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

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1621 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to treat certain farming 

business machinery and equipment as 5-year property for purposes of 

depreciation. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 14, 2007 

Mr. CONRAD (for himself, Mr. CRAPO, Mr. HARKIN, Mr. ROBERTS, Mrs. LINCOLN, Mr. BUNNING, and Mr. SALAZAR) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to treat certain farming business machinery and equipment as 5- 

year property for purposes of depreciation. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN FARMING BUSINESS MACHINERY AND 

4 EQUIPMENT TREATED AS 5-YEAR PROPERTY. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 168(e)(3)(B) of the Inter6 nal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining 5-year property) is 

7 amended by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of clause (v), by 

8 striking the period at the end of clause (vi)(III) and inmstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•S 1621 IS

1 serting ‘‘, and’’, and by inserting after clause (vi) the fol2 lowing new clause: 

3 ‘‘(vii) any machinery or equipment 

4 (other than any grain bin, cotton ginning 

5 asset, fence, or other land improvement) 

6 which is used in a farming business (as de7 fined in section 263A(e)(4)) and placed in 

8 service before January 1, 2010.’’. 

9 (b) ALTERNATIVE SYSTEM.—The table contained in 

10 section 168(g)(3)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 

11 1986 (relating to special rule for certain property assigned 

12 to classes) is amended by inserting after the item relating 

13 to subparagraph (B)(iii) the following: 

‘‘(B)(vii) .................................................................................. 10’’. 

14 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

15 this section shall apply to property placed in service after 

16 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge Christine M. Arguello

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02547-CMA-KLM

BOND SAFEGUARD INSURANCE COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

v.

JIMMY CAMP DEVELOPMENT, INC.,

 a/k/a JIMMY CAMP DEV., INC., a/k/a known as JIMMY CAMP, LLC,

ALLEN D. VAN WHYHE,

CARY L. CARPENTER, and

GEORGE KRAMER,

Defendants.

ORDER REGARDING GARNISHMENT

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Court Order on

Garnishment Answer (Doc. # 38). Upon review, the Court finds as follows: 

Default judgment was entered in favor of Plaintiff and jointly and severally against

Defendants Jimmy Camp Development, Inc., Allen D. Van Whyhe, and Cary

L. Carpenter in the amount of $333,355.15 on January 25, 2012 (Doc. # 27). On May

22, 2012, the Clerk’s Office issued a Writ of Garnishment to Cumberland Green

Metropolitan District (the “District”), in the amount of $333,455.31 (Doc. # 34). On June

5, 2012, the District answered the Writ, and represented that the District owes

Defendant Jimmy Camp Development, Inc. (the judgment debtor) $1,200,000 (Doc.

# 36). The District further indicated that it does not claim any setoff against the owed

debt. Id. at 2. Thus, Plaintiff filed the Motion at hand, requesting that the Court enter

Case 1:11-cv-02547-CMA-KLM Document 40 Filed 06/19/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
1

 The Motion was served on the District. (Doc. # 38 at 4.)

2

 Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 69, Colorado law governs the enforcement of a money

judgment by writ. Pursuant to Colo. R. Civ. P. 103 § 4(f)(1),

If the answer to a writ of garnishment shows the garnishee is indebted to such

judgment debtor, the clerk shall enter judgment in favor of such judgment debtor

and against the garnishee for the use of the judgment creditor for the amount of

the indebtedness shown in such answer and order such amount paid into the

registry of the court. In no event shall any judgment against the garnishee be

more than the total amount due and owing on the judgment.

2

judgment in favor of Defendant Jimmy Camp Development, Inc. and against the

garnishee District in the amount of $333,493.52 (which includes interest), and order

that the District pay such amount into the Court registry for disbursement.1 See Doc.

# 38.

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 69 and Colo. R. Civ. P. 103 §4(f)(1),2 it is hereby

ORDERED that the Motion (Doc. # 38) is GRANTED. The Clerk’s Office is

directed to enter judgment in favor of Defendant Jimmy Camp Development, Inc. and

against garnishee Cumberland Green Metropolitan District for the use of Plaintiff Bond

Safeguard Insurance Company in the amount of $333,493.52. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that garnishee Cumberland Green Metropolitan District

shall pay the amount of the judgment, $333,493.52, into the Court registry pursuant to

D.C.COLO.LCivR 67.2A. Any request for disbursement must be submitted pursuant to

D.C.COLO.LCivR 67.2D.

DATED: June 19 , 2012

BY THE COURT:

_______________________________

CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO

United States District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02547-CMA-KLM Document 40 Filed 06/19/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
| Skip to Content*Release Date: June 7, 2007*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**F.205 Time and Savings Deposits** |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### BRENNER v. SMULLIAN.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June Term 1953.

Certiorari denied without opinion.
<PAGE>


                                                                  Exhibit 10.34
                                           
                                 FIRST AMENDMENT
                             TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
                                           
    This Amendment to Employment Agreement ("this Amendment") dated as of 
April 30, 1996, is between MOLECULAR BIOSYSTEMS, INC., a Delaware Corporation 
(the "Corporation") and BOBBA VENKATADRI ("Employee").

