alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### BUTLER v. NEW ORLEANS PUBLIC SERVICE, Inc.*

No. 16574.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

March 22, 1937.

Peter G. Charbonnet, Jr., of New Orleans, for appellant.

Ivy G. Kittredge and M. A. Woodruff, both of New Orleans, for appellee.

*

 Rehearing denied April 19. 1937.

WESTERFIELD, Judge.

This is a suit for damages for physical injuries in the sum of $300 brought by Frank Butler, a young colored man about 23 years of age, against the New Orleans Public Service, Inc. Plaintiff alleges that while a passenger on a street car operated by the defendant corporation, he fell through the open door on the rear platform and suffered certain injuries described in his petition; that his fall was due to the negligent handling of the street car by defendant’s servants; that the car stopped suddenly as it reached Nashville avenue, plaintiff’s destination, the brakes having been applied in such a manner as to cause the car to skid along the rails and finally come to an abrupt and violent stop throwing plaintiff off balance and through the open door which the conductor had negligently opened while the car was in motion.

The defendant answered denying the charges of negligence imputed to its servants and averred that if the plaintiff was injured as he claims it was due entirely to the fact that he attempted to alight from a moving car.

There was judgment below in favor of the defendant, and plaintiff has appealed.

The record fails to prove that the car was stopped with any unusual jerk or jar, calculated to disturb plaintiff’s equilibrium and the clear preponderance of the evidence is to the effect that plaintiff voluntarily alighted either by jumping or stepping from the rear platform while the car was in motion, and that his fall and resulting injuries were due to tiffs act of imprudence.

The conductor did open the door before the car came to a stop, which appears to be the custom. It is insisted that it was negligent for him to do so, but, the open door has nothing to do with the • accident which, as we have said, was caused by the imprudent' action of plaintiff in voluntarily alighting from the car while it was in motion.

For the reasons assigned, the judgment appeal from is affirmed.

Affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of CEO and CFO 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 Paradise, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2010 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Melvin S. Gordon, as Chief Executive Officer of Paradise, Inc., certify 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 my knowledge:



| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and 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 Paradise, Inc.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |                                      |  |                    |  | 
| |  | ------------------------------------ |  | ------------------ |  | 
| |  | /s/ Melvin S. Gordon                 |  | Date: May 14, 2010 |  | 
| |  | Melvin S. Gordon                     |  |                    |  | 
| |  | Chief Executive Officer and Chairman |  |                    |  |
#### Ex Parte Albert Edwards

No. 25596.

October 6, 1951.

*Theo. Pat Henley,*San Antonio, for relator.

*Willis Gresham,*Assistant Attorney General, and *George P. Blackburn,*State’s Attorney, Austin, for the state.

*290Per Curiam.

Relator, under sentence of death, affirmed by this Court in Edwards v. State, No. 25,145, (Page 146 this volume), 239 S.W. (2d) 618, filed his application for habeas corpus before Hon. N. H. Kirby, Judge of the 77th Judicial District of Texas, alleging that he was illegally restrained by the warden of the penitentiary by reason of certain allegations shown in the application.

The order entered by the district judge granted this writ and made it returnable before this court as provided by Art. 119, Vernon’s Ann. C.C.P.

The state moves that the writ be refused, or dismissed, because the facts alleged, if true, would not entitle relator to relief, and moves that the cause be advanced and heard because the date set for the execution is near and has not been stayed.

From an inspection of the transcript, we are convinced that the facts alleged, if true, would not sustain a collateral attack upon the judgment.

In order to entitle relator to relief by habeas corpus, it was incumbent that he show that the judgment is void. See Ex parte Oliver, (Page 235 this volume), 140 S.W. (2) 316.

The application for habeas corpus should have been denied by the trial judge.

For the reasons stated, the state’s motion is granted, the relief prayed for is denied, and no motion for rehearing will be permitted to be filed.
#### Lavinia Lally, Appellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent.

Motion to resettle order denied, with costs. Present — Hirschberg, P. J., Woodward, Jenks, Gaynor and Miller, JJ.
#### Demuth Glass Manufacturing Company, Appellant, v. Joseph N. Early and Another, Respondents.

Order resettled so as to provide for a reversal of the j udgment as well as the order appealed from. Motion for reargument denied, without costs. Present — Woodward, Jenks, Hooker, Gaynor and Miller, JJ.
Exhibit 21.1

LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES



|                                          |  |                              |  | 
|----------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------- |  | 
|Name of Subsidiary                        |  | Jurisdiction ofIncorporation |  | 
|1. DSP Group Ltd.                         |  | Israel                       | 
|2. Nihon DSP K.K.                         |  | Japan                        | 
|3. RF Integrated Systems, Inc.            |  | Delaware, U.S.               | 
|4. DSPG Edinburgh Ltd.                    |  | Scotland                     | 
|6. DSP R&D Ireland Ltd.*                  |  | Ireland                      | 
|7. DSP Group Switzerland AG               |  | Switzerland                  | 
|8. DSPG Technologies GmbH                 |  | Germany                      | 
|9. DSP Group HK Limited                   |  | Hong Kong                    | 
|10. DSP Technology Indian Private Limited |  | India                        | 



|* | In liquidation as of December 31, 2009.
|- | ---------------------------------------
Exhibit 32.2
                                                                    ------------


