alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### BAIRD et ux. v. EMPLOYERS’ LIABILITY ASSUR. CORPORATION, LIMITED.

No. 19030.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

March 14, 1949.

H. L. Hammett, of New Orleans, for plaintiffs and appellees.

Edward Rightor and W. H. Sellers, both of New Orleans, for defendant and appellant.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant-appellant has filed an application for rehearing wherein counsel point out what they consider several errors in our opinion.

The only point raised which we deem worthy of consideration was stated in the application as follows:

> “If the court feels that its judgment is correct and does not grant a rehearing on this application, we feel that the judgment in favor of Mr. Baird should be further amended in these respects. Mr. Baird should not have interest on the full amount from date of judicial demand, for in his original petition he only claimed the amount of $210.75 for medical expenses, and though he reserved his right to prove further medical (expenses) in the amount of $1000.00, there was no amendment to the petition, but a stipulation of counsel was filed on February 11, 1948, granting to plaintiffs the right to show expenses in excess of that claimed in the petition.

> “In all fairness to the court, we failed to brief this point or refer to it (in) argument.”

As stated in our opinion, counsel stipulated on February 11, 1948, that plaintiff, William R. Baird, might “show medical bills and expenses in excess of the amount sued for in the petition without the necessity of amendment, though liability therefor is denied.”

Under our holding in the case of Hobbs v. Employers’ Liability Assurance Corp.,. La.App., 188 So. 748, perhaps we would be justified in refusing to entertain the contention made by appellant. However, counsel for appellees have filed an answer to-the application for rehearing, in which there is contained the following remittitur as to interest on the award in favor of' William R. Baird:

> “ * * * However, in order to avoid any controversy as to the interest due on the judgment in favor of Mr. William R. Baird, counsel, on behalf of Mr. Baird, is-willing to agree to the contention of ap~ *375pellant with regard to the interest on Mr. Baird’s judgment, and therefore, does hereby remit all interest on the judgment in favor of Mr. Baird, except interest on $144.00 from the date of Judicial demand and interest on the remainder of the judgment $3,223.93 from February 11th, 1948.”

In accordance with the consent of ap-pellees, we believe that our judgment ■should be amended to the above extent.

It is ordered that our original decree be amended so as to allow William R. Baird legal interest on $144.00 from judicial demand until paid, and legal interest on $3,-223.93 from February 11, 1948, until paid.

The application for the rehearing is refused and, as thus amended, our original decree is made final.

Decree amended rehearing refused.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1583 Received in Senate (RDS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 1583

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 25, 2001

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located 
   at 121 West Spring Street in New Albany, Indiana, as the ``Lee H. 
       Hamilton Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The Federal building and United States courthouse located at 121 
West Spring Street in New Albany, Indiana, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Lee H. Hamilton Federal Building and United States 
Courthouse''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the Federal building and United States 
courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 
to the ``Lee H. Hamilton Federal Building and United States 
Courthouse''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 24, 2001.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted
from SEC Form 10-Q and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996             SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      18,638,718              19,863,604
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                9,402,685               8,559,518
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                  7,913,777               5,988,990
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            36,120,085              34,723,024
<PP&E>                                     289,211,129             291,364,162
<DEPRECIATION>                            (26,539,539)             (35,386,467)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             338,161,562             329,678,694
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       19,667,144              13,987,184
<BONDS>                                    209,830,918             205,494,563
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                            10                      10
<OTHER-SE>                               (108,825,145)            (131,434,931)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               338,161,562             329,678,694
<SALES>                                     21,883,962              48,785,940
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            22,495,204              50,673,891
<CGS>                                        7,813,737              20,867,693
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                9,074,621              26,613,376
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,954,266               9,176,433
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          11,095,941              32,422,084
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,629,624)            (17,538,002)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,629,624)            (17,538,002)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            (21,336,550)                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                               (25,371,334)            (17,538,002)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE>

                                          LINENS 'N THINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                                        COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE
                                           (in thousands, except share amounts)




                                                                      Thirteen Weeks Ended               Twenty-Six Weeks Ended
                                                                    July 3,           June 27,          July 3,           June 27,
                                                                      1999              1998              1999              1998
                                                                 ---------------    -------------    ---------------    ------------
                                                                           (Unaudited)                         (Unaudited)
<S>                                                                     <C>             <C>                <C>             <C>
Basic

    Weighted-average number of shares outstanding                        39,362           38,885             39,259           38,824
                                                                 ===============    =============    ===============    ============

    Net income applicable to common shares                               $5,103          $ 2,826            $ 8,698          $ 4,301
                                                                 ===============    =============    ===============    ============

