alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 15

- 00221

- CV

IN THE ESTATE OF GEO RGE GARNER, DECEASED

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No

. 3 of Nueces County , Texas Trial Cause No. 2013

- PR

- 000349

- 3

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed . The Court orders the appeal DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion . Costs of the appeal are adjudged against the party incurring the same

. We further order this decision certified below for observance. Sept ember 2, 2015
INRAD, Inc.
                               181 Legrand Avenue
                               Northvale, NJ 07647
                                                                   Exhibit 10.23
Mr. Peter Turnquest                                            December 31, 1998
Clarex Limited
P.O. Box N3016
Nassau, Bahamas

Dear Mr. Turnquest:

This letter is written to evidence the agreement between Inrad, Inc. (the
"Company") and you, with respect to your $43,740 of accrued interest to December
31, 1998 which the company presently owes you (the Indebtedness) on your secured
note of July 8, 1994, in the principal amount of $250,000.

By signing below, you hereby agree that as payment for the entire amount of this
Indebtedness of $43,740 you will receive 34,992 shares of the Company's Common
Stock (the "Shares").

You further acknowledge that the Indebtedness represents the entire amount owed
to you by the Company for borrowed money as of the date hereof (as opposed to
compensation and benefits).

By signing below, you also represent to the Company that: ( i ) you are able to
bear the economic risk of the investment in the Shares, ( ii ) you recognize and
agree that the Shares have not been registered under the Securities Act of 1933,
as amended ( the "Act"), ( iii) you recognize and agree that you will be
required to continue to bear the risk of investment in the Shares for an
indefinite period, ( iv ) you recognize and agree that such Shares must be held
by you indefinitely unless a subsequent disposition is registered under the Act
or is exempted from registration under all applicable federal and state
securities laws, ( v ) you recognize and agree that the Company will enter stop
transfer notations in its records with respect to the stock certificates
representing the shares, ( vi ) you have knowledge and experience with respect
to the Company and its business and in financial and business affairs generally
so that you are capable of evaluating the merits and risks of the prospective
investment; ( vii ) the Shares are being acquired for your own account for
investment purposes and not with the view of resale or distribution thereof by
you and (viii) you recognize and agree that a restrictive legend will be placed
on the certificates representing the Shares summarizing the restrictions on
transferability outlined above. At the request of Clarex, the Company will make
its best efforts to register the Shares, only if it qualifies to use Securities
and Exchange Commission form S3.

Please confirm your acceptance of the terms of this letter by signing below.

Very truly yours,


James L. Greco
Chief Financial Officer

Agreed to as of the 31st day of December, 1998

Clarex Limited
Exhibit 11.1



INTEGRAL SYSTEMS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE



|                                                                                                    |  |                                   |            |      |   |           |  |   |          
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------- | ---------- | ---- | - | --------- |  | - | ---------
|                                                                                                    |  | Twelve Months Ended September 30,
|                                                                                                    |  | 2004                              |            | 2003 |   | 2002     
|Numerator:                                                                                          |  |                                   |            |      |   |           |  |   |          
|Net Income                                                                                          |  | $                                 | 6,760,998  |      | $ | 5,018,600 |  | $ | 2,623,415
|Denominator:                                                                                        |  |                                   |            |      |   |           |  |   |          
|Denominator for basic earnings per share-weighted-average shares                                    |  |                                   | 9,895,357  |      |   | 9,713,321 |  |   | 9,174,831
|Effect of dilutive securities:                                                                      |  |                                   |            |      |   |           |  |   |          
|Employee stock options                                                                              |  |                                   | 24,642     |      |   | 41,380    |  |   | 57,788   
|Contingently issuable shares                                                                        |  |                                   | 230,349    |      |   | 104,856   |  |   |         
|Denominator for diluted earnings per share adjusted weighted-average shares and assumed conversions |  |                                   | 10,150,348 |      |   | 9,859,557 |  |   | 9,232,619
|Basic earnings per share                                                                            |  | $                                 | 0.68       |      | $ | 0.52      |  | $ | 0.29     
|Diluted earnings per share                                                                          |  | $                                 | 0.67       |      | $ | 0.51      |  | $ | 0.28
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02604-CMA-MJW

NUCOMPASS MOBILITY SERVICES INC.,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

NCOMPASS MOBILITY (S) PTE LTC.,

Defendant(s).

