alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
230 La. 574

#### GLOBE STORAGE CO., Inc., et al. v. LOUISIANA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION et al.

No. 42962.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 29, 1956.

Lamar Polk, Alexandria, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Major & Ponder, Baton Rouge, Harry Fuller, Winnfield, for defendants-appellees.

*128VIOSCA, Justice ad hoc.

This case was submitted to the Supreme Court on June 11, 1956, on a Motion to Dismiss the Appeal, filed by one of the defendants, Garland McManus, d/b/a Mercury Transfer and Storage Company. He alleged that the appeal had not been filed in accordance with the mandate of the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, transferring the Appeal to this Court. No appearance was made nor brief filed by plaintiffs-appellants.

On the following day, June 12, 1956, a joint Motion to Dismiss was filed in this Court by all plaintiffs and defendants.

Therefore, the Appeal is dismissed as of June 12, 1956.
EXHIBIT 11

                      SPARTECH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
                 STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
                      (In thousands, except per share data)

                                 QUARTER ENDED      SIX MONTHS ENDED
                                April 29,  May 1,   April 29,  May 1,
                                 2000      1999      2000      1999

NET EARNINGS
  Basic net earnings           $  13,781  $ 11,105  $ 24,948  $ 20,262
  Add:  Distributions on
   Preferred Securities,
   net of tax                      1,329       305     1,817       305

  Diluted net earnings            15,110    11,410    26,765    20,567

WEIGHTED AVERAGE SHARES
 OUTSTANDING
  Basic weighted average common
   shares outstanding             27,350    26,895    27,324    26,895
  Add:  Shares issuable from
   assumed conversion of
   Preferred Stock                 3,964     1,025     2,784       513
  Add:  Shares issuable from
   assumed exercise of options     1,000     1,853     1,049     1,852

  Diluted weighted average
   shares outstanding             32,314    29,773    31,157    29,260


NET EARNINGS PER SHARE

  Basic                         $    .50  $    .41  $    .91  $    .75
  Diluted                       $    .47  $    .38  $    .86  $    .70
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk February 26, 2010

y0222 

# Order

February 26, 2010

139955

THOMAS C. DEWARD, Petitioner-Appellant,

v SC: 139955 COA: 283927 MPSC: 00-015305 MICHIGAN PUBLIC SE RVICE COMMISSION, Appellee,

and

LDMI TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC., Respondent.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 6, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                        5
<CIK>                                   0000075439
<NAME>                   BELL NATIONAL CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1
<CURRENCY>                                     USD
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                9-MOS  
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      DEC-31-1998  
<PERIOD-START>                         JAN-01-1998  
<PERIOD-END>                           SEP-30-1998  
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                  1  
<CASH>                                   1,148,000  
<SECURITIES>                                     0  
<RECEIVABLES>                                    0  
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0  
<INVENTORY>                                      0  
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         1,155,000  
<PP&E>                                           0  
<DEPRECIATION>                                   0  
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           1,155,000  
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      846,000  
<BONDS>                                          0  
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0  
<PREFERRED>                                      0  
<COMMON>                                15,849,000  
<OTHER-SE>                             (15,540,000) 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             1,155,000  
<SALES>                                          0  
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 0  
<CGS>                                            0  
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              131,000  
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 0  
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0  
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         (57,000) 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (74,000) 
<INCOME-TAX>                                (5,000) 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (79,000) 
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0  
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0  
<CHANGES>                                        0  
<NET-INCOME>                               (79,000) 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                (0.01) 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                (0.01) 
                                       

</TABLE>
#### In re MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, Petitioner.

No. MISC. 716.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Nov. 1, 2002.

Before MAYER, Chief Judge, GAJARSA and DYK, Circuit Judges.

DYK, Circuit Judge.

*ORDER*

Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) petitions for a writ of mandamus to direct the Court of Federal Claims to vacate its order denying MBTA’s motion to disqualify the trial court judge.

The remedy of mandamus is available only in extraordinary situations to correct a clear abuse of discretion or usurpation of judicial power. *In re Calmar, Inc.,*854 F.2d 461, 464 (Fed.Cir.1988). A party seeking a writ bears the burden of proving that it has no other means of attaining the relief desired, *Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Court for the Southern Dist. of Iowa,*490 U.S. 296, 309, 109 S.Ct. 1814, 104 L.Ed.2d 318 (1989), and that the right to issuance of the writ is “clear and indisputable,” *Allied Chemical Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc.,*449 U.S. 33, 35, 101 S.Ct. 188, 66 L.Ed.2d 193 (1980).

MBTA asserts:

> The record of the proceedings in this court demonstrate (a) that the trial *991judge has not been open to being educated on the law pertaining to this case and the facts giving rise to it by counsel for *both*parties and (b) that the trial judge is unmistakably biased in favor of the government and against MBTA. Despite two favorable decisions by the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, MBTA has lost *every*substantive motion and ruling made by the trial judge in this case. Whatever position MBTA advances is either ignored or ruled against....

