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

No. 2417.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

Oct. 8, 1942.

LeDoux R. Provosty, of Alexandria, for appellant.

J. Y. Fontenot, Jr., of Shreveport, for appellee.

OTT, Judge.

The claim of the above plaintiff against W. E. Kolb- and his insurer is for the total sum of $4,597.54, and this claim arises out of the same accident wherein we found Kolb and his insurer liable in the opinion this day handed down in the case of Antoine Ashey, on behalf of his minor daughter, Asine Ashey, against these same defendants, 9 So.2d 865. It only remains to discuss the claim of plaintiff for damages in this suit.

The above plaintiff’s claim is made up of damage to his automobile in the sum of $518.05, the sum of $79.49 for medical and drug bills, and $4,000 for personal in*869juries, pain and suffering. The trial court awarded plaintiff $300 for damages to the car, $1,000 for the injuries received by him, including pneumonia contracted as a result of injuries, and the sum of $500 for pain and suffering, making a total award of $1,800. A reconventional demand was filed by defendant Kolb against Cook for damages to the former’s car in the sum of $535. While no mention is made in the judgment of this reconventional demand, the judgment in favor of plaintiff had the effect of rejecting it.

While there is some testimony in the record tending to show that the car driven by Cook was owned by him and Antoine J. Ashey jointly, yet throughout Cook’s testimony he referred to the car as belonging to him. Moreover, Ashey not only failed to claim any interest in the car in his testimony but actually filed a suit against these defendants on his own behalf and in behalf of his minor daughter in which he made no reference to this car as belonging to him and Cook jointly. Under these circumstances, we do not see how the defendants could be prejudiced by permitting Cook to collect for damage done to the car. The defendants do not seem to seriously question the award of $300 for this item, and as the proof supports the award, we are not disposed to change it.

Cook suffered the fracture of two or three ribs with rather severe chest bruises. He was confined to the hospital for eight or nine days and developed pneumonia from the injuries. His chest was strapped for the fractured ribs, and sedatives given him while in the hospital for the relief of pain. He came back several times after leaving the hospital for a check-up and apparently fully recovered from the injury. We think an award of $1,200 for the injuries, pain and suffering would be ample. His medical bill was $61, making the total allowed the sum of $1,561.

For the reasons assigned herein, as well as the reasons assigned in the case of Antoine J. Ashey, for the benefit of his minor daughter, Asine Ashey, v. W. E. Kolb et al., 9 So.2d 865, this day decided, it is ordered that the judgment herein appealed from be amended by reducing the amount of the award from $1,800 to the sum of $1,561, and as thus amended, the same is affirmed; appellee to pay the costs of the appeal, and appellants to pay all other costs.
| (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. |
|-----------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: April 15, 2011 | By:    | /s/ Deli Du   |   |
|-------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|                                |   | Deli Du                 |   |
|                                |   | Chief Executive Officer |   |

----
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, W. BradleyBlair, II, certify that:

1.             I have reviewed this QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q of Golf Trust of America, Inc;

2.             Based on my knowledge, this reportdoes not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;

3.             Based on my knowledge, thefinancial statements, and other financial information included in this report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;

4.             The registrant’s other certifyingofficer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)           Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

(b)           Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

(c)           Disclosed in this report any changein the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and

5.             The registrant’s other certifyingofficer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):

(a)           All significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

(b)           Any fraud, whether or not material,that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 
| August 16, 2007 |     | /s/ W. Bradley Blair, II           |   |
|-----------------|----------|-----------------------------------------|--------|
|            |     | W. Bradley Blair, II               |
|            | * * | *Chief Executive Officer and President* |

 

----
Exhibit 11.1



INTEGRAL SYSTEMS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE



|                                                                                                    |  | Twelve Months Ended September 30,
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------
|                                                                                                    |  | 2003                             
|Numerator:                                                                                          |  |                                  
|Net Income                                                                                          |  | $                                
|                                                                                                    |  |                                  
|Denominator:                                                                                        |  |                                  
|Denominator for basic earnings per share-weighted-average shares                                    |  |                                  
|Effect of dilutive securities:                                                                      |  |                                  
|Employee stock options                                                                              |  |                                  
|Contingently issuable shares                                                                        |  |                                  
|Denominator for diluted earnings per share adjusted weighted-average shares and assumed conversions |  |                                  
|                                                                                                    |  |                                  
|Basic earnings per share                                                                            |  | $                                
|Diluted earnings per share                                                                          |  | $
Second Amendment to 2000 Stock Option Plan



