alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### CLAUDE NEON FEDERAL CO., Inc., v. MEYER BROS., Inc.

No. 14532.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

Nov. 27, 1933.

For former opinion, see 150 So. 410.

Miller, Bloch & Martin and T. 1⁄8. Martin, all of New Orleans, for petitioner.

PER CURIAM.

In our opinion, Act No. 16 of 1910 requires applications for rehearings in eases appealed from the First city court of the city of New Orleans to be filed before the sixth day. This application, having been presented to the clerk of this court for filing on November 13, 1933, or 14 days after the case was decided, comes too late. Valmont Service Station v. Avegno, 3 La. App. 335; O. K. Realty Co. v. Juliani, Inc., 157 La. 277, 102 So. 399; Yazoo & Miss. Valley R. Co. v. Marx & Sons, 17 La. App. 172, 135 So. 675, decided July 1, 1931.

Consequently, for the reasons herein given, the application for rehearing presented on behalf of Claude Neon Federal Company, Inc., plaintiff and appellant, is hereby ordered returned to counsel without having been considered by this court.
Order entered December 9, 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 14 - 01450 - CV PATRICK THOBE, Appellant

V. THE UNIVERSITY OF TE XAS SOUTHWESTERN MED ICAL CENTER, Appellee

On Appeal from the 44th Judicial District Court

D allas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC - 12 - 14434



### O RDER Appellant Patrick Thobe’s December 8, 2015 motion to supplement his brief is GRANTED , and the supplemental brief attached as Exhibit A to appellant’s motion is ORDERED filed as of this date.

/s/ MOLLY FRANCIS PRESIDING JUSTICE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS OF SEL-DRUM INTERNATIONAL INC. FOR THE TWELVE MONTH PERIOD
ENDED JULY 31, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-2000
<CASH>                                          32,190
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,301,725
<ALLOWANCES>                                    33,460
<INVENTORY>                                  3,861,037
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,317,481
<PP&E>                                       1,597,861
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,110,904
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,387,576
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,428,651
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  4,499,805
<COMMON>                                        74,175
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,166,214
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,387,576
<SALES>                                     15,372,469
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            15,372,469
<CGS>                                       10,793,712
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,793,712
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,580,767
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   348
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              50,653
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                949,293
<INCOME-TAX>                                   331,786
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            617,507
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   617,507
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .08


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23.1


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We  hereby  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in  the  Registration
Statements  on Form S-8 (SEC  File  Nos.  333-68801,  333-62767,  333-13887  and
333-07409) and on Form S-3 (SEC File Nos.  333-63991,  333-23317 and 333-11391 )
of our report  dated  April 22,  2005,  relating to the  consolidated  financial
statements of Oryx Technology  Corp. for the year ended February 28, 2005, which
appears in this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB.



/s/ Burr, Pilger & Mayer LLP


Palo Alto, California
May 26, 2005
#### Wheeling & Lake Erie Ry. Co. *v.*Northwestern Ohio Ry. & Power Co. et al.

(No. 23701

Decided October 26, 1932.)

*Mr. John W. Hackett, Mr. Charles H. Graves, Messrs. Squire, Sanders & Dempsey*and *Mr. F. B. Shorn,*for plaintiff in error.

*Messrs. Tracy, Chapman & Welles,*for defendants in error.

*650It is ordered and adjudged that said petition in error he, and the same is hereby, dismissed for the reason no debatable constitutional question is involved in said cause.

*Petition in error dismissed.*

Marshall, C. J., Matthias, Day, Kinkade and Stephenson, JJ., concur.
178 La. 191

#### ROBIN v. MISTRIC.

No. 31818.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 30, 1933.

Oscar J. Mistric, in pro. per.

William Alexander Robertson, of Opelous-as, for appellee.

OVERTON, Justice.

This is a suit, coupled with a writ of sequestration, to recover certain notes and documents, a loose-leaf mortgage book, a cashbook, a daybook, a ledger, a journal, and certain vouchers claimed by plaintiff.

Pierre Mistric, the husband of plaintiff, died, leaving an estate valued at $208,119.77, *75consisting principally of farm lands, mortgage notes, bonds, and securities. One-balf of this estate belonged to plaintiff, as widow in community, and the remaining half was willed by her deceased husband to plaintiff’s nine children, though not altogether in equal portions. Plaintiff purchased from her children their interest in the estate, and thereby became the owner of the whole.

Plaintiff needed an agent and attorney to look after the estate for her. She appointed her son, the defendant herein, whom his father had named as one ■ of his legatees, to serve both as her lawyer and as her agent; Defendant, as hiS mother’s agent, took charge of the estate, and, with assistance, kept books, showing his transactions, receipts, and disbursements, as agent, and besides came1 into possession of notes and various documents belonging to plaintiff.