The trial court denied the motion to disqualify because the basis of MBTA’s motion was its disagreement with the trial court’s “legal decisions, not its conduct.” The arguments presented by MBTA are not sufficient to trigger this court’s review by mandamus.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

MBTA’s petition is denied.
SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 6D2024-0332

Lower Tribunal No. 2023-CC-001012-0001-XX

_____________________________

CLARK PEAR,

Appellant,

v.

898 FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH HOLDINGS, LLC and NECO 898 5TH AVE S, LLC,

Appellees.

_____________________________

Appeal from the County Court for Collier County.

Janeice T. Martin, Judge.

July 12, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.315(a).

STARGEL, WHITE, and MIZE, JJ., concur.

Clark Pear, Naples, pro se. 

Todd M. Rich, of Holmes Fraser, P.A., Naples, for Appellees. 

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING 

AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from
financial  statements for the three month period ended September 30, 1996 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000075053
<NAME>                        D-lanz Development Group, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     $
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 Jul-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   Sep-30-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   0
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .00
        


</TABLE>
#### L. E. LATHRAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Supreme Court of Florida. En Banc.

March 16, 1954.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
NUVA-EX10.2-3-31-2014-10-Q


Exhibit 10.2


AMENDMENT NO. 5
TO
2004 EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN
OF NUVASIVE, INC.


WHEREAS, effective as of March 25, 2014 the Board of Directors of NuVasive, Inc. agreed to amend the 2004 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, as previously amended (the “2004 ESPP”), pursuant to Section 26 of the 2004 ESPP.


NOW THEREFORE, the 2004 ESPP shall be amended as of March 25, 2014 as follows:


		
	1.
	The second sentence of Section 10(a) of the 2004 ESPP is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:




“The deductions may be made (at the election of the participant) either (i) as an election of a whole dollar amount not less than $10 per payroll deduction, nor greater than an amount equal to the amount that is fifteen percent (15%) of the participant’s compensation, or (ii) as a percentage of the participant’s compensation in one percent (1%) increments, not less than one percent (1%), nor greater than fifteen percent (15%), or, in each case, such lower limit set by the Committee.” 


		
	2.
	Except as amended by this Amendment No. 5, the 2004 ESPP shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.




		
	3.
	Except as otherwise provided in this Amendment No. 5, terms used herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the 2004 ESPP.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-51077 Summary Calendar

ANTONIO ALONSO, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus DEBORAH A. PARKER ET AL., Defendants, NATIVIDAD Q. VASQUEZ, Defendant-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. W-96-CV-106

-------------------- September 27, 1999 Before KING Chief Judge, EMILIO M. GARZA, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Antonio Alonso, TDJC# 462941, appeals the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to prosecute. The district court dismissed the case at the beginning of trial because Alonso did not proceed in English. The district court found that Alonso had not given notice that he could not speak English and needed an interpreter. However, Alonso had given notice on December 19,No. 97-51077 -2-

1996, that he could not speak English when he filed a motion for appointment of counsel, which the district court denied. Further, on September 19, 1997, approximately two months before trial, Alonso filed a motion requesting an interpreter and renewing his request for appointment of counsel. The district court did not rule on this later motion. Thus, the district court’s reasons for dismissing Alonso’s claim are not supported by the record. The district court abused its discretion in dismissing Alonso’s case. See Clofer v. Perego , 106 F.3d 678, 679 (5th Cir. 1997); Edwards v. City of Houston , 78 F.3d 983, 994 (5th Cir. 1996). Accordingly, the judgment is VACATED and the case is REMANDED. In addition, Alonso has moved to appoint Corey Baker as his interpreter and, in the alternative, moved for appointment of counsel. These motions are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to Alonso’s refiling such motions in the district court. In light of the foregoing, we need not consider at this time Alonso’s argument that the district court erred in not appointing counsel.
VACATED AND REMANDED. ALL OUTSTANDING MOTIONS ARE DENIED.
#### UNITED STATES of America, v. John H. LYLES, Appellant.

No. 03-1176.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) July 18, 2003.

Decided July 22, 2003.

*111Before: MCKEE, BARRY, and WEIS, Circuit Judges.

*OPINION*

WEIS, Circuit Judge.

Defendant entered a conditional plea of guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). He was sentenced to a term of 46-months imprisonment.

The defendant reserved the right to appeal the District Court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence. In addition, he contended that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) is unconstitutional as beyond Congress’ powers under the Commerce Clause. That issue, however, has been resolved by this Court in *United States v. Singletary,*268 F.3d 196 (3d Cir.2001), where we held that statute is constitutional. Recognizing our policy of being bound by the holding of a previous panel, defendant candidly concedes that his purpose in appealing that ruling is to preserve the issue for *en banc*review or for presentation *to the*Supreme Court of the United States.

