alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### HARRISON v. HARRISON.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division B.

April 9, 1954.

*731Ward & Ward, Miami, for petitioner.

Paul & Sams, Miami, for respondent.

THOMAS, Justice.

The petitioner is seeking a review of an order relating to temporary alimony, suit money and attorney’s fees.

Before examining the order we will give briefly the background of the. controversy. The petitioner sought a decree-o.f divorce 'from bed and board in Pennsylvania and later the respondent sued for- absolute divorce in that state. Then the respondent instituted suit for divorce in Florida ■ and the petitioner asked that the. suit here be ■stayed’because of. the one started by-the respondent in- the foreign state, ■ but the chancellor denied her ■ request and this Court'approved his order. .

. So the petitioner found herself a litigant in the chancery court in Florida over her protest. Having exhausted her remedy to stay the proceedings here so that her' dispute with her husband could be settled in Pennsylvania she filed her answer in the Florida court and prayed for (1) temporary alimony, (2) suit money, and (3) attorney’s fees. ■

At the outset we can quickly disr pose of the aspect of alimony because an allowance for such had been made by the court in Pennsylvania,' therefore, we find no reason to disturb the chancellor’s ruling that she should not be entitled to alimony here too. Nor do we find occasion to interfere with the award of attorney’s fees for regardless of any fees that may have been allowed in Pennsylvania she was entitled to have counsel in Florida.

But w.e cannot reconcile the remainder of the order, concerning suit money, either with' the justice of the cause or the allowance for fees.

The Court was of the opinion- “that the defendant [petitioner] may not seek an allowance for -alimony • pendente lite, suit money and counsel fees in this proceeding while simultaneously pressing for the same relief in" the courts in Pennsylvania [and that] she is entitled to no relief here other than a nominal allowance for attorney’s fees.” Therefore-the chancellor denied the motion except that the plaintiff pay to defendant’s attorneys the “nominal” fee of $500.

Obviously there is no need for. double alimony, but if there-ris need for fees in Florida it .would seem that there is a need also for suit money.

We -think' the request for suit mo'ney should.have been judged precisely as the .request for fees was judged. It is true that the matter required the exercis^ of discretion by the chancellor but onde the discretion was exercised in.favor .of the petitioner relative to fees for her attorney, the chancellor fixed the criterion for the award of suit-money.' Both, in our opinion, were in the same category.- That part of the above order denying' suit money is reversed with directions to set the amount reasonably required by the petitioner to present her defense.

ROBERTS, C J., and HOBSON and DREW, JJ., concur.-
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Juan Vasquez, Appellant.

[810 NYS2d 124]

*466Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Philip M. Grella, J.), rendered April 15, 2004, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the first degree, and sentencing him to a term of 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly declined to submit assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [2]) as a lesser included offense of assault in the first degree (Penal Law § 120.10 [1]). The evidence established that defendant heated a pan of oil on a stove and deliberately threw it in the victim’s face, causing protracted disfigurement. There was no reasonable view of the evidence, viewed most favorably to defendant, that he only caused, or only intended to cause, nonserious physical injury *(see e.g. People v Franco,*271 AD2d 383 [2000], *lv denied*95 NY2d 865 [2000]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Friedman, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Chief Judge Marcia S. Krieger

Criminal Action No. 11-cr-00355-MSK

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOHN PHILLIP GALLEGOS,

Defendant.

 

ORDER EXONERATING BOND

This criminal action has proceeded to sentencing and a final judgment and conviction, and

the defendant was remanded to the custody of the United States Marshal at sentencing, or has selfsurrendered to the designated facility, as confirmed by the United States Bureau of Prisons. As a

result, all the conditions of an appearance bond imposed by the court as a pretrial matter to secure

the defendant’s release, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(c), have been satisfied. Accordingly, it is 

ORDERED that the bond in this case is hereby exonerated and the surety or sureties, if

applicable, are released. It is further 

ORDERED that the bail funds or property deposited into the registry of the court shall

hereby be released by the clerk of the court, or a designated deputy, to the surety or the defendant. 

DATED this 27th day of January, 2014.

BY THE COURT:

Marcia S. Krieger

Chief United States District Judge

Case 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 362 Filed 01/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management 

          - [NM-920-1310-08; TXNM 107307, TXNM 107313] 

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior. 

