alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### KURZWEG v. PLISCHKE et al.

No. 7266.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Second Circuit.

Jan. 6, 1949.

Stafford & Pitts, of Alexandria, for appellants. ■

C. E. Laborde, Jr., of Marksville, for ap-. pellee. .

KENNON, Judge.

The District Judge allowed plaintiff Victor J. Kurzweg $1500 for pain and suffering, after finding that he had remained in the hospital for two„weeks. The evidence showed that he was not completely well when discharged and that even at the time of the trial, he still experienced some difficulty in raising his arm. Under these .circumstances, .we conclude that the award of $1500 for pain and suffering is adequate, but not' excessive.

On the question of loss of income, the record shows that plaintiff received his full salary during the time he was in the hospital. Mr. Kurzweg, who testified that he owned the largest single block of stock in the Consolidated Companies, Inc., said that he remained as president of the company following the accident on July 16, 1946 until the next meeting of the stockholders, which occurred either in September or October, and that at that time he resigned as president in favor of his son and accepted a position as chairman of the board of directors at a salary of $12,500 per year (as compared with a salary of $18,500 a year which he received as president of the company). He frankly testified that, previous to the accident, he had planned to place his son in control of the business at some future date, and upon being incapacitated by the injury, he decided to-go ahead with this arrangement. The record shows that he 'was paid compensation of $54.29, or for a period of less than three weeks. Under' these circumstances, we-think that an award of $1500, or approximately one month’s salary, for loss of income would be equitable.

His medical expenses were $660.30, of which $500 was paid by the compensation carrier, leaving a balance of $160.30. '■

For the reasons above assigned, and those assigned in, La.App., 38 So.2d 266, the judgment appealed from is amended by reducing same to $3160.30, and as amended, same is affirmed. Costs of appeal to be-paid by plaintiff, all other costs to be paid by defendants.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1761 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1761

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 8588 Richmond Highway in Alexandria, Virginia, as the ``Herb E. 
                     Harris Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 8, 2001

Mr. Moran of Virginia (for himself, Mrs. Jo Ann Davis of Virginia, Mr. 
Schrock, Mr. Scott, Mr. Goode, Mr. Goodlatte, Mr. Cantor, Mr. Boucher, 
Mr. Wolf, and Mr. Tom Davis of Virginia) introduced the following bill; 
        which was referred to the Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 8588 Richmond Highway in Alexandria, Virginia, as the ``Herb E. 
                     Harris Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. HERB E. HARRIS POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 8588 Richmond Highway in Alexandria, Virginia, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Herb E. Harris Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the Herb E. 
Harris Post Office Building.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the Covance
consolidated financial statements for the six months ended June 30, 1999 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001023131
<NAME> COVANCE INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                      25,081,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                              211,791,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 25,050,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           309,363,000
<PP&E>                                     277,998,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              20,594,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             665,925,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      184,119,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       588,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 254,462,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               665,925,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           215,060,000
<CGS>                                      140,906,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              192,105,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               161,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,419,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             20,375,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                 8,168,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         12,207,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                12,207,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.21


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2

CFO CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

I, Kevin T. Michaels, Chief Financial Officer of Powerwave
Technologies, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



| | 1. | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d)); 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: November 9, 2007 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ KEVIN T. MICHAELS
|                       |  |  |  |     |  |                       |  | Kevin T. Michaels Chief Financial
Officer Powerwave Technologies, Inc.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

MONA MARIA TATARU,

Defendant.

8:23MJ309

ORDER ISSUED PURSUANT TO THE

DUE PROCESS PROTECTION ACT

This matter came before the Court for Initial Appearance on a Complaint. The government 

was represented by John E. Higgins. The defendant was present and represented by James E. 

Reisinger. 

IT IS ORDERED:

Pursuant to the Due Process Protections Act, the Court confirms the United States' 

obligation to disclose to the defendant all exculpatory evidence as required by Brady v. Maryland, 

373 U.S. 83 (1963) and its progeny, and orders the United States to do so. Failure to disclose 

exculpatory evidence in a timely manner may result in consequences, including, but not limited 

to, exclusion of evidence, adverse jury instructions, dismissal of charges, contempt proceedings, 

or sanctions by the Court.

