alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated balance sheet, consolidated statement of operations and
consolidated statement of cash flows included in the Company's Form 10-Q for the
period ending September 30, 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>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           2,527
<SECURITIES>                                     4,346
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,498
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,083
<INVENTORY>                                        189
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                22,211
<PP&E>                                           7,660
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,525
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  40,604
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,896
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            52
<OTHER-SE>                                      31,995
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    40,604
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                31,369
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   22,640
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                16,863
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (231)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (7,911)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (2,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (5,911)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (5,911)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (1.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.19)


</TABLE>
#### Brobst *v.*City of Williamsport, Appellant.

Argued Feb. 16, 1910.

Appeal, No. 406,

Jan. T., 1909, by, defendant, from judgment of C. P. Lycoming Co., Sept. T.,-1908, No. 452, on verdict for plaintiff in case of William MiBrobst v. The City of Williamsport.

Before Fell, C. J., Mestrezat, Elkin, Stewart and Moschzisker, JJ. ■

Affirmed.

Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. .

*Frank P. Cummings,*city solicitor, for appellant.

*Charles J. Reilly,*for appellee.

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Stewart,

March 28, 1910:

The questions raised in this appeal are the same as those raised in No. 405, January Term, 1909, ante, p. 591. The ap*597pellee here recovered in the court below for injuries received in the same accident that was the basis of recovery in that case. Both cases were argued together, the facts and the law governing being the same in each. For the reasons stated in the opinion filed in No. 405, January Term, 1909, the assignments of error in this case are overruled, and the judgment is affirmed.
EXHIBIT 23











INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(File Nos.  33-61949, 33-52786, 33-36609 and 33-23837) of the A.G. Edwards,
Inc. 1988 Incentive Stock Plan on Form S-8 of our report dated April 22,
1999, appearing in and/or incorporated by reference in the Annual Report on
Form 10-K of A.G. Edwards, Inc. for the year ended February 28, 1999.






/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

May 27, 1999
St. Louis, Missouri
Exhibit 24(a)



                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



We consent to the incorporation by reference into the Company's previously
filed Registration Statements on Form S-8 for the Anuhco, Inc. 1992 Incentive
Stock Plan, File No. 33-51494, the American Carriers, Inc. 1983 Incentive Stock
Option Plan, File No. 2-86915, and the Stock Option Agreement by and between
Anuhco, Inc. and C. Ted McCarter, effective May 31, 1995, File No. 33-62553, of
our report dated February 18, 1997 on our audit of the consolidated financial
statements and financial statement schedule of Anuhco, Inc. as of December 31,
1996 and for the two years then ended, which report is incorporated by
reference in this Amendment No. 3 to Annual Report on Form  10-K/A-3.




                                    /s/ Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.

                                    COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.




Kansas City, Missouri

May 5, 1997
Exhibit 99.2


                              CERTIFICATION OF COO

    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 19 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANCES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Catherine P. Jackson, state and attest that:

1.       I am the Chief Operating Officer of Heritage Bankshares, Inc. (the
         "Registrant").

2.       I hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
         pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. that

o        the Annual Report of Form 10-KSB of the Registrant for the year ended
         December 31, 2002, (the "periodic report") containing financial
         statements 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 78o(d));
         and

o        the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in
         all material respects, the financial condition and results of
         operations of the Registrant for the periods presented.



Date:  March 26, 2003                      /s/ Catherine P. Jackson
                                           --------------------------
                                           Catherine P. Jackson
                                           Chief Operating Officer
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
LOR R AINE M ANATT, Pla intiff - Appe lla nt,
v. STATE OF NEVADA, e x re l its De pa rtm e nt of B u s ine ss a

nd Industry , Division of Industria

l R e la tions, De fe nda

nt - Appe lle e . No. 12-16668 D.C . No. 3:10-c v-00505-LRHVPC
M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Sta t e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ne v a da La rry R . Hic ks, Distric t Judge , Pre s iding Subm itte d Fe brua

ry 8, 2016 ** Sa n Fra n c isc o , C a lifornia B e fore : HAW KINS a nd M UR G UIA, C irc uit Judge s a nd B R EYER , *** Distric t Judge
. 