# ACTION:

Notice of Reinstatement of Terminated Oil and Gas Lease. 

# SUMMARY:

Under the Class II provisions of Title IV, Public Law 97-451, The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) received a petition for reinstatement of oil and gas leases TXNM 107307 and TXNM 107313 from the lessee, Southern Bay Energy, LLC for lands in Burleson County, Texas. The petition was filed on time and was accompanied by all the rentals due since the date the lease terminated under the law. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Margie Dupre, BLM, New Mexico State Office, at (505) 438-7520. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    No valid lease has been issued that affect the lands. The lessee agrees to new lease terms for rentals and royalties of $10.00 per acre or fraction thereof, per year, and 16 2/3 percent, respectively. The lessee paid the required $500.00 administrative fee for the reinstatement of the lease and $166.00 cost for publishing this Notice in the                     **Federal  Register**                    . The lessee met all the requirements for reinstatement of the lease as set out in Section 31(d) and (e) of the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 (30 U.S.C. 188). We are proposing to reinstate leases TXNM 107307 and TXNM 107313, effective the date of termination, December 1, 2007, under the original terms and conditions of the lease and the increased rental and royalty rates cited above.                 

Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. 

Dated: September 25, 2008. 

Margie Dupre, 

Land Law Examiner, Fluids Adjudication Team.

 [FR Doc. E8-23104 Filed 9-30-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-FB-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           OCT-2-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                OCT-2-1999
<CASH>                                           1,029
<SECURITIES>                                     3,163
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,909
<ALLOWANCES>                                       414
<INVENTORY>                                      2,186
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                10,113
<PP&E>                                          10,202
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,742
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  17,679
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,255
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      14,180
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    17,679
<SALES>                                         23,063
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                23,415
<CGS>                                           16,719
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   23,219
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    185
<INCOME-TAX>                                        53
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                132
<DISCONTINUED>                                     365
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       498
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .19


</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joseph Sweeney, Appellant.

[808 NYS2d 637]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Eduardo Padro, *336J.), rendered July 8, 2003, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of 1 to 3 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning credibility *(see People v Gaimari,*176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). The credible evidence established that defendant was part of a drug-selling operation and was not acting as the buyer’s agent.

Once the prosecution met the burden of showing that closure of the courtroom to the general public was required in order to protect the safety of the undercover officers, the burden shifted to defendant to demonstrate that an exception to the closure was warranted with regard to his friend because that person was “linked to him by some tie of more significance than ordinary friendship” *(People v Nazario, 4*NY3d 70, 74 [2005]). Since defendant failed to make such a showing, the People were not required to establish that the proposed spectator posed a particular threat to the undercover officers, and the court properly excluded defendant’s friend from the courtroom during those officers’ testimony. Concur—Tom, J.P., Andrias, Gonzalez and Sweeny, JJ.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)). 

                    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at                           ( print page 57358)                        the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than October 17, 2008.                 

**A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago**                     (Burl Thornton, Assistant Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:                 

*1. Peter T. Rogers*, Appleton, Wisconsin, to retain voting shares of M.S.B. Bancorporation, Inc., and thereby indirectly retain voting shares of Premier Community Bank, Marion, Wisconsin.                 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 29, 2008. 

Robert deV. Frierson, 

Deputy Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. E8-23218 Filed 10-1-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Cary Ratner

v. Civil No. 08-cv-418-PB

Martel Electronics Corporation

Cary Ratner

v. Civil No. 09-cv-30-JL

M&M Control Services, Inc.

ORDER OF CONSOLIDATION

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a), the above cases are consolidated for all purposes.

Civil case number 08-cv-418-PB has been designated as the main case. Henceforth, these

consolidated cases shall be considered as one case and all pleadings will be filed in the main case.

They shall be captioned with that case number. The certificate of service shall indicate copies to all

counsel in the main case which shall now include all counsel in the former related cases.

The former related cases shall be statistically closed.

Parties in the former related cases will be added to the main case as consolidated

plaintiffs/defendants, if applicable.

Any motions pending in the former related case are transferred to the main case and refiled

as of this date. Currently pending in the former related case is document number [40] Motion for

Case 1:08-cv-00418-PB Document 81 Filed 03/12/09 Page 1 of 2
2

Summary Judgment, filed by defendant. Mr. Ratner may contact the court or opposing counsel for

copies, if necessary. The deadline for any type of responsive pleading is now April 13, 2009.

