alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       2,250,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               16,291,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (449,000)
<INVENTORY>                                 17,338,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            37,824,000
<PP&E>                                      97,509,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              33,727,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             111,274,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       16,755,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     8,975,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  63,096,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               111,274,000
<SALES>                                     23,700,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            23,700,000
<CGS>                                       17,486,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               21,934,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (15,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             447,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,334,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   472,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            862,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   862,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### Dee O. Wilkinson and Mrs. Dee O. Wilkinson v. State.

No. 24592.

January 11, 1950.

*138No attorney for appellant of record on appeal.

*E. W. Boedeker,*County Attorney, Levelland, and *George P. Blackburn,*State’s Attorney, Austin, for the state

GRAVES, Judge.

Both appellants were convicted by the jury and each fined the sum of $100.00 for the unlawful possession of whisky in a dry area.

The testimony shows that Lubbock County is a dry area under the law. On the date in question the sheriff of that county, his deputy, and a Texas Liquor Control Board Agent, being in possession of a search warrant, approached the home of the appellants; that Mrs. Wilkinson ran into the house immediately and began to break some bottles which evidently contained whisky. She broke five bottles, but the officer following her found two bottles which were not broken. No defense was offered, and we think the testimony was sufficient to show guilt.

There are no bills of exception in the record.

No error appearing, the judgment will be affirmed.
#### Ex Parte Neal Edgar Aeby.

No. 24784.

March 22, 1950.

*Hardin & Hardin,*Fort Worth, for appellant.

*George P. Blackburn,*State’s Attorney, Austin, for the state.

GRAVES, Judge.

Appellant was indicted for robbery with firearms. He presented his application for writ of habeas corpus to the district judge who, after hearing the evidence, refused to grant bail.

Testifying in his own behalf the appellant said he realized he was indicted for a capital offense and expressed a belief that he could make a reasonable bond. He indicated no defense to the charge. Bondsmen from the city of Dallas stated that they could *392make bond for him in a reasonable amount, and suggested that a $10,000.00 bond would be reasonable.

The evidence shows that the manager of a grocery store and his wife were working late at night. As they left the store the wife preceded her husband and, while the husband was looking back in the store, appellant drew a gun on the wife and forced her to turn back. The husband protested this action and appellant cursed him and struck him on the cheek with a pistol, inflicting a painful and serious wound, and threatened to kill him as he forced him to open the safe. He had required the wife to lie down on the floor while forcing the husband to secure the money from the safe, which amounted to about $250.00. He then took the money, threw the checks handed to him on the floor, and walked away.

There is no evidence whatsoever in this record to mitigate the circumstances above detailed. The state announced they would ask the death penalty. The trial court heard this evidence and we are not in position to say, under the circumstances detailed, that he abused his discretion in refusing bail.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
#### In the Matter of the Judicial Settlement of the Account of George Leask and Others, as Trustees of the Trusts Created in and by the Last Will and Testament of Hudson Hoagland, Deceased, Respondents. Dorothy Racilia Hoagland, Appellant.

Decree affirmed, with costs. No opinion. (Clarke, J., dissented.)
#### Aubrey Merkel v. State.

No. 24547.

December 14, 1949.

No attorney for appellant of record on appeal.

*George P. Blackburn,*State’s Attorney, Austin, for the state.

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was indicted for rape of Kathrine Hapak, a little girl three years of age, but the trial resulted in a conviction for assault with intent to rape, punishment being assessed, at 10 years in the penitentiary.

No bills of exception appear in the record. The state’s case, in the main, was made out by the testimony of the little girl’s six-year-old brother, and of a physician who examined the little girl shortly after the assault.

It would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state to set out the sordid details of the facts upon which the state relies for a conviction. It is sufficient to state that they support the verdict and judgment.

*68Appellant’s evidence raised the issue of alibi, which was properly submitted to the jury, but decided adversely to appellant.

The judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit 99.3


                      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 March 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Robert A. Levinson, Chief Executive 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: May 15, 2003


By:/s/ Robert A. Levinson
-------------------------
Robert A. Levinson
Chief Executive 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.
<PAGE>


                                                                      EXHIBIT 12

          PG&E GAS TRANSMISSION, NORTHWEST CORPORATION
          SEC FILING - FORM 10-Q - Third Quarter 2001
          EXHIBIT 12 - RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES



                                               For the Nine Months Ended
                                               -------------------------
          Ratio of earnings to Fixed Charges        2001       2000
          ----------------------------------   ------------  -----------
          (Dollars in millions)
          ---------------------
          Earnings
             Net income                             $  56.4    $  43.3
          Adjustments:
             Income taxes                              28.8       27.4
             Fixed charges (as below)                  29.2       30.6
                                                    -------    -------
                   Total adjusted earnings          $ 114.4    $ 101.3
                                                    =======    =======


        Fixed charges:
             Net interest expense                   $  28.6    $  30.2
          Adjustments:
             Interest component of rents                0.3        0.0
             AFUDC debt                                 0.3        0.4
                                                    -------    -------
                   Total fixed charges              $  29.2    $  30.6
                                                    =======    =======


        Ratio of earnings to fixed charges              3.9        3.3
                                                    =======    =======
1

M otion GRANTED and Order filed March 28, 2014

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 14

- 00248

- CV

____________ IN RE PRODIGY SERVIC ES, LLC , Relator

O RIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 234th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2012

- 35849



### ORDER

On M arch 28, 2014, relator Prodigy Services, LLC, filed a petition for writ
of mandamus in this court. Relator asks this court to order the Honorable Wesley Ward, Judge of the 234th District Court, in Harris County, Texas, to dismiss the Office of the Attorney General from the underlying suit, set aside his order denying relator’s motion to release liens, c onclude discovery in the underlying2

case, and set aside his order denying relator’s motion to disburse settlement funds
entered in trial court number 2012

- 35849, styled Prodigy Services, LLC v. ENI US Operating Company, Inc. Relator claims respondent abused his discretion by allowing the Office of the Attorney General to intervene in the underlying lawsuit, by reopening discovery, and refusing to disburse settlement funds to relator

. Relator has also filed a motion for tempora ry stay of proceedings below.
See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(b), 52.10. On March 28, 2014, relator ask ed this court to stay proceedings in the trial court pending a decision on the petition for writ of
mandamus.
It appears from the facts stated in the petition and motion that relator’s request for relief requires further consideration and that relator will be prejudiced unless immediate temporary relief is granted. We therefore GRANT relator’s
amended motion and issue the following order:

We ORDER the March 31 , 2014 hearing on the motion to disburse funds
and the motion to enforce the settlement in trial court cause number 2012

- 35849 , Prodigy Services, LLC v. ENI US Operating Company, Inc. , STAYED until a final decision by this court on relator’s petition for w rit of mandamus, or unt il further
order of this court

.
PER CURIAM
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of PG&E Corporation for the quarter
ended March 31, 2011 (Form 10-Q), I, C. Lee Cox, Interim Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, and President of PG&E Corporation, hereby certify 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 my knowledge and belief, that:



| | (1) | the Form 10-Q 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 Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of PG&E Corporation.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



C. LEE COXC. LEE COXInterim Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, and President


May 4, 2011



---

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of PG&E Corporation for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 (Form 10-Q), I, Kent M. Harvey, Senior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer of PG&E Corporation, hereby certify 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 my knowledge and belief, that:



| | (1) | the Form 10-Q 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 Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of PG&E Corporation.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



KENT M. HARVEYKENT M. HARVEYSenior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer


May 4, 2011
six_Ex10_51


		
			Exhibit 10.51
		

		
			Amendment No. 1
		

		
			to
		

		
			Employment Agreement 
		

		
			 
		

		
			This Amendment No. 1 (“Amendment”), dated as of February 18, 2020 between Six Flags Entertainment Corporation and Michael Spanos amends that certain Employment Agreement, dated as of October 24, 2019 (the “Agreement”) between Six Flags Entertainment Corporation and Michael Spanos.  Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed thereto in the Agreement. 
		

			
	
			
				 1.
			Subsection (b) of Section 3 Compensation of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: 




		
			“(b)  Annual Bonus.  Executive shall have a target bonus opportunity (“Target Bonus”) of 150% of Base Salary during the Term commencing with the 2021 calendar year performance year.  Any annual bonus payable to Executive shall be paid during the calendar year following the calendar year performance year and no later than five days following the filing of the Company’s Form 10-K for the performance year (or, if the Company is not required to or does not file a Form 10-K, no later than five days following the completion of the audit of the applicable performance year).  Notwithstanding the foregoing, Executive shall be treated as having a Target Bonus throughout the entire Term for purposes of all other Sections of this Agreement of 150% of Base Salary.”
		

			
	
			
				 2.
			Except as set forth in this Amendment, the Agreement remains in full force and effect. 




		
			 
		

		
			IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned execute this Amendment as of the date set forth above. 
		