DATED: May 25, 2023.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Michael D. Nelson

United States Magistrate Judge

8:23-mj-00309-MDN Doc # 15 Filed: 05/25/23 Page 1 of 1 - Page ID # 26
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Joseph Sawtell

v. Civil No. 06-cv-229-SM

Warden, New Hampshire State Prison

O R D E R

Having moved to lift the stay of federal proceedings, Joseph

Sawtell now seeks review of his petition for a writ of habeas

corpus and supporting documents, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

2254, in which he challenges the constitutionality of his state

court conviction and confinement (document nos. 1, 6, 9-12 and

28). See Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the

United States District Courts (“Habeas Rule”) (requiring initial

review to determine whether the petition is facially valid). 

For the reasons stated in the report and recommendation

issued simultaneously herewith, I recommend that Grounds One, Two

and Three of the petition be dismissed for failure to state a

claim upon which federal habeas corpus relief may be granted. As

Ground Four of the petition states a cognizable claim for

purposes of federal habeas review, I order it served on the

Case 1:06-cv-00229-SM Document 34 Filed 04/07/09 Page 1 of 3
2

respondent.

Accordingly, I direct that Ground Four of the petition be

served on the warden of the NHSP. See Habeas Rule 4. The

respondent shall file an answer or other pleading in response to

the allegations made therein. See id. (requiring reviewing judge

to order a response to the petition). The Clerk’s Office is

directed to serve the New Hampshire Office of the Attorney

General, as provided in the Agreement On Acceptance Of Service,

copies of this order and the habeas petition and supporting

documents (document nos. 1, 6, 9-12 and 28). Respondent shall

answer or otherwise plead within thirty (30) days of the date of

this order. The answer shall comply with the requirements of

Habeas Rule 5 (setting forth contents of the answer). 

Upon receipt of the response, the court will determine

whether a hearing is warranted. See Habeas Rule 8 (providing

circumstances under which a hearing is appropriate). 

Petitioner is referred to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5, which requires

that every pleading, written motion, notice, and similar paper,

after the petition, shall be served on all parties. Such service

Case 1:06-cv-00229-SM Document 34 Filed 04/07/09 Page 2 of 3
3

is to be made by mailing the material to the parties’ attorneys.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: April 7, 2009

cc: Thomas J. Gleason, Esq.

 Scott F. Gleason, Esq.

 Stephen D. Fuller, Esq.

 Joseph Sawtell, Petitioner 

Case 1:06-cv-00229-SM Document 34 Filed 04/07/09 Page 3 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 07-cr-213-01-SM

Jean P.Verdiner

O R D E R

Defendant Verdiner’s motion to continue the final pretrial conference and

trial is granted (document 11). Trial has been rescheduled for the June 2008

trial period. Defendant Verdiner shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights not

later than March 24, 2008. On the filing of such waiver, his continuance shall

be effective. 

The Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance

outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, 18

U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would

unreasonably deny defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence under the

circumstances. 

Final Pretrial Conference: May 20, 2008 at 4:30 p.m.

Jury Selection: June 3, 2008 at 9:30 a.m.

Case 1:07-cr-00213-SM Document 17 Filed 03/11/08 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

 Chief Judge

March 11, 2008

cc: David Bownes, Esq.

Debra Walsh, AUSA

US Probation

US Marshal

Case 1:07-cr-00213-SM Document 17 Filed 03/11/08 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Kenneth Churchill

v. Civil No. 1:07-cv-25-JL

Target Corporation et al 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

In accordance with the provisions of Local Rule 41.1, as neither an agreement for

judgment nor a stipulation for dismissal has been filed, this case is herewith dismissed with 

prejudice.

 SO ORDERED.

July 10, 2008 ________________________________

Joseph N. Laplante

United States District Judge

cc: Amy Celeste Mackin, Esq.

Meredith M. Lasna, Esq.

Sean J. Milano, Esq.

Case 1:07-cv-00025-JL Document 34 Filed 07/10/08 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 07-cr-66-PB

Jonathan Welch

O R D E R

The defendant, through counsel, has moved to continue the

October 10, 2007 trial in the above case, citing the need for

additional time to engage in further plea negotiations and set a

plea hearing. The government does not object to a continuance of

the trial date.

Accordingly, for the above reasons and to allow the parties

additional time to properly prepare for trial, the court will

continue the trial from October 10, 2007 to January 8, 2008. In

agreeing to continue the trial, the court finds pursuant to 18

U.S.C.A. § 3161(h)(8)(A) that for the above-stated reasons, the

ends of justice served in granting a continuance outweigh the

best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial

Case 1:07-cr-00066-PB Document 20 Filed 10/09/07 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

October 9, 2007

cc: Ray Raimo, Esq.