# FIL ED
FEB 25 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U

. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public a t ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a )(2). *** The Honora

ble C ha rle s R . B re y e r, Unite d Sta te s Distric t Judge for the Northe rn Distric t of C a lifornia , sitting by de signa tion.Lorra ine M a na t t, a form e r industria l hy gie nist with the Ne va da D e pa rtm e n t of Bu s i n e ss a nd Industry (the “ D e pa rtm e n t” ), a

ppe a l s the distric t c ourt’ s gra n t o f
sum m a ry judgm e n t in fa v or of the De pa rtm e nt on M a na tt’ s re ta lia tion c la im brought unde r Title VII of the C ivil R ights Ac t of 1964. Se e 42 U.S.C . § 2000e

– 3 (a ). W e a gre e with t

he d istrict co u rt tha t M a

n a t t fa ile d to ra ise a ge nuine issue of
m a te ria l fa c t on whe the r the “ a d ve rse e m ploy m e nt a c tions” ta ke n b y the De pa rtm e nt
we re m otiva

te d b y M a na tt re porting a ra c ist vide o tha

t a nothe r e m ploy e e ha d shown
a t he r workpla c e . Se e R ay v . H e nde rson , 217 F.3d 1234, 1240 (9th C ir. 2000). Eve n
a ssum ing M a na t t h a d m a de a prim a fa c ie c a se of re ta lia

tion, she a lso fa ile d to ra ise a ge nuine issue o f m a te ria l f ac t on whe the r the re a sons o ffe re d by t he De pa rtm e nt for its a c tions we re a p re te xt for un law f u l d i s c rim ina tion. S

e e Ste ine r v . Show boat Ope rating C

o. , 2 5 F
. 3d 1 459, 1464–65 (9th C ir. 1994). The distric t c ourt thus prope rly gra nte d sum

m a ry judgm e nt in fa vor of the De pa rtm e nt on M a na tt’ s Title VII
re ta lia tion c la im
. AFFIRM E D.
Order entered June 21, 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 18

- 01011

- CR

JACOLBY MARQUAN HILL , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Crimin al District Court No. 2

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F17

- 75383

- I



### O RDER

Before the Court is the State’s June 20, 2019 second motion to extend the time to file its

brief. The State has tendered its brief with the motion. We GRANT the motion and ORDER

the State’s brief filed as of the date of this order.

/s/ CORY L. CARLYLE JUSTICE
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 20, 2019

No. 04-19-00343-CV

Brittany RETLEDGE and Arnold Lamotte, Jr.,

Appellants

v.

Misty SANTANA,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 3, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019CV04147

Honorable J Frank Davis, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Appellants, proceeding pro se, seek to appeal the county court’s judgment of eviction 

signed on May 17, 2019. Appellants timely filed a notice of appeal. The clerk’s record and 

reporter’s record were filed on July 15, 2019 and July 22, 2019, respectively. Appellants’ brief 

was therefore due to be filed on August 21, 2019, but neither the brief nor a motion for extension 

of time to file the brief was filed. The clerk of this court notified appellants that the appellants’ 

brief was late and that either the brief or a motion for extension of time to file the brief should be 

filed on or before September 30, 2019. Appellants responded by filing a motion for extension of 

time to file their appellants’ brief. The motion for extension was granted and the deadline for 

filing the appellants’ brief was extended to November 22, 2019, with a notation stating, “No 

further extensions absent extenuating circumstances.” To date, the appellants’ brief has not been 

filed.

It is therefore ORDERED that appellants show cause in writing within fifteen (15) days

from the date of this order why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a).