                                     RECITALS

    A.   The Corporation  and the Employee are parties to an Employment
Agreement effective November 1, 1995 ("the Agreement").

    B.   Paragraph 7 (a) provides in part: "This Agreement may not be
changed... but only by way of an instrument in writing signed by the parties
referring to this Agreement."

    C.   The Corporation and the Employee wish to amend the Agreement with
respect to the Employee's home in Pennsylvania

    THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein and in
the Agreement, the Corporation and the Employee agree as follows:

    1.   Paragraph 5(f)(i) shall be stricken in its entirety and replaced by
the following:

         f.  REAL ESTATE

              (i) The Employee shall be responsible for sale of Employee's home
         located at 300 Barn Hill Road, Westchester, Pennsylvania 19382.  If
         the Employee's home is sold on or before April 30, 1998, the
         Corporation shall be responsible for paying the non-recurring costs
         which are incurred by Employee in the sale of the home.  These costs
         shall include costs which are normally borne by the seller of a home,
         such as real estate agent fees, escrow fees and closing costs.  The
         Employee shall be responsible for these costs if the home is sold
         after the above date.  The Corporation shall also be responsible for
         paying all reasonable expenses for storage, movement and insurance of
         household goods incurred in connection with the sale of Employee's
         home whether or not the home is sold before April 30, 1998.  For the
         purposes of this paragraph, the home will be considered "sold" when
         the sales contract is signed and the escrow period closes.  

<PAGE>

         The Corporation shall not be required to pay for the services of a 
         professional property management company to maintain, market, or 
         sell the Employee's home.
         
AGREED:

                             MOLECULAR BIOSYSTEMS, INC.



                             /s/ Steven Lawson
                             --------------------------------------------------
                             Steven Lawson
                             Vice President, Legal Affairs and 
                                 General Counsel






                             /s/ Bobba Venkatadri
                             --------------------------------------------------
                             Bobba Venkatadri
Exhibit 31.2

**Certification of Chief Financial Officer**

I, Anders Giltvedt, certify that:

1.          I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A to the Annual Report on Form 10‐K for the year ended December 31, 2009,  of West Coast Bancorp; and

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

 

|   |  |
|--------|--|

 

 

----
OFFICIAL NOTICE FROM COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS

P.O. BOX 12308,CAPITOL STATION, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711

OFFICIAL BUS

STATE OF TEXAS

PEWALTY FOR

1/30/2015 PR8VATEUSE • '• gg WS^gXEi 0002003152 feb 09 "201-5

ANTHONY, CARL DEWAYNE Tr. (^Nof^GRWljO MAILEDFRO|w.vvR3g2,8^9,-'01 On this day, the application for 11.07 Writ of Habeas Corpus has been received

; and presented to the Court.

CARL DEWAYNE ANTHONY

ELLIS I UNIT - TDC # 1820527

1697 FM 980

HUNTSVILLE, TX 77343

.%&>•

c ^

^EESmS? P1TNEV BOWES

02 1R

0002003152

Abel Acosta, Clerk

UTF

•43B 77320 ||1fti. .i,,.,i|r|,,11 fI>f|,,ff1yi1i.j1.1,., J11| i,.1,.,r..,i|f1fif
BEN & JERRY'S HOMEMADE, INC. 			
 			COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE						
 			(In thousands except per share amounts)						

									
									


                            			Thirteen weeks ended				Thirty-nine weeks ended
                              			9/30/95	 	9/24/94	      9/30/95    	9/24/94
 									
Primary:									
Average shares outstanding	     		 7,177  		 7,151     		  7,157       7,147 
Net effect of dilutive stock
  options -	
 	based on the treasury stock 								
 	method using average								
 	market price		                      83 		 		                41 		 
									
Totals			                          7,260     7,151         7,198    	 7,147 
Net Income	                       $2,525    $1,415  		    $5,089     $3,032
Per share amount	                		$0.35   		$0.20 		      $0.71    		$0.42 
									
									
Fully diluted:									
Average shares outstanding		     	 7,177     7,151         7,157      7,147 
Net effect of dilutive stock
  options -									
 	based on the treasury stock 								
 	method using quarter-end								
	market price which is greater								
	than average market price         		103 	   		              	60 	       	1 
									
Totals			                          7,280     7,151         7,217      7,148     
Net Income			                     $2,525 	  $1,415        $5,089     $3,032 
Per share amount			                $0.35   		$0.20       		$0.71    		$0.42
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 24, 2016

No. 04

- 15

- 00808

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF S.L.S., S.S., S.L.S., CHILDREN,

From the 406th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012

- CVL

- 000402

- D4

Honorable Oscar J. Hale, Jr., Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

The panel has considered the Appellant ’ s Motion for Rehearing, and the Motion is

DENIED.

_________________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 24th day of J une, 2016

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge Christine M. Arguello

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02711-CMA-MEH

IN RE THE APPLICATION OF:

JAVIER ORTEGA PONCE,

Petitioner,

v.