The District Court held a hearing on the motion to suppress and upheld a search warrant. The arresting officers had represented that one of them observed ammunition in plain view in the defendant’s small apartment when they arrested the defendant on a fugitive warrant. An ammunition belt hanging on a hook was also seen by the arresting officers, and a woman in the apartment admitted that the defendant had a gun. There was more than ample evidence submitted to the United States Magistrate Judge to issue the search warrant. Thus, the motion to suppress was properly denied.

Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court will be affirmed.
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

     We consent to the  incorporation  by reference in Post Effective  Amendment
No. 1 to  Registration  Statement  No.  33-94914 on Form S-8,  Registration  No.
333-30237  on Form S-8 and  Registration  No.  333-22535  on Form S-3 of  Hirsch
International  Corp.  and  Subsidiaries  of our  report  dated  March 11,  1998,
appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Hirsch  International  Corp. and
Subsidiaries for the year ended January 31, 1998.

DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Jericho, New York 
April 29,1998
#### DESOTO SECURITIES CO., Inc., v. WALKER.

No. 5306.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Second Circuit.

Oct. 30, 1936.

*278Wm. C. Boone, of Shreveport, for appellant.

Robert C. Gamble, of Mansfield, for ap-pellee.

TALIAFERRO, Judge.

Defendant appealed suspensively and devolutively from an order of executory process issued on a mortgage against real estate. In.this court he has made no appearance in person or through counsel; no brief was filed on his behalf. It is therefore obvious that the appeal was taken for delay and, this being accomplished, has been abandoned. It will be so treated.

The appeal is hereby dismissed as having been abandoned, and at appellant’s cost.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-29-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1999
<CASH>                                             290
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,413
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    101,094
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               105,549
<PP&E>                                          89,205
<DEPRECIATION>                                  54,313
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 140,670
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           58,685
<BONDS>                                         36,665
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,830
<OTHER-SE>                                      32,654
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   140,670
<SALES>                                        147,648
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               147,648
<CGS>                                           96,275
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   96,275
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,298
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,476)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        35
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,511)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,511)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.26)


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32(b)





PEOPLES ENERGY CORPORATION AND CONSOLIDATED AFFILIATES



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 combined Quarterly Report of Peoples Energy Corporation (the "Company"), The Peoples Gas Light and Coke Company ("Peoples Gas") and North Shore Gas Company ("North Shore Gas") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas A. Nardi, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, Peoples Gas and North Shore Gas, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the Company, Peoples Gas and North Shore Gas.



|/s/ THOMAS A. NARDI |  |  | August 13, 2003
|------------------- |  |  | ---------------
|                    |  |  | Date           

Thomas A. Nardi
Senior Vice President, 
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of
Peoples Energy Corporation



|/s/ THOMAS A. NARDI |  |  | August 13, 2003
|------------------- |  |  | ---------------
|                    |  |  | Date           

Thomas A. Nardi
Senior Vice President, 
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of
The Peoples Gas Light and Coke Company



|/s/ THOMAS A. NARDI |  |  | August 13, 2003
|------------------- |  |  | ---------------
|                    |  |  | Date           

Thomas A. Nardi
Senior Vice President, 
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of
North Shore Gas Company
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

Appeal of

- )

)

Obera LLC ) ASBCA No. 63576

)

Under Contract No. FA4890

- 20

- F

- 0031 )

APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT : Rebecca E. Pearson, Esq.

Venable LLP

Washington, DC

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Caryl A. Potter, III, Esq.

Air Force Deputy Chief Trial Attorney

Maj Danelle McGinnis, USAF

Trial Attorney

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Appellant’s claim, located at Tab 2 of the government’s Rule 4 file, did not

include a certification as required by the Contract Disputes Act, 41 U.S.C. §§ 7101

- 7109.

On May 26, 2023, the Board issued an Order directing appellant to show that its June 6,

2 022 claim was certified to the contracting officer and to provide a copy of the

certification. By correspondence dated May 26, 2023, appellant informed the Board that

it had filed a new, properly certified claim with the contracting officer and requested that

the Board dismiss this appeal without prejudice

. By correspondence dated June 2, 2023,

the government informed the Board that it had no objection to appellant’s request.

Accordingly, the appeal dismissed from the Board’s docket with out prejudice.

Dated: June 6, 2023

JOHN J. THRASHER

Administrative Judge

Cha ir man

Armed Services Board

of Contract Appeals2 I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 63576

, Appeal of Obera LLC

, rendered in conformance with the Board’s Charter.

Dated: June 6, 2023

PAULLA K. GATES

- LEWIS

Recorder, Armed Services

Board of Contract Appeals