alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### HAWKE v. SERVICISED PRODUCTS CORPORATION et al.

No. 7415.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

April 5, 1938.

Geo. S. Hawke, of Cincinnati, Ohio (H. Henry Sundermann, of Cincinnati, Ohio, on the brief), for appellant.

John H. More, of Cincinnati,' Ohio (Franklin R. Overmyer and Petit, Olin & Overmyer, all of Chicago, Ill., and Taft, Stettinius & Hollister, of Cincinnati, Ohio, on the brief), for appellees.

Before HICKS, and SIMONS, Circuit Judges, and FORD, District Judge.

FORD, District Judge.

This is an appeal from an order dismissing the action without prejudice because of plaintiff’s failure to obey an order of the court.

The only parts of the record brought up by the appellant relating to the judgment appealed from are certain orders of the court showing the filing of claims to funds attached, the appointment of an auditor “for the purpose of hearing all matters relating to accounting herein,” the overruling of exceptions filed by the plaintiff, the confirmation of the auditor’s report, the allowance of compensation to the auditor for his services, the requirement that plaintiff pay the sum allowed the auditor, the failure of the plaintiff to make payment in compliance with the order, and the dismissal without prejudice on account thereof.

The transcript, contains none of the pleadings. The portions of the record brought here are entirely insufficient to show the nature of the case or the issues involved.

It is elementary that appellate courts do not presume error, but grant relief only m cases where it is affirmatively made to appear that error has been committed. Mercantile Trust Co. v. Hensey, 205 U.S. 298, 306, 27 S.Ct. 535, 51 L.Ed. 811, 10 Ann.Cas. 572.

It is the duty of the appellant to bring up sufficient portions of the record to affirmatively show the error claimed. Loring v. Frue, 104 U.S. 223, 224, 26 L.Ed. 713; Kearney v. Denn ex dem. Sansbury, 15 Wall. 51, 56, 21 L.Ed. 41.

Having nothing before us but the orders complained of, upon the face of which no error is disclosed, the presumption must prevail that the court acted properly, in the *711appropriate exercise of judicial discretion and upon lawful grounds.

 The appellant also assigns error to and seeks review of numerous intermediate orders upon matters wholly unrelated to the order from which the appeal is taken. The dismissal without prejudice for the failure of the plaintiff to comply with a particular order of the court involved no determination of the merits of the case. Upon appeal from such an order, the scope of review in the appellate court is limited by the nature of the decision from which the appeal is taken and does not embrace questions which have no relation to it. Old Colony Trust Co. v. City of Seattle, 271 U.S. 426, 429, 46 S.Ct. 552, 553, 70 L.Ed. 1019. However, if such questions were open for our review, we would be unable to do so upon the fragmentary record before us.

Judgment affirmed.
**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**





The
      undersigned, Asher Zwebner, the Interim Chief Executive Officer and Chief
      Financial Officer of PCMT Corporation (the “Company”), certifies, under the
      standards set forth and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his
      knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter
      ended March 31, 2008, 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.




Date:
      May
      15, 2008





By:
            /s/
                Asher ZwebnerName:
            Asher
                ZwebnerTitle:
            Interim
                Chief Executive Officerand
                Chief Financial Officer





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.
#### Charles A. Hottle et al., Appellants, v Jeff A. Sansevera, Respondent.

[677 NYS2d 607]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County *790(Mastro, J.), dated March 21, 1997, which, upon a jury verdict finding the defendant 75% at fault in the happening of the accident and a jury verdict on the issue of damages in favor of the defendant, denied the plaintiffs’ motion, *inter alia,*pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a) to set aside the verdict on damages in favor of the defendant.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We reject the plaintiffs’ claim that the verdict was not supported by legally sufficient evidence, as it has not been shown that there was “no valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences which could possibly lead rational men to the conclusion reached by the jury on the basis of the evidence presented at trial” *(Cohen v Hallmark Cards,*45 NY2d 493, 499; *Nicastro v Park,*113 AD2d 129, 132).

Contrary to the plaintiffs’ claims, the verdict was not contrary to the weight of the evidence as it has not been shown that “ ‘the jury could not have reached the verdict on any fair interpretation of the evidence’ ” *(Nicastro v Park, supra,*at 134, quoting *Delgado v Board of Educ.,*65 AD2d 547, *affd*48 NY2d 643; *Tripoli v Tripoli,*83 AD2d 764, *affd*56 NY2d 684). Miller, J. P., Krausman, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.
#### Oscar M. Edgerley, Appellant, v. Samuel P. Blackburn and Eugene H. Morse, Respondents.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Ho opinion.

