alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 10.1

                          FEBRUARY 15, 2004 ADDENDUM TO

                   WAREHOUSING LINE OF CREDIT PROMISSORY NOTE
            Dated February 20, 2002 as amended February 15, 2003 and
                                  April 1, 2003

      On February 20, 2002, Temporary Financial Services, Inc. ("TFS") and
Genesis Financial, Inc. ("GENESIS") entered into a Warehousing Line of Credit
Promissory Note and related loan documents (collectively the "Line of Credit")
for a $2,000,000 secured line of credit. TFS was the lender and GENESIS was the
borrower under these documents. The Line was intended to provide GENESIS with
funds for the purchase of seller financed real estate contracts. The Warehousing
Line of Credit Promissory Note and applicable extensions is due March 31, 2004.
On February 15, 2004, TFS and GENESIS entered into an agreement to extend the
line of credit through December 31, 2004 in order to allow GENESIS additional
time to locate a new lender or negotiate new terms for the Line of Credit with
TFS.

      TFS and Genesis have agreed to new terms on the Line of Credit, as
follows:

1.    The due date of the Warehousing Line of Credit Promissory Note is extended
      to December 31, 2004.

2.    The interest rate (8%) and the Line of Credit limit ($2,000,000) set forth
      in the Warehousing Line of Credit Promissory Note, with extensions, are
      maintained for the extension period.

3.    In addition to the interest rate charged for the extension period, GENESIS
      will also pay a Commitment Fee for the Warehousing Line of Credit
      Promissory Note extension in the amount of $20,000 payable in cash. This
      additional Commitment Fee relates to the extension period.

      This February 15, 2004 Addendum supercedes and replaces the Addendum dated
April 1, 2003. Except as noted in Paragraphs 1 through 3, above, all other terms
of the Line of Credit remain in full force and effect, including the terms and
conditions described in "Advance and Repayment Procedures," the "Financial
Covenants and Reporting Obligations," the "Security Agreement," and the
"Guaranty."

      Dated this 15th day of February, 2004.


GENESIS FINANCIAL, INC.                     ATTEST:
/s/ Michael A. Kirk                         /s/ Douglas B. Durham
Michael A. Kirk, President                  Douglas B. Durham, Chairman


Accepted this 15th day of February, 2004 in Spokane, Washington.

Temporary Financial Services, Inc.          Attest:
/s/ John R. Coghlan                         /s/ Brad E. Herr
John R. Coghlan, President                  Brad E. Herr, Secretary
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

Criminal Case No. 11-cr-00364-WYD 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

1. RAMON ACOSTA-BALLESTEROS, 

Defendant. 

MINUTE ORDER 

ORDER ENTERED BY CHIEF JUDGE WILEY Y. DANIEL 

Due to a scheduling conflict with the Court’s calendar, the Change of Plea hearing 

set for Wednesday, December 14, 2011 at 4:00 p.m. is VACATED and RESET for 

Monday, January 3, 2012 at 2:30 p.m. 

Counsel for the parties shall deliver all change of plea documents 

separately to Judge Daniel’s chambers AND to the Probation Department not later 

than 72 HOURS before the hearing date. If the documents are not timely submitted, 

the hearing will be VACATED. There will be no exceptions to this policy, and 

sanctions may be imposed for failure to comply.

 Dated: December 14, 2011 

Case 1:11-cr-00364-WYD Document 15 Filed 12/14/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Criminal Case No. 11–cr–000335-001-MSK

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

WAUNITA WEINGART,

Defendants.

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND MOTIONS FILING DEADLINE

Comes now the Defendant, Waunita Weingart, by and through her attorney,

Martin Stuart, and moves this Court for an order extending the currently scheduled 

March 12, 2012, motions filing deadline by an initial period of 90 days. As grounds:

1. On March 12, 2012, the Court to appointed undersigned counsel to 

substitute for the United States Federal Public Defender in the representation of Ms. 

Weingart in the present matter.