 EXHIBIT 10.13 
  
 SECOND AMENDMENT 
  
 TO 
  
 2000 STOCK OPTION PLAN 
  
 THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO 2000 STOCK OPTION PLAN (the “Amendment”) is made and adopted, effective as of December 18, 2001 (the “Effective Date”), by CALLWAVE, INC., a California
corporation (the “Company”), with reference to the following facts. 
  
 RECITALS: 
  
 A. The
Company previously adopted that certain 2000 Stock Option Plan dated effective April 13, 2000, (the “Option Plan”), and the shareholders and Board of Directors of the Company set aside thereunder Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand (750,000)
shares of Common Stock as of April 13, 2000, to permit certain additional administrative procedures in connection with the operation of the Option Plan. 
  
 B. The Company previously adopted the First Amendment to the 2000 Stock Option Plan dated effective December 18, 2001 and the shareholders and Board of
Directors of the Company set aside thereunder to increase the shares under the Option Plan to One Million Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand (1,750,000) shares. 
  
 C. The Board of Directors and shareholders have determined that in order to attract and retain talented employees, the Company needs to set aside
additional shares under that Option Plan for the granting of options and issuance of shares of restricted stock thereunder. 
  
 D. The Board of Directors and shareholders of the Corporation have approved the setting aside of an additional One Million (1,000,000) shares of Common
Stock under the Option Plan, and the Company is executing this Amendment in order memorialize those actions. 
  
 AMENDMENT: 
  
 NOW, THEREFORE, the Company, intending to be legally bound, hereby amends the Option Plan as follows: 
  
 1. INCREASE IN AUTHORIZED SHARES 
  
 Effective as of the Effective Date, the number of shares of Common Stock set
aside under the Option Plan for the granting of options and issuance of shares of restricted stock thereunder is hereby increased by One Million (1,000,000) shares, to a total of Two Million Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand (2,750,000) (including in
such 2,750,000 figure the aggregate number of shares of Common Stock heretofore set aside under the Option Plan). 







 2. MISCELLANEOUS 
  
 Except as expressly modified by this Amendment, the Option Plan is hereby ratified and confirmed and remains in full force and effect. 
  
 (Signature appears on the following page.) 
  

 -2- 








 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Second Amendment, effective as of the
“Effective Date” described above. 
  

			
	 CALLWAVE, INC., a California corporation

		
	 By
	 	     /s/    DAVID
HOFSTATTER        


	 	 	 David Hofstatter, President



  

 -3-
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America,

Government

v. Criminal No. 08-cr-67-1-SM

Raymond Crosdale,

Defendant

ORDER FOR PSYCHIATRIC OR PSYCHOLOGICAL

EXAMINATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 4241

The defendant’s unopposed motion for psychiatric evaluation

pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4241 (document no. 8) is granted. The

court hereby orders that a psychiatric or psychological

examination of Defendant Raymond Crosdale be conducted, and that

a psychiatric or psychological report be filed with the court,

pursuant to the provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 4247(b), (c).

Defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney

General for a period not to exceed thirty (30) days for placement

in a suitable facility where an examination of the defendant’s

mental condition can be conducted, or if appropriate, counsel for

the parties may seek to agree on an outpatient examination and an

appropriate examiner, and advise the court of such agreement.

A hearing under 18 U.S.C. § 4241(c) and scheduling of

defendant’s trial will be deferred until completion of that

examination, and submission of a report to the court.

Case 1:08-cr-00067-SM Document 12 Filed 08/01/08 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

August 1, 2008

cc: Michael J. Zaino, Esq.

Bjorn R. Lange, Esq.