Terry Ollila, AUSA

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:07-cr-00066-PB Document 20 Filed 10/09/07 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1722 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1722

   To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the amount 
excluded from gain on the sale of a principal residence for both single 
                    and joint filers to $1,000,000.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 3, 2001

 Ms. Lofgren introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the amount 
excluded from gain on the sale of a principal residence for both single 
                    and joint filers to $1,000,000.

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

SECTION 1. INCREASE IN AMOUNT OF GAIN EXCLUDED FROM GROSS INCOME.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 121(b) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to general limitations) is amended by 
striking ``$250,000'' and inserting ``$1,000,000''.
    (b) Repeal of Special Rules for Joint Returns.--Subsection (b) of 
section 121 of such Code is amended by striking paragraph (2) and 
redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (2).
    (c) Conforming Amendments.--
            (1) Section 121(c) of such Code is amended--
                    (A) by striking ``subsection (b)(3)'' both places 
                it appears and inserting ``subsection (b)(2)'', and
                    (B) by striking ``or (2) of subsection (b), 
                whichever is applicable,'' in the matter preceding 
                subparagraph (A).
    (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to sales and exchanges after the date of the enactment of this 
Act.
                                 <all>
```
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1401

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude from gross income

loan payments received under the National Health Service Corps Loan

Repayment Program established in the Public Health Service Act.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 4, 2001

Mr. PHELPS (for himself, Mr. NETHERCUTT, and Mr. RUSH) introduced the

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude

from gross income loan payments received under the

National Health Service Corps Loan Repayment Program established in the Public Health Service Act.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 1401 IH

1 SECTION 1. INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986; EXCLUSION

2 FOR LOAN PAYMENTS UNDER NATIONAL

3 HEALTH SERVICE CORPS LOAN REPAYMENT

4 PROGRAM.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 117 of the Internal Rev6 enue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the

7 following new subsection:

8 ‘‘(e) LOAN PAYMENTS UNDER NATIONAL HEALTH

9 SERVICE CORPS LOAN REPAYMENT PROGRAM.—Gross in10 come shall not include any amount received under section

11 338B(g) of the Public Health Service Act.’’

12 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

13 subsection (a) shall apply to amounts received by an indi14 vidual in taxable years beginning after December 31,

15 2000.

Æ
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 9, 2016

No. 04-15-00805-CR

Edward James DWYER Jr.,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 198th Judicial District Court, Kerr County, Texas

Trial Court No. B14568

Honorable M. Rex Emerson, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The appellant’s motion for extension of time to file their brief is granted. The 

appellant’s brief is due July 11, 2016. 

_________________________________

Jason Pulliam, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 9th day of June, 2016.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
B.5. Net Charge-offs of Real Estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
                                                                                                            
                                 Estimated volume                Share of outstanding real estate farm loans
                              (millions of dollars)                               (percent)
                      ______________________________________     ___________________________________________

Year                  Total     Q1      Q2      Q3       Q4      Total      Q1        Q2        Q3       Q4
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
                                                                                                            
1993......    |          24       2      4        7       11      .121      .010      .018     .035     .054
1994......    |          10       1      1        3        6      .048      .003      .003     .013     .026
1995......    |          12       0      3        6        4      .055     -.001      .011     .027     .016
1996......    |           7       0      1        2        4      .031      .000      .003     .009     .017
1997......    |          16      -1      0        3       14      .064     -.003     -.001     .010     .054
1998......    |           6      -1      3        0        5      .022     -.004      .009     .000     .016
1999......    |          15       0      3        5        7      .051     -.001      .011     .015     .022
2000......    |          12     -12      3        8       14      .037     -.037      .009     .022     .040
2001......    |          42      10      9        5       17      .123      .030      .027     .014     .049
2002......    |          35       8      6        5       16      .097      .022      .017     .014     .041
2003......    |          32       4      6        8       14      .082      .010      .015     .021     .034
2004......    |        n.a.       1      5     n.a.     n.a.      n.a.      .003      .012     n.a.     n.a.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
   Note. Components might not sum to totals because of rounding. Quarterly data are as of end of quarter.
   n.a. Not available.

25
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

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned
officers of Rand Capital Corporation (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:

The Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2017 (the Form 10-Q) of the Company fully complies with the requirement of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                      |  |  |  |  |  |                                                                                
|--------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: April 27, 2017 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Allen F. Grum
Allen F. Grum, President(Chief Executive Officer)            
|                      |  |  | 
|Dated: April 27, 2017 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Daniel P.
Penberthy Daniel P. Penberthy, Treasurer(Chief Financial Officer)