2. On October 14, 2011, the Court set a motions filing deadline for March 12, 

2012 (doc. 42).

3. Defense counsel has made contact with Assistant United States Attorney 

(AUSA) Linda Kaufman who represented that the discovery in the Defendant’s case is 

voluminous including in excess of 27,000 pages for an alleged conspiracy that lasted 

approximately 9 years. AUSA Kaufman authorized defense counsel to represent in the 

Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 68 filed 03/12/12 USDC Colorado pg 1 of 3
2

instant pleading that she does not oppose a 90 day continuance of the Defendant’s 

motions filing deadline.

4. Due to the close proximity of defense counsel’s appointment and the 

Court’s motions filing deadline, he has been unable to contact his client regarding the 

relief sought in this motion. Defense counsel does believe that denial of the request for 

an extended motions filing deadline would deprive the Defendant of effective 

representation by counsel. In addition, defense counsel requests leave of the Court to 

make additional requests pertaining to the period within which to file motions pending 

his review of discovery which he has yet to receive.

WHEREFORE, Ms. Weingart respectfully requests that this Honorable Court enter 

an order extending the motions filing deadline by an initial period of 90 days.

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: March 12, 2012 By: s/Martin Stuart_____ 

MARTIN STUART, counsel for Ms. 

Weingart

 PortmanStuart, LLC

955 Bannock Street, suite 200

 Denver, CO 80204

 Phone 303-355-6789

 Fax 303-623-0714

Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 68 filed 03/12/12 USDC Colorado pg 2 of 3
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 12th day of March 2012, I electronically filed the 

foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send 

notification of such filing to the following e-mail addresses: 

Linda Kaufman

Assistant United States Attorney

1225 17th St., Ste. 700

Denver, CO 80202

/s/ Martin Stuart________

Martin Stuart

Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 68 filed 03/12/12 USDC Colorado pg 3 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02391-RPM

MARVIN J. THOMAS,

Plaintiff,

v.

DENVER PUBLIC SCHOOLS, 

Defendant.

 

ORDER SETTING TRIAL DATE

 

Pursuant to the pretrial conference held today, it is

ORDERED that this matter is set for trial to jury on November 4, 2013, at 8:30 a.m.,

in Courtroom A, Second Floor, the Byron White United States Courthouse, 1823 Stout

Street, Denver, Colorado. Trial procedures may be found at

www.cod.uscourts.gov/judges_frame.htm. Counsel shall submit proposed voir dire

questions and instructions in paper form directly to chambers on or before October 31,

2013, at 4:00 p.m.

Dated: June 21st, 2013

BY THE COURT:

s/Richard P. Matsch

________________________________

Richard P. Matsch, Senior District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02391-RPM-KMT Document 30 Filed 06/21/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>   1





                                                                     EXHIBIT 23a

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-3 No. 33-61375) pertaining to the Stockholders' Investment Program and
Form S-8 Nos. 33-37884, 33-44528 and 33-44930 pertaining to the Equity Option
Plan and the Outside Directors' Formula Stock Option Plan of Schawk, Inc. of our
report dated February 13, 1998, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements and schedule of Schawk, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form
10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1997.

Chicago, Illinois                                             ERNST & YOUNG LLP
March 27, 1998



                                       49
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           9,741
<SECURITIES>                                     7,113
<RECEIVABLES>                                      446
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                19,553
<PP&E>                                           7,522
<DEPRECIATION>                                     632
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  26,783
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,266
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           267
<OTHER-SE>                                      22,648
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    22,915
<SALES>                                          2,945
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,797
<CGS>                                            2,186
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,816
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 341
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (14)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (14)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (14)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0




</TABLE>
United States Court of Appeals 

For the First Circuit 

No. 09-2473 

FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUNDATION, ET AL., 

Plaintiffs, Appellants, 

v. 

HANOVER SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL., 

Defendants, Appellees. 