_________________________________

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 20th day of December, 2019.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ,

Clerk of Court
EXHIBIT 32.01

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of iGATE Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), I, Phaneesh Murthy, Chief Executive Officer and Director of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



|(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/    PHANEESH MURTHY                              
|Phaneesh Murthy Chief Executive Officer and
Director

Date: May 5, 2008
**Exhibit 13**

 

**SECTION 906 CERTIFICATIONS**

 

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350**

 

 

I, Brian Charles Hartzer, certify that the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended 30 September 2016 of Westpac Banking Corporation (the “issuer”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the issuer.

 
|                                           | Date: 7   November 2016 |
|------------------------------------------------|------------------------------|
|                                           |                         |
|                                           |                         |
|                                           |                         |
|                                           | /s/ Brian Charles Hartzer    |
|                                           | Brian Charles Hartzer        |
| Managing Director and

Chief Executive Officer |

 

I, Peter Francis King, certify that the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended 30 September 2016 of Westpac Banking Corporation (the “issuer”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the issuer.

 
|                    | Date: 7   November 2016 |
|-------------------------|------------------------------|
|                    |                         |
|                    |                         |
|                    |                         |
|                    | /s/ Peter Francis King       |
|                    | Peter Francis King           |
| Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
Directors Stock Option Plan



 EXHIBIT 10(z) 
  
 AMENDMENT NO. 7 
 TO 
 AMERICAN DENTAL PARTNERS, INC. 
 AMENDED AND RESTATED 1996 DIRECTORS STOCK OPTION PLAN 
  
 The American Dental Partners, Inc. Amended and Restated 1996 Directors Stock Option Plan, as previously amended (the “Plan”), is hereby amended
pursuant to the following provisions: 
  
 1. Definitions

  
 All capitalized terms used in this amendment which are not
otherwise defined herein shall have the respective meanings given such terms in the Plan. 
  
 2. Shares Subject To Plan 
  
 The total number of Shares for which Options may be granted under the Plan, as provided under §4 of the Plan, as previously adjusted and increased, is increased by 125,000 Shares to a total of 385,000 Shares. 
  
 3. Effective Date; Construction 
  
 The effective date of this amendment is April 30, 2004, and this amendment
shall be deemed to be a part of the Plan as of such date. In the event of any inconsistencies between the provisions of the Plan and this amendment, the provisions of this amendment shall control. Except as modified by this amendment, the Plan shall
continue in full force and effect without change.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF SPALDING HOLDINGS CORPORATION FOR THE SIX FISCAL MONTHS
ENDED JULY 1, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   OTHER
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                JUL-1-2000
<CASH>                                           3,323
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  110,777
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (2,465)
<INVENTORY>                                     58,577
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               193,419
<PP&E>                                         104,529
<DEPRECIATION>                                (57,662)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 462,775
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          146,997
<BONDS>                                        525,158
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    100,000
<COMMON>                                           989
<OTHER-SE>                                   (328,106)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   462,775
<SALES>                                        235,651
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               235,651
<CGS>                                          113,753
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  113,753
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                94,991
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              29,476
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,569)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (905)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,664)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,664)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02420-RPM

NORMAN RIDDLE,

Plaintiff,

v.

THE WESTERN UNION COMPANY,

Defendant.

____________________________________________________________________________

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION TO AMEND SCHEDULING ORDER

____________________________________________________________________________

Upon review of Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Amend Scheduling Order [23], filed June

23, 2012, it is

ORDERED that the Scheduling Order is amended to provide for the following new

deadlines:

Designation of expert witnesses and expert disclosures August 17, 2012

Designation of contracting expert witnesses and disclosures September 14, 2012

Designation of rebuttal expert witnesses and disclosures October 5, 2012

Submission of last interrogatories September 14, 2012

Submission of last requests for production or admissions September 14, 2012

Discovery cut-off date October 19, 2012

Potentially dispositive motions November 16, 2012

DATED: June 26th, 2012

BY THE COURT:

s/Richard P. Matsch

__________________________

Richard P. Matsch, Senior Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02420-RPM Document 24 Filed 06/26/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
204 La. 475

#### STATE v. WEST.

No. 37147.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 8, 1943.