		
			 
		

			
					
						 

					
					
						 

				
	
					
						 

				
	
					
						Date:  February 18, 2020

					
					
						SIX FLAGS ENTERTAINMENT CORPORATION

				
	
					
						 

					
					
						By: /s/ Kathy Aslin

				
	
					
						 

					
					
						Title: Senior Vice President, Human Resources

				
	
					
						 

					
						 

					
						Date:  February 18, 2020

					
						

					
					
						

					
						 

					
						By: /s/ Michael Spanos

					
						Michael Spanos
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Hellfried Sartori, Appellant.

[676 NYS2d 508]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Angiolillo, J.), rendered April 8, 1996, convicting him of unauthorized practice of a profession (two counts) and criminally possessing a hypodermic instrument, after a non-jury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the County Court correctly determined that the People were ready for trial within the statutorily-prescribed, six-month period *(see,*CPL 30.30; *People v Edwards,*215 AD2d 498).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Ritter, J. P., Santucci, Joy and Florio, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.1




CERTIFICATION




The
undersigned officer of China Ruitai International Holdings Co., Ltd. (the
“Company”) hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, the Company’s Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q to which this certification is attached (the “Report”),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and that
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.




Date:
      August 16, 2010
              
              By:
              /s/
      Dian Min MaDian
      Min Ma, Chief Executive
Officer
#### Isaac Greenbaum v. Annie Perlmutter.

Motion to dismiss appeal denied, with ten dollars costs, with leave to move this court for permission to have the record returned to the county clerk for correction. Settle order on notice.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-19-00352-CR

RICARDO DE LA CRUZ

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

On Appeal from the

County Court at Law of San Patricio County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 81178

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

September 12, 2019
#### HENRY v. MERIDIAN LBR. CO., LIMITED.

No. 2336.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

Feb. 18, 1942.

E. L. Stewart, of DeRidder, for appellant.

Gist & Thornton, of Alexandria, for ap-pellee.

DORE, Judge.

This is a suit wherein plaintiff claims compensation for total permanent disability arising out of an alleged injury received by him on March 24, 1940, while in the employ of defendant company, causing a left inguinal hernia.

The defendant denies that plaintiff sustained an injury which caused a hernia, and denies that plaintiff is entitled to any compensation whatever.

There was judgment dismissing plaintiff’s demand, and he has appealed, but has failed to argue the case either orally or by brief.

Plaintiff testified that he was struck on the left side by the handle bars of a wheelbarrow which he was pushing when the wheelbarrow got out of his control and turned over. He states that he immediately felt a stinging pain, left his work, and informed his foreman who sent him to defendant’s doctor, whom he visited at his home that same night, and who gave him some medicine; that he returned to the doctor’s office on the next morning, at which time the doctor taped his side and told him to go to bed; that he remained in bed for about three weeks and that thereafter he visited the doctor several times; and that he is still unable to work on account of his side hurting him.

Plaintiff offered the testimony of Dr. R. Strother. On direct examination Dr. Strother stated that plaintiff has a potential hernia and is not able to do hard manual labor. On cross-examination, the doctor stated that “Well, he has a swollen gland, and a potential hernia is liable to come with hernia at any time”, which destroys his former testimony that plaintiff had a potential hernia.

As against this evidence, we have the testimony of Dr. Archibald, the company doctor at its plant, who saw the plaintiff soon after the alleged injury, and examined and treated him several times. He states that he could not find any sign of a potential hernia, and surely not a hernia. He diagnosed the trouble as resulting from a venereal disease. Dr. Frazor, a prominent physician of Many, Louisiana, also examined plaintiff, and failed to find any indication of a hernia, either complete or incomplete. This doctor likewise attributes plaintiff’s trouble to a venereal disease which affected the prostate gland. To the same effect is the testimony of Dr. King Rand of Alexandria.

It is our opinion that the medical testimony clearly shows that plaintiff has neither a complete hernia nor a potential hernia, and that he has failed to prove any disability resulting from any injury sustained in his employment.

Judgment affirmed.
----

----

| (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:  May      19, 2007 |   |        /s/ Robert W. Dunlap                         |
|-------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------|
|                                |   | Robert      W. Dunlap                                    |
|                                |   | Chief      Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer |
|                                |   | (principal      executive and financial officer)         |

----

----
EXHIBIT 32.1




CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND


PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002






In connection with the Annual Report of Brekford Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, C.B. Brechin, Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, certify to my knowledge and in my capacity as an officer of the Company, 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, as amended; and,





2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.






Date: February 22, 2011
By:
/s/ C.B. BrechinC.B. BrechinPrincipal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.