JUDGMENT 

Entered: November 12, 2010 

This cause came on to be heard on appeal from the United States District Court for the 

District of New Hampshire and was argued by counsel. 

Upon consideration whereof, it is now here ordered, adjudged and decreed as follows: The 

order and judgment of the district court dismissing the complaint is affirmed. 

By the Court: 

/s/ Margaret Carter, Clerk 

cc: Mr. Rassbach, Mr. Atwood, Mr. Sturgill, Ms. Smith, Mr. Sekulow, Mr. Bradley, Ms. Witt, Mr. 

Fitschen, Mr. Hirt, Mr. Bull, Mr. Newdow, Mr. Fox, Mr. Beckenhauer, Mr. Hasson, Mr. Simmons, 

Mr. Cortman, Mr. Tedesco, Mr. Compitello & Mr. Eidsmoe, 

Case 1:07-cv-00356-SM Document 70 Filed 11/12/10 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF SPALDING HOLDINGS CORPORATION FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1,
1998 THROUGH MARCH 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   OTHER
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           6,393
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  255,438
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,154
<INVENTORY>                                    217,797
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               498,008
<PP&E>                                         205,963
<DEPRECIATION>                                (89,986)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 865,358
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          337,591
<BONDS>                                        698,125
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           970
<OTHER-SE>                                   (193,989)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   865,358
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               242,223
<CGS>                                          162,397
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   77,342
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,186
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              19,331
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (20,033)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (6,762)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (13,271)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (13,271)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
               This schedule  contains Summary Financial  Information  extracted
               from the Balance  Sheet and Income  Statement  for the six months
               ended December 31, 1999 for Mobius Management  Systems,  Inc. and
               is  qualified  in its  entirety by  reference  to such  Financial
               Statements.

</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                            0001025148
<NAME>                                           MOBIUS MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000
<CURRENCY>                                       USD

<S>                                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                   JUL-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                     DEC-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                  1.0
<CASH>                                           32,518
<SECURITIES>                                      9,772
<RECEIVABLES>                                     7,977
<ALLOWANCES>                                        764
<INVENTORY>                                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 60,942
<PP&E>                                           13,556
<DEPRECIATION>                                    5,125
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   81,043
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            27,574
<BONDS>                                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                              2
<OTHER-SE>                                       47,001
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     81,043
<SALES>                                          27,728
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 27,728
<CGS>                                             3,464
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    19,719
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 12,475
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    2
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (7,811)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (2,444)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (5,367)
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (5,367)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (0.30)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (0.30)



</TABLE>
1

This minute order is issued pursuant to the express authority of the Honorable Robert E. 

Blackburn, United States District Judge for the District of Colorado.

2

“[#15]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a specific

paper by the court’s electronic case filing and management system (CM/ECF). I use this convention

throughout this order.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge Robert E. Blackburn

Criminal Case No. 11-cr-00368-REB

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

1. ARTURO MIRANDA-CINTO,

Defendant.

MINUTE ORDER1

A Notice of Disposition and Motion Requesting Change of Plea Hearing

[#15]2 was filed on November 4, 2011. After reviewing the notice and the file, the court

has concluded that a telephonic setting conference should be held to set this matter for

a change of plea hearing.

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. That on November 15, 2011, commencing at 10:00 a.m., the court shall

conduct a telephonic setting conference to set this matter for a change of plea hearing;

2. That counsel for the government shall arrange, initiate, and coordinate the

conference call necessary to facilitate the setting conference; and

3. That the Trial Preparation Conference set for November 18, 2011, and the

jury trial set to commence November 21, 2011, are VACATED.

Dated: November 7, 2011

Case 1:11-cr-00368-REB Document 16 Filed 11/07/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
#### In the Matter of Steven Allan Herman, an Attorney, Respondent. Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Judicial Department, Petitioner.

First Department,

December 4,1990

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Richard M. Maltz*of counsel *(Hal R. Lieberman,*attorney), for petitioner.