SO ORDERED.

March 12, 2009 /s/ Paul Barbadoro

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

cc: Cary Ratner, pro se

Counsel of Record

Case 1:08-cv-00418-PB Document 81 Filed 03/12/09 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE INTERIM
STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           6,989
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   34,053
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                41,042
<PP&E>                                           3,483
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  50,422
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,956
<BONDS>                                         56,986
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            2,496
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           173
<OTHER-SE>                                    (12,189)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    50,422
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,902
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,105
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,635)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,635)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,635)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.10)


</TABLE>
exv10w17



 





EXHIBIT 10.17




FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE TERMINATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN

MOBILEPRO CORPORATION AND ARNE DUNHEM DATED NOVEMBER 26, 2003



This First Amendment to the Termination Agreement (defined below) between
Mobilepro Corporation and Arne Dunhem (this “Amendment”) is entered into this
30th day of December, 2003, by and between Arne Dunhem (“Dunhem”), on the one
hand, and Mobilepro Corp. (the “Company”), on the other hand. The parties
hereto represent as follows:




     WHEREAS, the Company and Dunhem are party to a termination agreement
between the Company and Dunhem dated November 26, 2003 (the “Termination
Agreement”) pursuant to which the Company agreed to pay a 5% success fee to
Dunhem for the first $1,000,000 of funding obtained from Cornell Capital
following the execution of the Termination Agreement, which fee was to be paid
within 14 days after the Company received such funds; and



     WHEREAS, the Company received $1,000,000 from Cornell Capital for which
Dunhem is eligible to receive $50,000; and



     WHEREAS Dunhem has agreed to forego the $50,000 success fee in recognition
of the Company’s cash flow constraints and other considerations and has instead
agreed to reduce the success fee to $36,000 to be paid in equal amounts over a
six month period.



     NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agreements and promises
contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of
which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as follows:




	 	1.	 	Dunhem waives the right to receive $50,000 as a success fee in
connection with the $1,000,000 funding by Cornell Capital in December
2003 and agrees to accept a reduced success fee of $36,000 to be paid
as follows: $6,000 per month on each of January 1, 2004, February 1,
2004, March 1, 2004, April 1, 2004, May 1, 2004 and June 1, 2004. All
payments by the Company to Dunhem will be made payable to Ariel, LLC.
	 
	 	2.	 	Except as amended hereby, the Agreement shall continue in full
force and effect.
	 
	 	3.	 	This Amendment may be signed in one or more counterparts, each of
which shall be deemed an original and all of which , take together,
shall be deemed one and the same documents.





 









 




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the date and
year first set forth above.




MOBILEPRO CORP.







By: Daniel Lozinsky

Title: Secretary and Director



WE HAVE READ THE FOREGOING AND FULLY UNDERSTAND ITS TERMS AND ACCEPT THESE
TERMS. WE ARE SIGNING THIS AGREEMENT FREELY AND VOLUNTARILY, HAVING BEEN GIVEN
A FULL AND FAIR OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER IT AND CONSULT WITH ADVISORS OF OUR
CHOICE.




AGREED AND ACCEPTED:








Arne Dunhem
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

I, Steven Strasser, Chief Executive Officer of Power EfficiencyCorporation, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

 

1.               the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company forthe quarter ended September 30, 2005 (the “Report”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934(U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

 

2.               the information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

Date:  November 11, 2005

 
|   | BY:  | /s/ Steven Strasser                  |   |
|--------|-----------|--------------------------------------|--------|
|   |      | Steven Strasser                      |   |
|   |      | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |   |

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solelypursuant 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) and is notbeing filed as part of a separate disclosure document.

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRCATED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS FOR THE THREE MONTH PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         500,451
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,456,178
<ALLOWANCES>                                    35,000
<INVENTORY>                                  1,464,532
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,547,459
<PP&E>                                       1,433,695
<DEPRECIATION>                                 782,060
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,639,620
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,596,317
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        550
<COMMON>                                         3,218
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,011,758
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,639,620
<SALES>                                      3,773,640
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,773,640
<CGS>                                        1,916,107
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,916,107
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,220,205
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              68,448
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                568,880
<INCOME-TAX>                                   227,471
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            341,409
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   217,440
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.06


</TABLE>