Plaintiff made an effort to obtain an accounting from defendant, but defendant failed to render an account of his agency. Plaintiff thereupon revoked the power of .attorney she had given defendant, and later brought the1 present suit to recover her papers, notes, and books.

In his answer, defendant asserts ownership of the books, documents, and other papers. The evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of plaintiff on the entire case. The trial judge rendered judgment in favor of plaintiff,' decreeing her to be the owner of the propérty seized under the writ of sequestration, and directing that it be delivered to her, but reserving to defendant the right to exámine the books, vouchers, and other papers at reasonable. times, under plaintiff’s supervision, or under the supervision of her attorney.

Defendant has made no appearance to point out error in the judgment, and'we fail to find error therein.

The judgment is affirmed at defendant’s costs.
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

     I,  Dennis  Sunshine, Chief Executive Officer of Orbit International Corp.,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.   1350, as enacted by  906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act  of  2002,  that:
(1)     the  Quarterly  Report  on  Form  10-QSB  for the quarterly period ended
September  30,  2006  (the  "Periodic  Report") which this statement accompanies
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange  Act  of  1934;  and
(2)     information  contained  in  the  Periodic Report fairly presents, in all
material  respects,  the  financial condition and results of operations of Orbit
International  Corp.

Dated: November 10, 2006
                                   /s/ Dennis Sunshine
                                   -------------------
                                   Dennis Sunshine
                                   Chief Executive Officer

A  signed  original  of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document  authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears  in  typed  form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Orbit International Corp. and will
be  retained  by  Orbit  International Corp. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange  Commission  or  its  staff  upon  request.
#### Tina Myers, Respondent, *v.*Andreas Fox, as Executor, etc., of Franziska Knoth, Deceased, Appellant.

Second Department,

November 27, 1908.

Costs — verdict set aside on condition — taxable costs.

Where a verdict for the plaintiff is set aside and a new trial granted on condition that the defendant pay “ the costs of the trial already had and the disbursements to the date of the order,” the plaintiff is not entitled to tax costs before notice of trial and term fees, for the purpose of the condition is to reimburse him for the disbursements incurred and services performed which were rendered futile by the order setting aside the verdict, that is to say, the services which will have to be performed again.

Appeal by the defendant, Andreas Fox, as executor, etc., from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the Kings County Special Term and entered in the office of the cleric of the county of Kings on the 15th day of July, 1908, denying the defendant’s motion for a retaxation of costs.

*Katz*& *Sommerich,*for the appellant.

*Louis Weinberger [Jacob Weinberger*with him on the brief], for the respondent.

*32Miller, J.:

In this case a verdict for the plaintiff was set aside and a new trial was granted on condition that the defendant pay *“*the costs of the trial already had and the disbursements to the date of the order.”

On this appeal we are required to construe the terms imposed as the condition of granting the new trial. The clerk taxed all of the costs of the action to the date of the order, including the costs before notice of trial, fifteen dollars, and four term fees, forty dollars, and the order appealed from denied a motion for retaxation.

The purpose of the condition is to reimburse the successful party at the trial for the disbursements incurred and the services performed which are rendered futile by the order setting aside the verdict. Had it been intended to allow all costs of the action the order would have so stated. The costs after notice of trial, fifteen dollars, and the trial fee, thirty dollars, are allowed for services which will have to he performed again, and are the costs intended to be imposed by the order. The items of fifteen dollars costs before notice of trial and forty dollars term fees should be disallowed.

The order is reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion for retaxation in accordance herewith is granted, with ten dollars costs.

Woodward, Jenks, Gaynor and Rich, JJ., concurred.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion for retaxation granted in accordance with opinion, with ten dollars costs.
224 So.2d 588

#### Hoyt B. HAMILTON, as Principal Judge of the Court of County Commissioners, etc. v. Clyde MORROW et al., etc.

7 Div. 769.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

June 12, 1969.

Burnham, Klinefelter & Halsey, Anniston, for appellant.

Embry & Robinson, Pell City, Gerald Swann, Ashville, Hawkins, Rhea & Mitch*229ell, Gadsden,' Fred Blanton, Birmingham, for appellees.

LIVINGSTON, Chief Justice.

Respondent in a mandamus proceeding in the Circuit Court of St. Clair County, Alabama, appeals from a purported judgment, dated December 10, 1966, granting a peremptory writ of mandamus.

The petition was filed by all four members of the Court of County Commissioners of St. Clair County, joined by five employees of the county and others similarly situated. The respondent (appellant) is the principal judge of said Commissioners’ Court. Title 12, Sec. 5, Code of 1940, Recompiled in 1958.