*Steven Allan Herman,*respondent *pro se.*

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to the practice of law in New York by the Second Judicial Department on April 21, 1971 and at all relevant times had an office within the First Judicial Department.

*271By notice of petition and petition dated June 18, 1990, the Departmental Disciplinary Committee seeks an order striking respondent’s name from the roll of attorneys pursuant to Judiciary Law §90 (4) (b) on the ground that respondent’s conviction in New Jersey of sexual assault in the second degree, if committed within New York, would constitute a violation of New York Penal Law § 130.65 (3), sexual abuse in the first degree, a class D felony.

On March 1, 1985, respondent pleaded guilty in the Superior Court of the State of New Jersey, Mercer County, to one count of sexual assault in the second degree in violation of New Jersey Statutes Annotated §2C:14-2 (b). In his plea allocution respondent admitted assaulting a 10-year-old boy. In exchange for his plea of guilty, the Mercer County District Attorney’s office agreed not to prosecute respondent for other incidents involving other young boys. On June 4, 1985, respondent was sentenced to three years’ probation on condition that he continue to receive psychiatric counseling, file a report with Probation every 90 days and pay a fine and penalty.

New Jersey Statutes Annotated § 2C:14-2 (b) reads, in pertinent part, as follows:

> "Sexual assault * * *

> "b. An actor is guilty of sexual assault if he commits an act of sexual contact with a victim who is less than 13 years old and the actor is at least four yeárs older than the victim.”

New York Penal Law § 130.65 (3), sexual abuse in the first degree, provides as follows:

> "A person is guilty of sexual abuse in the first degree when he subjects another person to sexual contact:

> "3. When the other person is less than eleven years old.” New York Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (a) provides: "Any person being an attorney and counsellor-at-law who shall be convicted of a felony as defined in paragraph e of this subdivision, shall upon such conviction, cease to be an attorney and counsellor-at-law, or to be competent to practice law as such.” New Jersey Statutes Annotated § 2C:14-2 (b) is essentially similar to New York Penal Law § 130.65 (3) for the purpose of automatic disbarment pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (a).

Accordingly, the motion to strike respondent’s name from the roll of attorneys is granted, and respondent’s name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law nunc pro tunc as of March 1,1985.

*272Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Smith and Rubin, JJ., concur.

Respondent’s name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York nunc pro tunc as of March 1, 1985.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02434-WYD-MEH

CARL GENBERG,

Plaintiff,

v.

STEVEN S. PORTER,

Defendant.

MINUTE ORDER

Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on March 18, 2015.

Defendant’s Unopposed Motion for Entry of Stipulated Protective Order [filed March 17,

2015; docket #201] is granted. The proposed Stipulated Protective Order is accepted and filed

contemporaneously with this minute order.

Case 1:11-cv-02434-WYD-MEH Document 203 Filed 03/18/15 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
#### Sophie Sulkes, Appellant, *v.*Abraham Winters, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

October 25, 1956.

*538
      *Allen E. Marcus*for appellant.

*Morris Wagman*for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

The separation agreement and the letter, both dated February 15, 1947, and both executed at the same time, referred to the same subject matter, are contemporaneous writings and are to be considered and read together as one *(Salinas*v. *Salinas,*187 Misc. 509). However, the stipulation dated May 10, 1950, signed by the plaintiff, settling a previous case based upon differences between the parties in connection with the separation agreement, which stipulation was made in open court and approved and signed by the Justice then presiding, bars any recovery by the plaintiff based on her first cause of action.

However, the order denying appellant’s motion to strike out costs taxed in favor of defendant and for costs in her favor as the prevailing party was improper. The fact that plaintiff was granted summary judgment in connection with her second cause of action makes her the prevailing party and the dismissal of her first cause of action, after trial of the issues, does not change her status as the prevailing party. That order should, therefore, be reversed.

The judgment appealed from should be affirmed, with $25 costs. The order appealed from should be reversed, and motion granted.

Edeb, Hecht and Tilzeb, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, etc.