U.S. Marshal

U.S. Probation

Case 1:08-cr-00067-SM Document 12 Filed 08/01/08 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
          THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM
          FORM 10-QSB FOR THE PERIOD ENDED  JANUARY 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
          ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              APR-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 MAY-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JAN-31-1999
<CASH>                                             228
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,389
<ALLOWANCES>                                       156
<INVENTORY>                                      1,134
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 5,139
<PP&E>                                           1,352
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (263)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   9,971
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,201
<BONDS>                                            859
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,364
<OTHER-SE>                                       (382)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     9,971
<SALES>                                         14,309
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                14,309
<CGS>                                           11,575
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,575
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,114
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 236
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,560)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       197
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,757)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,757)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.29)
        


</TABLE>
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D20-699

_____________________________

DUSTYN ANDREW HOLMES,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County.

James M. Colaw, Judge.

September 23, 2020

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

RAY, C.J., and BILBREY and JAY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Kasey Lacey, Assistant Public 

Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Damaris E. Reynolds, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7047

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

RONALD DAWSON, a/k/a Tree,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, 

District Judge. (5:06-cr-00061-FL-1; 5:08-cv-00298-FL)

Submitted: November 14, 2014 Decided: December 1, 2014

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ronald Dawson, Appellant Pro Se. Edward D. Gray, Jennifer P. 

May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorneys, Banumathi 

Rangarajan, Seth Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES 

ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Ronald Dawson seeks to appeal the district court’s 

orders denying relief on his filing, which was construed as a 

successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion, and his motion for

reconsideration. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit 

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability 

will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Dawson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
**Exhibit 32.1**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q of BPZ Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter endedMarch 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Manuel Pablo Zuniga-Pflucker, as Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and solely for the purpose of 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, 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.
| */s/ Manuel Pablo Zúñiga-Pflücker* |   |
|---------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Manuel Pablo Zúñiga-Pflücker       |
| President and Chief Executive Officer             |
| May 9, 2007                                       |

 

----
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions   under delegated authority  Applications and reports:Boston |New York |Philadelphia |Cleveland |Richmond |AtlantaChicago |St. Louis |Minneapolis |Kansas City |Dallas |San FranciscoDistrict: 6Federal Reserve Bank of: AtlantaFilings received during the week ending April 22, 2006FilerFiling TypeFiling ProposalEnd of Comment PeriodALGIERS BANCORP, INC.                                                                                                   CICAlgiers Bancorp, Inc., Baton Rouge, Louisiana, prior change in control notice by the Robin and Cherie Arkley Revocable Algiers Bancorp Stock Trust, Eureka, California, with Robin P. Arkley II and Cherie P. Arkley, Eureka, California, as trustees to acquire 57 percent; the Allison E. Arkley Trust #5, Eureka, California, with Calvin Richard Jones, managing member of CTT, LLC, Eureka, California, and John L. Piland as trustees to acquire 19 percent; and the Elizabeth A. Arkley Trust #5, with Calvin Richard Jones, managing member of CTT, LLC, Eureka, California, and John L. Piland as trustees to acquire 19 percent; and Jack J. Mendheim and Stephanie C. Medheim, Folsom, Louisiana, to  acquire 5 percent of the outstanding shares of Algiers Bancorp, Inc., Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and its subsidiary, Statewide Bank, Terrytown, Louisiana. Collectively, this represents 100 percent transfer of ownership.Newspaper: Not availableFederal Register: 05/08/2006AMSOUTH BANK                                                                                                            * BranchAmSouth Bank, Birmingham, Alabama, to establish a branch located at 8225 Champions Gate Boulevard, Champions Gate, Florida, to be known as the Champions Gate Branch.Newspaper: 05/02/2006Federal Register: Not applicableCITIZENS B & T HOLDINGS, INC.                                                                                           3A1Citizens B & T Holdings, Inc., notice to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the outstanding shares of Citizens Bank & Trust, both of Guntersville, Alabama.Newspaper: Not applicableFederal Register: Not applicableFEB BANCSHARES, INC.                                                                                                    * 3A1FEB Bancshares, Inc., to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the outstanding shares of Farmers Exchange Bank, both of Louisville, Alabama.Newspaper: 05/09/2006Federal Register: 05/11/2006FIRST FLORIDA BANK                                                                                                      * BranchFirst Florida Bank, Naples, Florida, to establish a branch located at 101 Center Road, Venice, Florida, to be known as the First Florida Bank Venice Office.Newspaper: 05/03/2006Federal Register: Not applicableHOMETOWN OF HOMESTEAD, INC.                                                                                             * 3A1