MINUTE ORDER 

Entered by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe

It is hereby ORDERED that the Joint Motion for Protective Order (docket no. 32)

is GRANTED finding good cause shown. The Stipulated Protective Order (docket no.

32-1) is APPROVED as amended in paragraph 35 and made an Order of Court. 

Date: April 23, 2012

Case 1:11-cv-02604-CMA-MJW Document 34 Filed 04/23/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

JUDGE DAVID M. EBEL

Courtroom Deputy: Emily Seamon 

Court Reporter: Tammy Hoffschildt

Date: August 9, 2012

Civil Action No. 11-cv-01934-DME-BNB

Parties: Counsel:

JEFFREY A. BOARDMAN,

Plaintiff,

v.

James Fosnaught 

Sander Karp 

DYLAN HAUCK, an individual, and

AMERICAN FAMILY MUTUAL INSURANCE

COMPANY, a Wisconsin corporation, 

Defendants.

(No appearance)

Heather Salg 

_____________________________________________________________________

COURTROOM MINUTES

_____________________________________________________________________

HEARING: TRIAL PREPARATION CONFERENCE 

1:14 p.m. Court in session.

Also seated at Plaintiff’s table: paralegal Ginny Lemon.

Discussion between the Court and counsel regarding having a jury of eight, the jury

selection process, the trial schedule, time for opening and closing statements, trial time,

issues regarding jury instructions, objections during video depositions, accommodating

the needs of Plaintiff’s counsel and the Plaintiff, and the Court reading the parties’ joint

stipulation of fact to the jury. The Court ruled on several written and oral motions. The

Court’s rulings are without prejudice to the parties’ ability to renew these motions or

objections.

Case 1:11-cv-01934-DME-BNB Document 61 Filed 08/09/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

ORDER: Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Allow Trial Testimony by Telephone [Doc.

No. 57, Filed August 7, 2012] is GRANTED. Officer Martin Donohue may

appear by video conference on Wednesday, August 15, 2012 at 9:30 a.m.

at the federal courthouse in Grand Junction, Courtroom 323. 

ORDER: Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine Regarding Defendant’s Assertion of the Seat

Belt Defense Pursuant to C.R.S. § 42-4-237(7) [Doc. No. 58, Filed August

8, 2012] is DENIED.

ORDER: The jury will not be permitted to hear evidence of the uninsured motorist

insurance policy limits.

ORDER: Parties and witnesses may use a laser pointer as necessary to facilitate

testimony.

ORDER: Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Submit Second Amended Exhibit List

[Doc. No. 55, Filed August 7, 2012] is GRANTED.

ORDER: Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Submit Amended Witness List [Doc. No.

56, Filed August 7, 2012] is GRANTED.

ORDER: The Court sustains Defendant’s objection to Plaintiff’s reader wearing a

doctor’s coat while reading the deposition testimony of Dr. Lorah.

ORDER: Plaintiff’s witness Dr. Krauth may step out of the witness box and come to

counsel table to operate the laptop to show an MRI.

ORDER: Plaintiff’s objection to the untimely disclosure of Defendant’s

demonstrative exhibit is sustained. 

ORDER: Witnesses will be sequestered.

2:21 p.m. Court in recess.

Hearing concluded.

Total in-court time: 1:07

Case 1:11-cv-01934-DME-BNB Document 61 Filed 08/09/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
H. Res. 918 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

January 16, 2008. 

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 

XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 

the bill (H.R. 2768) to establish improved mandatory standards to protect miners during emergencies, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. 