The judgment from which the appeal was taken reads as follows:

> “The issues being joined by the Complainants on the answer by the Respondent a judgment in favor of the Complainant on the petition as amended and the Respondent Hoyt B. Hamilton is ordered and directed to sign the checks as prepared and made out by the Clerk of the Court of County Commissioners and the County Treasurer of St. Clair County, which signature is in conformity with the resolution adopted by all four members of the County Commissioners on September 28, 1966.”

Appellees move this Court to dismiss the appeal because the judgment from which this appeal is taken is not final within the purview of Sec. 1074, Title 7, Code 1940, Recompiled in 1958. We think the motion has merit.

The purported judgment of the lower court is, we think, also insufficient in that as it reads in the record it has no more of a binding effect than a minute entry or bench note of the trial court. And no citation is required to say that a minute entry or bench note is not an appealable order or decree. Only where the lower court’s formal decree recites that “it is ordered and adjudged by the court,” or “it is the judgment of the court that,” or words of equivalent import, does such decree or. judgment take on' the character of a final judgment from which an appeal may be taken. Bronson v. Youngblood, 276 Ala. 14, 158 So.2d 656; Wynn v. McCraney, 156 Ala. 630, 46 So. 854.

Because the decree of the lower court in. the instant case lacks the essential elements of finality as discussed, supra, it is ordered that the appeal in this case be, and the same is, dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

lawson, Merrill’ and Harwood, JJ., concur.
Exhibit
32.1





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





Not Filed
Pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934








In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Princeton Security Technologies,
Inc.  (the “Company”) on Form 10Q for the period ending June 30, 2009,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof )the
“Report”), I, Juhani Taskinen, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer
and President 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.





Dated:
August 17, 2009








/s/  Juhani
Taskinen





Name:
Juhani Taskinen





Title:  Chief
Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                                             
<ARTICLE>                                   5
<CIK>                                       0000916122
<NAME>                                      Arch Communications, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                1,000
<CURRENCY>                                  USD
                                                   
<S>                                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                     YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      Dec-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                         Jan-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                           Dec-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                                  1
<CASH>                                                          22
<SECURITIES>                                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                               30,753
<ALLOWANCES>                                                 6,583
<INVENTORY>                                                 10,319
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                            49,101
<PP&E>                                                     428,173
<DEPRECIATION>                                             209,128
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             894,585
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                       86,939
<BONDS>                                                    620,629
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                            0
<PREFERRED>                                                      0
<COMMON>                                                         0
<OTHER-SE>                                                 159,782
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                               894,585
<SALES>                                                     42,481
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                           413,635
<CGS>                                                       29,953
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                               29,953
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                            80,782
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                             8,545
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          68,094
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                           (165,383)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                       (165,383)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                             (1,720)
<CHANGES>                                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                              (167,103)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                 0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                 0.00
        
 

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER>    1000
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1998
<CASH>                                             266
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    19874
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      27775
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 50860
<PP&E>                                           86381
<DEPRECIATION>                                   29751
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  111758
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            19999
<BONDS>                                          32894
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            72
<OTHER-SE>                                       48173
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    111758
<SALES>                                         151431
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                151431
<CGS>                                           122945
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   122945
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                2296
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   9009
<INCOME-TAX>                                      2802
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               6207
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      6207
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .87
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .86
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

        In connection with the Annual Report on Form10-K of Webco Industries, Inc. (the "Company") for the year ended July 31, 2003as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the"Report"), I, Michael P. Howard, Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financialand Accounting Officer) of the Company, certify as of the date hereof, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that, based on my knowledge:        1. The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and         2. The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.        This certification is deemed to accompany thisAnnual Report on Form 10-K, but is not deemed "filed" for purpose of Section 18of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise.Dated: October 28, 2003 

/s/ Michael P. Howard Michael P. Howard Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
**Exhibit 32.1**

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES - OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with theAnnual Report of Protection One, Inc. and Protection One Alarm Monitoring, Inc.(the “Companies”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2006  (the “Report”), which this certificationaccompanies, I, Richard Ginsburg, in my capacity as President and ChiefExecutive Officer of the Companies, certify that to the best of my knowledgethe Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Companies.

 
| Date: March 16, 2007 | /s/     Richard  Ginsburg                                                      |   |
|----------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                 | Richard Ginsburg                                                                                        |   |
|                 | President and Chief  Executive Officer, Protection One, Inc. and Protection One  Alarm Monitoring, Inc. |

 

 

 

The foregoingcertification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes– Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Companies as part ofthe Report or as a separate disclosure document for purposes of Section 18 orany other provision of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

----