    Per share amounts
        Net income per share                                              $0.13            $0.07              $0.22            $0.11
                                                                 ===============    =============    ===============    ============

Diluted

    Weighted-average number of shares outstanding                        41,074           40,500             40,968           40,354
                                                                 ===============    =============    ===============    ============

    Net income applicable to common shares                               $5,103          $ 2,826            $ 8,698          $ 4,301
                                                                 ===============    =============    ===============    ============

    Per share amounts
        Net income per share                                              $0.12            $0.07              $0.21            $0.11
                                                                 ===============    =============    ===============    ============


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1374 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.1374

                      One Hundred Seventh Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
          the twenty-third day of January, two thousand and two

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
 600 Calumet Street in Lake Linden, Michigan, as the ``Philip E. Ruppe 
                         Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 600 
Calumet Street in Lake Linden, Michigan, shall be known and designated 
as the ``Philip E. Ruppe Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Philip E. Ruppe Post Office 
Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
---

All files contain data as of the current quarter. Files in comma-separated variable 
(CSV) format contain all available historical data.

|Summary Charts                                                        
|----------------------------------------------------------------------
|PDF (11 KB)                                                           
|                                                                      
|
|                                                                      
|A.1. Number of Non-real-estate Bank Loans                             
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                          
|A.2. Average Size of Non-real-estate Bank Loans                       
|ASCII (6 KB)                                                          
|A.3. Volume of Non-real-estate Bank Loans                             
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                          
|A.4. Average Maturity of Non-real-estate Bank Loans                   
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                          
|A.5. Average Effective Interest Rate on Non-real-estate Bank          
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                          
|A.6. Share of Non-real-estate Bank Loans with a Floating Interest Rate
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                          
|A.7. Distribution of Dollar Amount of Non-real-estate Farm Loans      
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                          
|A.8. All Banks, by Size of Loan                                       
|ASCII (7 KB)                                                          
|A.9. Large Farm Lenders, by Size of Loan                              
|ASCII (4 KB)                                                          
|A.10. Small and Mid-sized Farm Lenders                                
|ASCII (4 KB)                                                          
|A.11. All Banks, by Risk Rating                                       
|ASCII (4 KB)                                                          
|A.12. Large Farm Lenders                                              
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                          
|A.13. Small and Mid-sized Farm Lenders                                
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                          
|A.14. Regional Disaggregation of Survey Results                       
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                          

Statistical releases

---

Home Economic research and data  Accessibility Contact Us  Last update: June 30, 2003
<PAGE>
Exhibit 99.1


                   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
             SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b) OF
            SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the
undersigned officers of the registrant certifies, to the best of his knowledge,
that the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June
30, 2002 (the "Form 10-Q") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
contained in the Form 10-Q, fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the registrant.



Dated:  August 14, 2002                     /s/ Kari Stefansson
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Kari Stefansson
                                            Chairman, President, Chief Executive
                                            Officer



Dated:  August 14, 2002                     /s/ Lance Thibault
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Lance Thibault
                                            Chief Financial Officer and
                                            Treasurer
Case 1:07-cr-00005-SM Document 7 Filed 01/19/07 Page 1 of 5Case 1:07-cr-00005-SM Document 7 Filed 01/19/07 Page 2 of 5Case 1:07-cr-00005-SM Document 7 Filed 01/19/07 Page 3 of 5Case 1:07-cr-00005-SM Document 7 Filed 01/19/07 Page 4 of 5Case 1:07-cr-00005-SM Document 7 Filed 01/19/07 Page 5 of 5
- 492 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

302 Nebraska Reports

STATE v. SAVAGE

Cite as 302 Neb. 492

State of Nebraska, appellee, v. 

Courtney J. Savage, appellant.

___ N.W.2d ___

Filed March 15, 2019. No. S-17-1166.

supplemental opinion

Appeal from the District Court for Lancaster County: Susan

I. Strong, Judge. Supplemental opinion: Former opinion modified. Motion for rehearing overruled.

Darik J. Von Loh, of Hernandez Frantz, Von Loh, appellant.

Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and Austin N. Relph 

for appellee.

Heavican, C.J., Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, Funke, 

Papik, and Freudenberg, JJ.

Per Curiam.

