ■ .

 In the court below defendant filed an exception of no cause of action, which does not appear to have been expressly passed upon. Defendant also filed a similar exception in this court. The grounds of the exception are, substantially, that the plaintiff does not allege he is free from fault ■ or that he and his wife are living separate and apart, ncfr that the acts complained of were not condoned, and that no reconciliation has taken place between the parties.

The grounds of the exception are matters of defense rather than of exception; and, as a matter of fact, were pleaded by defendant in her answer as a bar to plaintiff’s action.

.On the merits, the court below found in favor of the plaintiff, and, after a careful reading of the testimony adduced on the trial of the case, we cannot say that he erred in his findings.

The plaintiff sets forth in his petition a number of specific acts of cruel treatment on the part of his wife towards him, which are sufficient, if established, to entitle him to a judgment of sepáration from bed and board under the plain provisions of the Civil Code (article 138 et seq.). Plaintiff testified as to these various acts, and his testimony, in many instances, is supported by the testimony of a number of other and disinterested witnesses. Defendant’s denial of plaintiff’s charges stands alone. The testimony does not show that the plaintiff was at fault, nor that he had condoned the acts complained of; and it does show that plaintiff and defendant were living *46separate and apart before and at the time the suit *was*filed.

For the reasons assigned, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Swift Energy
Pension Partners  1993-C,  Ltd.'s balance sheet and statement of operations con-
tained in its Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1997 and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         75,329
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  152,710
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               228,039
<PP&E>                                         4,104,140
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,429,181)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,902,998
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          9,860
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     1,893,138
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,902,998
<SALES>                                        496,916
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               499,053
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  314,987<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                101,099
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            101,099
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   101,099
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<FN>
<F1>Includes  lease  operating  expenses,  production  taxes  and  depreciation,
depletion and  amortization  expense.  Excludes general and  administrative  and
interest expense.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000915661
<NAME> PARAMARK ENTERPRISES, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          49,667
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,783,158
<ALLOWANCES>                                    64,000
<INVENTORY>                                     82,201
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,891,406
<PP&E>                                         215,819
<DEPRECIATION>                                  27,272
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,651,294
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,055,511
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        30,689
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,525,419
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,651,294
<SALES>                                      1,117,917
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,489,837
<CGS>                                          925,228
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,483,920
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               138,138
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              96,841
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 57,135
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             57,135
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                162,729
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   219,864
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.08
        

</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of the Application of Leonard Drake for a Writ of Certiorari Directed to Hon. William S. Andrews.

Application for writ of certiorari granted and proceedings stayed upon petitioner giving a bond of §2,500 to be approved by a justice of the Supreme Court of the fifth judicial district. All concurred; McLennan, P. J., not sitting.
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION OF VICE PRESIDENT OF CORPORATE FINANCE


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 Financial Officer of Tongji Healthcare Group, Inc. (the "Company"), does hereby certify under the standards set forth and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2011 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in that Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated: August 15, 2011



/s/ Eric ZhangEric Zhang

Chief Financial Officer
174 La. 955

#### NEWSOM v. STARNS et al.

No. 31657.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 25, 1932.

• Rownd & Warner, J. M. Blache, Jr., and B- Marvin Harvard, all of Hammond, for relator.

Amos L. Ponder and W. B. Kemp, both of Amite, Garter Rownd and Carroll Buck, of Amite, for respondents.

LAND, J.

. Plaintiff has sued defendants for damages for kidnapping, tarring and feathering him, and has joined with this cause of action" separate and distinct demands for damages to his good name and reputation in the sum of $20,000, alleged to have been caused by general publication in the newspapers of the news of plaintiff’s tarring and feathering, and by the special publication by the defendant Issac G. Starns “of vile and defamatory charges against petitioner, alleging that he had ■ been intimate with his, defendant’s, wife.” Plaintiff’s Petition, Arts. 23-30.

The principal demand of plaintiff for $20,000 necessarily includes damages for personal injury, as plaintiff alleges that he was violently seized and forcibly handcuffed, and that his wrists were thereby injured, that coal- tar, smeared by defendants upon his body, burned his skin with great intensity and pain from head to foot, and that his body was cut and twisted by the inhuman treatment received by him at the hands of defendants, and that he was dumped with violence out of the car driven by defendants in the ' maip business section of the town of Hammond, after he had been brought back to town by them.

As the Court of Appeal has exclusive jurisdiction over suits for damages for personal injuries, regardless of amount, it has jurisdiction, without doubt, over the principal demand of plaintiff in this case for damages in the sum of $20,000.