                      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Levcor
         International, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June
         30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
         date hereof (the "Report"), I, Edward F. Cooke, Chief Financial Officer
         of the Company, certify, 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 6, 2004

By: /s/ EDWARD F. COOKE
    ----------------------------------
    Edward F. Cooke
    Chief Financial Officer

                                    Page 30
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 159 (Friday, August 15, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 47891]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18908]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XJ74


New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) is 
scheduling a public meeting of its Scallop Committee in September, 2008 
to consider actions affecting New England fisheries in the exclusive 
economic zone (EEZ). Recommendations from this group will be brought to 
the full Council for formal consideration and action, if appropriate.

DATES: This meeting will be held on Wednesday, September 10, 2008, at 9 
a.m. and Thursday, September 11, 2008, at 8:30 a.m.

ADDRESSES: 
    Meeting address: This meeting will be held at the Hotel Providence, 
311 Westminister Street, Providence, RI 02903; telephone: (401) 861-
8000; fax: (401) 861-8002.
    Council address: New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water 
Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, 
New England Fishery Management Council; telephone: (978) 465-0492.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The committee will review Section 7 
Endangered Species Act Consultation for the Scallop FMP (Biological 
Opinion) and develop potential management measures to comply with 
findings of biological opinion. The committee will also review input 
from Scallop Advisory Panel on development of Amendment 15 alternatives 
to date and discuss additional measures for consideration in Amendment 
15. The primary management topics include: implementation of annual 
catch limits (ACLs); measures to rationalize the limited access scallop 
fishery; revision of the overfishing definition; modifications to 
specific aspects of the general category limited entry program 
implemented by Amendment 11; measures to address EFH closed areas in 
the Scallop FMP if the EFH Omnibus Amendment is delayed; alternatives 
to improve the research set-aside program; and modifying the start date 
of the scallop fishing year. The committee may discuss other topics at 
their discretion.
    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. 
Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids 
should be directed to Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, at 978-465-
0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: August 12, 2008.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E8-18908 Filed 8-14-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 20, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49203-49204]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-19329]


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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Ocean Transportation Intermediary License Revocations

    The Federal Maritime Commission hereby gives notice that the 
following Ocean Transportation Intermediary licenses have been revoked 
pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. chapter 
409) and the regulations of the Commission pertaining to the licensing 
of Ocean Transportation Intermediaries, 46 CFR part 515, effective on 
the corresponding date shown below:

    License Number: 017378N.
    Name: M.W. Freight Forwarding Corp.
    Address: 0300 Northwest 19th Street, Ste. 104, Miami, FL 33172.
    Date Revoked: July 31, 2008.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.

    License Number: 017767N.
    Name: Empire Express, Inc.
    Address: 147-39 175th Street, Jamaica, NY 11434.
    Date Revoked: July 27, 2008.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.


[[Page 49204]]


    License Number: 020499F.
    Name: KOC Enterprise Inc.
    Address: 111 Lakeview Drive, Old Tappan, NJ 07675.
    Date Revoked: July 31, 2008.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.

    License Number: 020747N.
    Name: Prime Logistics Int'l, Inc.
    Address: 6900 NW 84th Avenue, Miami, FL 33166.
    Date Revoked: July 18, 2008.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.

    License Number: 019586NF.
    Name: USL Logistics, LLC.
    Address: 3621 S. Harbor Blvd., Suite 225, Santa Ana, CA 92704.
    Date Revoked: July 18, 2008.
    Reason: Failed to maintain valid bonds.

Sandra L. Kusumoto,
Director, Bureau of Certification and Licensing.
[FR Doc. E8-19329 Filed 8-19-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
EXHIBIT32.2

|   | (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      at the dates and for the periodsindicated. |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| By:                                                                                                                             | /s/ Paul F. Norris |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------|
|                                                                                                                            |
| Name:  Paul      F. Norris                                                                                            |
| Title:  Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and General Counsel |

----
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 83 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 H. R. 83

      To provide for the withholding of contributions to certain 
         organizations that assist Iraq, Iran, Libya, and Cuba.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 1995

 Mr. Diaz-Balart introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
            the Committee on Banking and Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To provide for the withholding of contributions to certain 
         organizations that assist Iraq, Iran, Libya, and Cuba.

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

SECTION 1. WITHHOLDING OF CONTRIBUTIONS TO CERTAIN INTERNATIONAL 
              FINANCIAL ORGANIZATIONS.