Eugene Stanley, Atty. Gen., Niels F. Hertz, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., and Edwin M. Fraser, Dsit. Atty., of Many, for the State, plaintiff appellee.

W. C. Boone, of Leesville, for defendant, appellant.

HAMITER, Justice.

Defendant, Wingate West, was tried and convicted by a jury for the theft of three hogs valued at $60 and owned by Jim Mc-Rae. From the conviction and the sentence that followed he appealed.

Neither a brief nor an oral argument in behalf of the appeal has been presented in this court; however, we find in the record two bills of exceptions on which defendant obviously relies for a reversal.

It appears from these bills and from the district judge’s per curiams that on or about December 23, 1942, defendant, along with several assistants, killed and dressed threp hogs in a wooded section of Vernon Parish located several miles from the parish court house, and that the removed hair was buried at the scene of such operation. McRae’s animals were lost at about that time.

Certain witnesses for the state, during the course of the trial, testified that the hogs of McRae were of a blue and spotted color; defendant and his witnesses, on the other hand, insisted that those killed were colored differently. After this conflict in the evidence developed, defense counsel requested the court to permit the jury’s attending “the scene where the said hogs had been killed and their hair preserved, all for the purpose of definitely determining the color of the hogs killed * * * ”. The court refused to grant the request; whereupon defendant reserved his first bill of exceptions.

The matter of whether the jurors should be permitted to make observations away from the court room is one which addresses itself largely to the discretion of the court. State v. McDougal, 166 La. 303, *117*So. 233; State v. Seal, 175 La. 103, 143 So. 18. We do not find that there has been an abuse of that discretion here. The hair existing at the scene of the slaughtering *859could have been either adequately described by witnesses or brought into court for the jury’s inspection.

The second bill of exceptions, we-think, is also without merit. Under it defendant complains of the court’s overruling of his motion for a new trial. An additional hearing was desired, so the motion shows, in order that new evidence relating to the color of the slaughtered hogs might be presented to the jury. Such evidence, if received, would tend merely to contradict or impeach the testimony of the state’s witnesses; and, in a situation of that kind, a ndw trial will not be granted. Code of 'Criminal Procedure Article 511; State v. Raney, 181 La. 638, 160 So. 124 (and authorities therein cited).

The verdict of the jury and the sentence of the court are affirmed.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE O F FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME E XPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED SAFIR S. KAZI ,

Appellant ,
v. Cas e No. 5D 22 -2826 LT Case No. 2022

- CF

- 002049 -A
STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee

. ________________________________/ Decision filed July 3, 2023 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Se minole County, Melissa Souto, Judge. Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Betty Wyatt, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Richard A. Pallas, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee. PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. EDWARDS, C.J., LAMBERT and JAY, JJ., concur.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Criminal Action No. 11-cr-00375-CMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

5. EDWARD R. GOLL,

Defendant.

ORDER

______________________________________________________________________________

THE COURT, upon review of the oral motion of the United States requesting an Order,

under the terms of the Plea Agreement, that calls for the forfeiture of four firearms as follows:

1) One Marlin 22-caliber rifle bearing serial number 03240407; 

2) One Mossberg 12 gauge shotgun bearing serial number P461874;

3) One Western 12 gauge shotgun (etched #4475); and

4) One Smith & Wesson 9mm pistol bearing serial number A312580l.

The Court, having being sufficiently advised, hereby

ORDERS that said firearms are forfeited pursuant to the terms of the plea agreement

under the provisions of Title 18, United States Code, Section 3365. 

DATED this 13th day of April, 2012

BY THE COURT:

____________________________________

CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO

United States District Judge

Case 1:11-cr-00375-CMA Document 328 Filed 04/13/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1