Clarke and Scott, JJ., dissented.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           9,761
<SECURITIES>                                    17,876
<RECEIVABLES>                                       83
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                28,403
<PP&E>                                           3,189
<DEPRECIATION>                                     871
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  32,712
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,414
<BONDS>                                          1,750
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            10
<OTHER-SE>                                      29,188
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    21,712
<SALES>                                            184
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   189
<CGS>                                               55
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   14,582
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 139
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (12,547)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         2
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (12,549)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (12,549)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.32)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.32)


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 99.1
                                                                    ------------

                            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 annual report of AMB Financial Corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I
Clement B. Knapp, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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



Date:         April 3, 2003                /s/ Clement B. Knapp
            ------------------             -------------------------------------
                                           Clement B. Knapp
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

February 26, 2016

Order 

February 26, 2016

152743(43)

CLAY W. LONG,

Plaintiff/Counter DefendantAppellant,

v

HARBOR POINT ASSOCIATION,

Defendant/Counter Plaintiff/Third

Party Plaintiff-Appellee,

and

LYNSEY LONG,

Third Party Defendant.

SC: 152743

COA: 322327

Emmet CC: 2013-103876-CH

________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of the Meisner Law Group, P.C., to 

withdraw as counsel for plaintiff/counter defendant-appellant is GRANTED. The case 

will proceed to a decision on the existing application for leave to appeal and with 

plaintiff/counter defendant-appellant being listed as acting in propria persona unless and 

until another attorney files an appearance on his behalf.
MIE 800 Generic Notice of Hearing (Rev. 3/98)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

JONATHAN WILKOF,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

CARACO PHARMACEUTICAL

LABORATORIES, LTD,

Defendant(s).

/

CASE NUMBER: 09-12830

HONORABLE ARTHUR J. TARNOW

NOTICE OF:

STATUS/SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

You are hereby notified to appear before the Honorable Arthur J. Tarnow, United States District

Judge for the above proceeding on:

DATE TIME ROOM 124

TUESDAY, JANUARY 12, 2010 2:30 p.m. Theodore Levin U.S. Courthouse

231 W. Lafayette

Detroit, Michigan 48226

Please be prepared to discuss the following:

1. A brief summary to the Court of the case and issues;

2. Settlement offers and counteroffers;

3. Subject matter jurisdiction;

4. Relationship to other cases; and

5. Necessity of amendments to pleadings, additional parties, third-party complaints.

6. Someone with settlement authority must be present.

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

I hereby certify that a copy of this notice was served upon on this date December 9, 2009 by

ordinary mail or electronically.

Date: December 9, 2009 s/Theresa E. Taylor

Deputy Clerk 313-234-5182

Case 2:09-cv-12830-AJT-DAS Document 18 Filed 12/09/2009 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated financial statements of Paramark Enterprises, Inc. as of
December 31, 1999 and the fiscal year then ended, and it is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<NAME>                             PARAMARK ENTERPRISES INC
<CIK>                              0000915661

<S>                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                     JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                       DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                 195,997
<SECURITIES>                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                          847,962
<ALLOWANCES>                            87,500
<INVENTORY>                            279,326
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                     1,346,583
<PP&E>                               1,117,361
<DEPRECIATION>                         249,397
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                       2,214,547
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  984,659
<BONDS>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        0
<PREFERRED>                                  0
<COMMON>                                33,935
<OTHER-SE>                             969,272
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>         2,214,547
<SALES>                              4,392,570
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                     4,392,570
<CGS>                                3,481,847
<TOTAL-COSTS>                        5,459,373
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                      (68,341)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      18,232
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    (1,016,694)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                (1,016,694)
<DISCONTINUED>                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              0
<CHANGES>                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                       (1,016,694)
<EPS-BASIC>                             (0.30)
<EPS-DILUTED>                           (0.30)


</TABLE>
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by
reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Form S-8 Nos. 333-140233, 333-135220, 333-131324, 333-126773, 333-112417, 333-108937 and 333-147561) pertaining to the Amended and Restated 1991 Employee and Consultant Stock Plan, the Amended
and Restated 1993 Director Stock Option Plan, the Amended and Restated 1993 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, the Amended and Restated 2001 Stock Incentive Plan and 2003 Israeli Share Option Plan of DSP Group Inc. and its subsidiaries of our reports
dated March 16, 2008, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of DSP Group Inc. and its subsidiaries, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of DSP Group Inc. included in this Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007.