This case is before us on a motion for rehearing filed by the 

appellant, Courtney J. Savage, concerning our opinion in State 

v. Savage, 301 Neb. 873, 920 N.W.2d 692 (2018). We overrule 

the motion, but we modify the opinion as follows:

In the subsection “(a) Authentication,” after the fourth 

sentence of the fourth paragraph, we insert the following 

language:

As for Savage’s contention that the State did not properly 

authenticate messages sent to him by others, we again 

disagree. The State was required only to introduce testimony sufficient to establish that the evidence was what 

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library

www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/

04/19/2019 09:06 AM CDT
- 493 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

302 Nebraska Reports

STATE v. SAVAGE

Cite as 302 Neb. 492

the State claimed it to be. The State did not claim that 

messages sent by others were anything more than messages sent to Savage’s cell phone. See State v. Elseman, 

287 Neb. 134, 841 N.W.2d 225 (2014).

Savage, 301 Neb. at 885, 920 N.W.2d at 703.

In subsection “(b) Hearsay,” following the second to the last 

paragraph, we insert the following paragraph:

We also reject Savage’s argument that text messages 

sent to his cell phone by unidentified individuals contained 

inadmissible hearsay. Hearsay is “a statement, other than 

one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or 

hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-801(3) (Reissue 2016). 

Messages sent to Savage’s cell phone were not offered 

for the truth of the matters asserted. They were offered to 

prove that the statements were made.

Savage, 301 Neb. at 887, 920 N.W.2d at 704.

The remainder of the opinion shall remain unmodified.

 Former opinion modified.

 Motion for rehearing overruled.
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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Eagle Broadband, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ending February 29, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David
Weisman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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),
as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Date:  June 1, 2004

/S/David A. Weisman
David A. Weisman,
Chairman of the Board and
Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

William J . Carey

V .

Hillsborough County Departmen t

of Corrections, Medical Department

No . 05-fp-44 2

ORDER GRANTING REQUEST TO

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERI S

Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis is hereby

granted, but only for the purpose of waiving the filing fee .

This case has been assigned civil number 05-cv-442-PB .

SO ORDERED .

R . Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judg e

Date : December 19, 200 5

cc : William J. Carey, pro se

Case 1:05-cv-00442-PB Document 3 Filed 12/19/05 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

John Zerbe, Trustee

v. NH Civil No. 05-ds-021-JD

PR Civil No. 02-2357

Gabriela Alejandra Guzman

Pinal and Luis Olmos Dueas

O R D E R

The parties have not shown cause, pursuant to the procedural

order dated October 30, 2006, as to why this case should remain

open. Therefore, case is dismissed with prejudice based upon the

parties’ settlement as approved by the bankruptcy court.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

 (Sitting by designation)

November 17, 2006

cc: Alfredo Castellanos-Bayouth, Esquire

Angel E. Rotger-Sabat, Esquire

USDC-PR, Clerk

Case 1:05-ds-00021-JD Document 77 Filed 11/17/06 Page 1 of 1
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

ALL BY GRACE HEALTH CARE

, INC.

Appellant

,

v.

TEXAS HEALTH AND HUMAN

SERVICES COMMISSION

Appellee. **§**

**§**

**§**

**§**

**§**

**§**

**§** No. 08

- 22

- 00 22 3

- C V

Appeal from the

3 53 rd Judicial District Cou r t

o f Travis County, Texas

(TC# D

- 1

- GN

- 22

- 004307 )

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Appellant ’ s second motion for extension of time within which to

file the brief until February 25 , 202 3

. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

TO FILE THE APPELLANT ’ S BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. Hayley Ellison

, the Appellant’s attorney, prepare the

Appellant ’ s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before February 25

, 202 3

.

I T IS SO ORDERED this 26 th day of January , 202 3

.

PER CURIAM

B efore Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox, and Soto , JJ.
<PAGE>


                                                                      Exhibit 32


  Written Statement of the President and Chief Executive and Financial Officer
                          Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, I, the undersigned
President and Chief Executive and Financial Officer of Avenue Entertainment
Group, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended June 30,
2004 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.


/s/ Cary Brokaw
-----------------------
Cary Brokaw
August 23, 2004
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-12-0000142

12-SEP-2014

08:12 AM
#### BURTHE v. LEE et al.*

No. 14689.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

Feb. 12, 1934.

For former opinion, see 152 So. 100.

Hugh M. Wilkinson, A. Miles Coe, Fred W. Oser, and Harry Nowalsky, all of New Orleans, for appellants.

Leslie P. Beard and Chester A. Peyronnin, both of New Orleans, for appellee.

*

writ of certiorari denied by Supreme Court March 26, 1934.

PER CURIAM.

In an application for rehearing counsel for plaintiff, appellee, calls our attention to the fact that in our opinion we incorrectly stated that after the impact plaintiff’s automobile turned over.

Even though the car did not turn over, we are well convinced that plaintiff drove it into the intersection and into the path of the on-coming taxicab without looking and at too high a speed.

The rehearing is refused.