All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived 

except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed 

one hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and 

ranking minority member of the Committee on Education 

and Labor. After general debate the bill shall be considered 

for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall be in 

order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature 

of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Education 

and Labor now printed in the bill. The committee amendment 
2 

•HRES 918 EH 

in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. All 

points of order against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived except those arising under 

clause 10 of rule XXI. Notwithstanding clause 11 of rule 

XVIII, no amendment to the committee amendment in the 

nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed 

in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 

resolution. Each such amendment may be offered only in the 

order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member 

designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be 

debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided 

and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not 

be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the 

Committee of the Whole. All points of order against such 

amendments are waived except those arising under clause 9 

or 10 of rule XXI. At the conclusion of consideration of the 

bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the 

bill to the House with such amendments as may have been 

adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the 

House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the 

Whole to the bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final 
3 

•HRES 918 EH 

passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. 

SEC. 2. During consideration in the House of H.R. 2768 

pursuant to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of 

the previous question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the bill to such time as may be designated by the 

Speaker. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
---

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Golden Queen Mining
Co. Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended June 30,
2006 (the "Report"), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates
indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his
knowledge:

| | 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.

|Dated: August 14, 2006 | /s/ Lutz
      Klingmann                 
|---------------------- | -----------------------------------------
|                       | Lutz Klingmann                           
|                       | President and Principal Financial Officer

1

---
#### WAGNER v. SUPREME INDUSTRIAL LIFE INS. CO.

No. 18080.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

May 1, 1944.

Gill & Simon and John T. Charbonnet, all of New Orleans, for appellant.

Prowell & McBride, of New Orleans, for appellee.

WESTERFIELD, Judge.

The beneficiary of an industrial life insurance policy brings this suit for $500, .the principal sum thereof. The defense as outlined in defendant’s answer, though articulate in form, was in the nature of a general denial.

There was judgment below in favor of plaintiff and defendant has appealed.

The case, as argued and briefed in this court, involves only the sufficiency of the proof of the death of the insured. We are requested to remand the case in order that further proof might be administered on this point.

Plaintiff’s father, Cecil Augustus Wagner, was a seaman on the S. S. Sixeola, which was torpedoed on June 12, 1942, when twenty-eight members of its crew of eighty-six were lost. Wagner has not since been heard from.

On June 25, 1942, Lucille Wagner, the plaintiff’s mother and the insured’s wife, received a telegram from Admiral Wae-sche, Commandant of the United States Coast Guard, reading as follows:

> “The Navy Department deeply regrets to inform you that your husband Cecil Wagner is missing following action in the performance of his duty and in the service of his Country. The Coast Guard appreciates your great anxiety and will furnish you further information promptly when received to prevent possible aid to our enemies please do not divulge the name of his ship”.

On December 2, 1942, another letter was received from the Coast Guard, signed by one C. W. Sanders, advising her as follows :

> “There were fifty-eight survivors from this vessel, and I regret to advise that twenty-nine members of the crew, including Mr. Wagner, were reported missing. Due to the length of time and the circumstances of the attack, these missing crew members are presumed lost.”

The Maritime War Emergency Board found, after an investigation, that the missing seamen who were on board the S. S. Sixeola at the time of its sinking, were presumably dead.

On the 18th of August, 1942, the United States Treasury issued a warrant to the order of Wagner’s widow in the sum of $5,150, $150 of which was for the loss of Wagner’s personal effects, and the remainder, war risk insurance.

On September- 26, 1943, the American Legion issued its Gold Star Citation to Wagner’s next of surviving kin.

The basis of defendant’s request for the remand of the case is a statement made by Lucille Wagner while on the stand, that on June 15th, she had received a letter from her husband written from Cristobal, concerning which she replied, “but I guess according to the telegram'he was already dead when I received the letter.”

*757We are of the opinion that the circumstantial evidence is sufficient to justify the conclusion that the insured is dead. Death, like any other fact, may be proved by circumstantial evidence. Boyd v. New England Mutual Life Ins. Co., 34 La.Ann. 848.