/s/    KOST FORER GABBAY & KASSIERERKost Forer Gabbay & Kassierer A Member of
Ernst & Young Global


Tel-Aviv, Israel

March 16, 2008
1

The Honorable Richard H. Battey, United States District Judge for the District

of South Dakota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-3849

___________

Kennith S. Stoehr, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

Tim Reisch, Secretary of Corrections; * District of South Dakota.

Daryl R. Slykhuis, Deputy Warden; *

Doug Weber, Warden, South Dakota * [UNPUBLISHED]

State Penitentiary; Rodney Brockoft, *

Lt. in charge of DHO; South Dakota *

Department of Corrections, *

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: February 2, 2007

Filed: February 7, 2007

___________

Before RILEY, MAGILL, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Kennith S. Stoehr appeals the adverse grant of summary judgment entered by

the district court1

 in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Following de novo review, we agree

with the district court that defendants’ uncontroverted evidence showed Stoehr’s due
-2-

process rights were not violated at his prison disciplinary proceedings. We also find

no abuse of discretion in the denial of Stoehr’s motion for counsel. Accordingly, we

affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________
#### Martha J. O’Malley, Individually and as Trustee of Mary K. Kaufman, under the Last Will and Testament of Isaac C. Fenton, Deceased, Respondent, v. George R. Adams and William Fenton Adams, as Executors, etc., of Emma E. *920Adams, Deceased, Appellants, and Others.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. All concurred.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                  1,000
<CASH>                                           1,706
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      985
<ALLOWANCES>                                        71
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,359
<PP&E>                                           3,452
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,593
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  15,230
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,664
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           101
<OTHER-SE>                                       5,169
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    15,230
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                25,455
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   16,760
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,198
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  26
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    471
<INCOME-TAX>                                       168
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                303
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       303
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .03


</TABLE>
[No. 28915.

Department One.

February 5, 1943.]

#### *In the Matter of the Petition of*Floyd G. Richardson for *a Writ of Habeas Corpus.*
      *1*

*Floyd*G. *Richardson, pro se.*

*The Attorney General*and *Shirley R. Marsh, Assistant,*and *B. Gray Warner,*for respondent.

Reported in 133 P. (2d) 810.

Per Curiam.

— This case was heard upon the petition of Floyd G. Richardson for a writ of *habeas corpus.*

It appears from the record that petitioner was, on October 23, 1924, charged by information in Cause No. 12133 in the superior court of the state of Washington for King county with the crime of murder in the first degree; that, on January 30, 1925, a jury duly empaneled in that cause found him guilty of the included crime of manslaughter, and that no judgment and sentence has ever been entered on that verdict.

The record further discloses that an information was filed on March 12, 1925, in the same cause (No. 12133), charging petitioner with being an habitual criminal. Plea of not guilty was entered, a trial had, and a verdict of guilty returned by the jury on June 4, 1925. He was sentenced on that verdict on June 10, 1925, and is held in custody under that verdict, sentence, and the ensuing commitment thereon.

These facts bring the matter within our holdings in the cases of *Blake v. Mahoney,*9 Wn. (2d) 110, 113 P. (2d) 1028; *In re Cress,*13 Wn. (2d) 7, 123 P. (2d) 767, and *In re Towne,*14 Wn. (2d) 633, 129 P. (2d) 230. It is therefore ordered, and we now direct, as follows: The superintendent of the state penitentiary shall deliver the petitioner into the custody of the sheriff of King county for sentence by the superior court of that county on the verdict of the jury holding him guilty of manslaughter returned on January 30, 1925, taken in connection with the jury’s finding on June 4, 1925.

If, at the expiration of thirty days from the time of petitioner’s delivery into the custody of the sheriff of King county, he shall not have been sentenced on the manslaughter verdict, he may apply to this court for final judgment on his petition.
Exhibit
31.1




CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER




I, Carl
Oberg, President and Chief Executive Officer of Classic Costume Company, Inc.,
(the “Registrant”), certify that:




1.    I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Registrant;




2.    Based
on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of
a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;




3.    Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;




4.    The
Registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and we have:




(a)    designed
such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;




(b)    evaluated
the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and




(c)    disclosed
in this quarterly report any change in the Registrant’s internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the Registrant’s most recent fiscal
quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;
and




5.    The
Registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
Registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of Registrant’s board of
directors:




(a)    all
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the Registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and




(b)    any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the Registrant’s internal controls over financial
reporting.




Dated:
May 16, 2008




/s/
      Carl Oberg
              
              Carl
      ObergPresident
      and Chief Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)