    The President shall withhold assessed and voluntary contributions 
of the United States to any international financial institution 
(including the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the 
International Development Bank) that furnishes any assistance of any 
kind to Iraq, Iran, Libya, or Cuba.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT
      12.1




CERTIFICATION




I,
      Weidong Hong, certify that:





1.  I
      have
      reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Yucheng Technologies
      Limited;





2.  Based
      on
      my knowledge, this 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 report;





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





4.  The
      company'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 company and 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 company, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
      is
      made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period
      in which this report is being prepared;





(b)  Evaluated
      the effectiveness of the company'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 report any change in the company's internal control over financial
      reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that
      has
      materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company's
      internal control over financial reporting; and





5.  The
      company's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
      recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company's
      auditors and the audit committee of the company's board of directors (or persons
      performing the equivalent functions):





(a)  All
      significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
      of
      internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
      adversely affect the company'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 company's internal control over financial
      reporting.





Date:
      June 22, 2007


/s/
                Weidong HongName:
                Weidong HongTitle:
                Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

             In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of MapInfo Corporation (the "Company") for the period ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, K. Wayne McDougall, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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.
ORDER

- 1 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18
19

20

21

22

23

24

25 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

LILES PARKER PLLC , Plaintiff

v.

HARVEST BANK OF MARYLAND
Defendant

.

__________________________________________ No. 11

- cv

- 1821 (BJR)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS COUNT II OF THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Before the court is Defendant Harvest Bank of Maryland’s (“Defendant”) Motion to
Dismiss Count II of the First Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 9.). Having reviewed the motion,
the opposition, and the reply thereto, as well as the relevant case law, the court hereby finds and

rules as follows.

This case in volves a fee dispute between a law firm and its former client. Plaintiff Liles
Parker PLLC (“Plaintiff”) alleges that Defendant breached the terms of the parties’ Engagement
Letter. Plaintiff seeks $101, 417.96 in damages, plus interest and costs.ORDER

- 2 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18
19

20

21

22

23

24

25 Plaintif f asserts two causes of action: (1) Count I

— Breach of Contract; and (2) Count

II

— Quantum Meruit. Defendant moves to dismiss the quantum m eruit claim, asserting that such
claims can only exist in the absence of a written agreement between the parties and wh en equity
renders it unjust for one party to retain money paid, or to not pay for services rendered. (Dkt. No.
9 at 1.). Here, Plaintiff alleges the existence of a wr itten agreement and incorporates the
allegation into Count II. Id . at 1

- 2.

Plaintiff counters that the quantum m eruit claim is all eged in the alternative to the breach

of c ontract claim, and that such a pleading is consistent with the Federal Rule s of Civil

Procedure . (Dkt. No. 10 at 1 citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(d)(3).). Plaintiff argues tha t in the event he

is unable to establish that a valid contract exists, he would be entitled to prosecute the unjust
enrichment claim. However, Defendant answered Count I of the Amended Complaint (on the
same day that it filed is reply to the instant motion ) and admitted the existence of a valid contract
between the parties. (Dkt. No. 12 at 1.).
In light of Defendant’s admission, the court will dismiss Count II of the First Amended
Complaint. See Harrington v. Trotman , 983 A.2d 342, 346

- 47 ( D.C. 2009) (h omeo wner could
not recover damages against contractor on unjust enrichment theory where parties’ relationship is
governed by written agreement); Schiff v. American Ass’ n of Retired Persons , 697 A.2d 1193,
1194 (D.C. 1997) (“[T]here can be no claim for unjust e nrichment when an express contrac t
exists between the parties.”).
Based on the foregoing, Count II of the First Amended Complaint is herebyORDER

- 3 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18
19

20

21

22

23

24

25 Barbara Jacobs Rothstein U.S. District Court Judge DISMISSED.

SO ORDERED this 3 0 t h day of April, 2012. 

# A
#### William Tabachnick, Appellant, v. Leopold Brand, Respondent.

Motion denied, without costs. Present—Hirschherg, P. J., Jenks, Gaynor, Rich and Miller, J J.
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4246

To require a study by the United States Sentencing Commission of sentencing

for drug offenses where domestic violence has been found to occur.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 27, 1996

Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania introduced the following bill; which was referred to

the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To require a study by the United States Sentencing Commission of sentencing for drug offenses where domestic violence has been found to occur.

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

3 That, not later than 180 days after the date of the enact4 ment of this Act, the United States Sentencing Commis5 sion shall submit a report to Congress concerning the ef6 fect of cocaine (both crack and powder) and other illicit

7 drugs on domestic violence. In this report the Commission

8 shall include—
2

•HR 4246 IH

1 (1) an analysis of the sentences imposed for of2 fenses involving such illicit drugs where domestic vi3 olence occurred and any recommendations for im4 proving sentencing in such cases; and

5 (2) such other recommendations with respect to

6 the offenses described in this section as the Commis7 sion deems appropriate.

Æ