But the demands of plaintiff for damages in the sum of $20,000, for general publication of news of his tarring and feathering, and for special publication by the defendant Isaac G. Starns of alleged libelous matters affecting plaintiff, are not suits for damages for personal injuries, but are separate and-distinct causes of action, over which the Court of Appeal has no jurisdiction, since the amount In dispute exceeds the sum of $2,000. Const. 1921, art. 7, § 10 and section 29.

The Court of Appeal erred, therefore, in. remanding the case to the lower court in order to give to defendants an opportunity to prove the truth, in justification of the alleged libelous charges.

This demand, as well as the demand for damages arising from the general publication of the news of plaintiff’s tarring and feathering, should be disregarded by the Court of Appeal for want of jurisdiction, and plaintiff’s principal demand should have been entertained and passed upon by that court.

It is therefore ordered that the judgment of the Court of Appeal, First circuit, be annulled and set aside.

It is now ordered that this case be remanded to the Court of Appeal, First circuit, and be reinstated upon the, docket of that court, and be proceeded with, in due course in accordance with the views herein expressejl -
Exhibit 14.1

Form of  Code of Ethical Conduct for Chief Executive Officer

In
my role as Chief Executive Officer of Samsonite Corporation,

I
recognize that the Chief Executive Officer hold an important and elevated role in corporate governance. I am uniquely capable and empowered to ensure that stakeholders' interests are appropriately
balanced, protected and preserved. Accordingly, this Code provides principles to which a Chief Executive Officer is expected to adhere and advocate. The Code embodies rules regarding individual and
peer responsibilities, as well as responsibilities to the company, the public and other stakeholders.

I
certify to you that I adhere to and advocate the following principles and responsibilities governing my professional and ethical conduct.

To
the best of my knowledge and ability:

|(Signature) |  | (Date)
|----------- |  | ------

---



QuickLinks
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

          - [Transmittal Nos. 08-95]

# AGENCY:

Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to fulfill the  requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 July 1996.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM, (703) 601-3740.   The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of  Representatives, Transmittals 08-95 with attached transmittal, policy  justification, and Sensitivity of Technology.

Dated: August 5, 2008.

Patricia L. Toppings,

OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

      ( print page 47904)          ( print page 47905)          ( print page 47906)          ( print page 47907)          ( print page 47908)    

BILLING CODE 5001-06-M

[FR Doc. E8-18642 Filed 8-14-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 1 of 31 Pg ID 652
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 2 of 31 Pg ID 653
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 3 of 31 Pg ID 654
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 4 of 31 Pg ID 655
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 5 of 31 Pg ID 656
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 6 of 31 Pg ID 657
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 7 of 31 Pg ID 658
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 8 of 31 Pg ID 659
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 9 of 31 Pg ID 660
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 10 of 31 Pg ID 661
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 11 of 31 Pg ID 662
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 12 of 31 Pg ID 663
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 13 of 31 Pg ID 664
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 14 of 31 Pg ID 665
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 15 of 31 Pg ID 666
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 16 of 31 Pg ID 667
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 17 of 31 Pg ID 668
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 18 of 31 Pg ID 669
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 19 of 31 Pg ID 670
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 20 of 31 Pg ID 671
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 21 of 31 Pg ID 672
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 22 of 31 Pg ID 673
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 23 of 31 Pg ID 674
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 24 of 31 Pg ID 675
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 25 of 31 Pg ID 676
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 26 of 31 Pg ID 677
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 27 of 31 Pg ID 678
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 28 of 31 Pg ID 679
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 29 of 31 Pg ID 680
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 30 of 31 Pg ID 681
2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 39 Filed 08/10/09 Pg 31 of 31 Pg ID 682
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

WILLIAM R. JOHNSON, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-2451

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

___________________________________)

Opinion filed December 12, 2018.

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P.

9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court 

for Hillsborough County; Mark D. Kiser, 

Judge.

William R. Johnson, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Comer v. Moore, 817 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 2002); Benedetto v. 

State, 957 So. 2d 109 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007); Cookshot v. State, 846 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 4th 

DCA 2003); Sanchez v. State, 765 So. 2d 246 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Tiger v. State, 764 

So. 2d 824 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000).

NORTHCUTT, CASANUEVA, and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.
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 Skyview Development Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended
June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
“Report”), the undersigned certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best
of the undersigned’s knowledge, 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:
            August 11,
      2008
            By:
            /s/ Donald R.
      McKelveyDonald
      R. McKelvey, President(Principal
      Executive Officer)Dated:
            August 11,
      2008
            By:
            /s/ Donald R.
      McKelveyDonald
      R. McKelveyPrincipal
      Financial Officer