For the reasons assigned the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Affirmed.
Order entered January 14, 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 18 - 01048 - CV WILLIAM CHARLES BUND REN, ET AL. , Appellant s V. COLLIN CENTRAL APPRA ISAL DISTRICT, ET AL . , Appellee s On Appeal from the 416th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 416 - 05054 - 2017



### O RDER Before the Court is appellants’ January 11, 2019 unopposed second motion for an extension of time to file a brief. We GRANT th e motion and extend the time to January 18, 2019

. /s/ KEN MOLBERG JUSTICE
|   | (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:  | 7/25/11 |   |                                                           |   |
|--------|---------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |    |   |                                                           |   |
|   |    |   |                                                           |   |
|   |    |   | /s/ PATRICK J. LAWLOR                                          |   |
|   |    |   | Patrick J. Lawlor                                              |   |
|   |    |   | Vice President Finance,Chief Financial Officer & Secretary |   |
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Inconnection with the Annual Report of Calypso Wireless, Inc. (the “Company”) onForm 10-KSB/A for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the “Report”), as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, David Davilo, CEO andPresident of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1. TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2. Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

/s/ David DaviloCEO and PresidentDated: June 22, 2005

A signed original of this writtenstatement required by Section 906 has been provided to Calypso Wireless, Inc. and will beretained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.
Case 1:11-cv-02503-LTB Document 2 Filed 09/30/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 4
Case 1:11-cv-02503-LTB Document 2 Filed 09/30/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 4
Case 1:11-cv-02503-LTB Document 2 Filed 09/30/11 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 4
Case 1:11-cv-02503-LTB Document 2 Filed 09/30/11 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 4
#### Samuel POLLACK, Trading as Samuel Pollack, Real Estate, Appellant, v. EVANS HOTEL CORPORATION, a Corporation, Appellee.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division A.

Nov. 19, 1954.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
H. Res. 923 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

June 3, 2008. 

Whereas Minnesota was established as a territory on March 

2, 1849, and became the 32nd State on May 11, 1858; 

Whereas Minnesota is also known as the ‘‘Gopher State’’, the 

‘‘North Star State’’, and the ‘‘Land of 10,000 Lakes’’; 

Whereas Minnesota’s name comes from the Dakota word 

‘‘minesota’’, meaning ‘‘water that reflects the sky’’, and 

Native Americans continue to play a defining role in Minnesota’s proud heritage; 

Whereas the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul were established after the completion of nearby Fort Snelling, a 

frontier outpost and training center for Civil War soldiers; 

Whereas more than 338,000,000 tons of Minnesota iron ore 

were shipped between 1940 and 1945 that contributed to 

the U.S. military victory in World War II, and an additional 648,000,000 tons of iron ore were shipped between 

1945 and 1955 that boosted post-war economic expansion 

in the U.S.; 

Whereas in 1889, the Saint Mary’s Hospital, now known as 

the Mayo Clinic, opened its doors to patients in Rochester, Minnesota, and is now known worldwide for its cutting-edge care; 
2 

•HRES 923 EH 

Whereas Minnesota continues to be a leader in innovation 

and is currently home to more than 35 Fortune 500 

Companies; 

Whereas Minnesota houses over 30 institutions of higher education including the University of Minnesota, a worldclass research university where the first open heart surgery and first bone marrow transplant was performed in 

the United States; 

Whereas farmland spans over half of Minnesota’s 54 million 

acres and the agriculture industry is Minnesota’s second 

largest job market, employing nearly 80,000 farmers; 

Whereas Minnesota is the Nation’s number one producer of 

sugarbeets and turkeys; 

Whereas Minnesota is a national leader in the production and 

use of renewable energy, which helps our Nation reduce 

its dependency on foreign sources of oil; 

Whereas the Mall of America located in Bloomington, Minnesota, is the Nation’s largest retail and entertainment 

complex, spanning 9,500,000 square feet and providing 

more than 11,000 jobs; 

Whereas Minnesota has 90,000 miles of lake and river shoreline, which includes the coast of Lake Superior, the largest of North America’s Great Lakes; 

Whereas the Minneapolis-St. Paul area is nationally recognized for its parks, museums, and cultural events; and 

Whereas the people of Minnesota have a timeless reputation 

of compassion, strength, and determination: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives congratulates the State of Minnesota on its 150th anniversary and the 
3 

•HRES 923 EH 

contributions it continues to make to America’s economy and 

heritage. 

Attest: 

Clerk.