S. BRENDA SANCHEZ,

Respondent;

and concerning

THE MINOR CHILD JOSE ANTONIO ORTEGA SANCHEZ,

 DOB 7/21/04.

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS

This matter is before the Court on Petitioner’s “Motion for Attorney Fees and

Costs,” filed on December 9, 2011. (Doc. # 22.) On December 8, 2011, the Court

granted Petitioner’s “Application for Return of the Minor Children to Petitioner” and

ordered Respondent to return the minor child to Mexico. (Doc. # 19.) The Petition

was brought pursuant to the International Child Abduction Remedies Act

(“ICARA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 11601-11610 (2007) and the Hague Convention on the

Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, 1998 WL 411501, T.I.A.S. No.

11,670. 

Case 1:11-cv-02711-CMA Document 24 Filed 12/28/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

42 U.S.C. § 11607(b)(3) provides that “[a]ny court ordering the return of a child

brought under section 11603 . . . shall order the respondent to pay necessary expenses

incurred by or on behalf of the petitioner, . . . unless the respondent establishes that

such order would be clearly inappropriate.” Despite being advised by the Court that she

had one week to respond to any request for attorneys’ fees and costs, Respondent has

not responded to the instant motion, and so Respondent has failed to establish that

granting such relief would be clearly inappropriate. 

Petitioner’s counsel indicates that he represented Petitioner pro bono, and so

Petitioner is not requesting an award of attorneys’ fees. However, Petitioner incurred

several costs during the pendency of this case, including a filing fee for the Petition,

fees for service of documents on Respondent, and fees for interpreters and translation

services. In total, Petitioner asserts that he incurred $1,640.16 in costs. The Court

finds that these requested costs are reasonable. 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT Petitioner’s “Motion for Attorney Fees and

Costs” (Doc. # 22) is GRANTED. Respondent is ORDERED to pay to Petitioner

$1,640.16 in costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 11607(b)(3). 

DATED: December 28, 2011

BY THE COURT:

________________________________

CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO

United States District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02711-CMA Document 24 Filed 12/28/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
#### CENTURY INDEMNITY COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STANDARD CAHILL CO., Inc., Defendant-Appellee, Federal Broadcasting Corporation, N. Y. Metropolitan Broadcasting Company, Edward Whitwell, George A. Coats, Paul M. Kuder, Defendants.

No. 117.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Jan. 3, 1938.

Leo E. Sherman, of New York City, for appellant. -

James Marshall and R. J. Schosberg, both of New York City, for appellee.

Before MANTON, L. HAND, and CHASE, Circuit Judges. .

PER CURIAM.

• Judgment affirmed.
**Exhibit31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Mark L. Freitas, certifythat:

 

1.             I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period endedJune 12, 2005 of Lancer Corporation;

 

2.             Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.             Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.             The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a.               Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b.              Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and

 

c.               Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

5.             The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

a.               All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and

 

b.              Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.

 

Date:  August 12, 2005

 

 
| /s/  MARK L. FREITAS                      |   |
|-------------------------------------------|--------|
| Mark  L. Freitas, Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
4830-5213-9896 

64296489 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

Civil Action No. 11-CV-02285-NYW 

CENTER FOR LEGAL ADVOCACY, d/b/a 

DISABILITY LAW COLORADO,

Plaintiff,

v. 

REGGIE BICHA, 

in his official capacity as Executive Director 

of the Colorado Department of Human Services, and 

JILL MARSHALL, in her official capacity 

as Chief Executive Officer of the Colorado Mental Health 

Institute at Pueblo, 

Defendants.

NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY 

 Plaintiff Center for Legal Advocacy d/b/a Disability Law Colorado, through undersigned, 

hereby gives notice of supplemental authority relevant to this litigation. Attached hereto as 

Exhibit 1 is a Mental Health Press Release issued by the Delta County Sheriff’s Office on 

October 10, 2018. 

DATED: October 12, 2018. 

/// 

 

Case No. 1:11-cv-02285-NYW Document 108 filed 10/12/18 USDC Colorado pg 1 of 3
4830-5213-9896 

 2 

64296489 

Respectfully submitted, 

s/ Iris Eytan 

Iris Eytan 

EYTAN NIELSEN LLC 

3200 Cherry Creek South Drive 

Denver, CO 80209 

Telephone: 720.440.8155 

Facsimile: 720.440.8156 

Email: iris@eytan-nielsen.com 

s/ Caleb Durling 

Caleb Durling 

FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP 

1225 Seventeenth Street, Suite 2200 

Denver, CO 80202 

Phone: (303) 945-7416 

Email: cdurling@foxrothschild.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Center for Legal Advocacy, 

d/b/a Disability Law Colorado

s/ Mark J. Ivandick 

Mark J. Ivandick 

Jennifer Purrington 

DISABILITY LAW COLORADO

455 Sherman St., Ste. 130 

Denver, CO 80203 

Telephone: 303.722.0300 

Facsimile: 303.722.0720 

Email: mivandick@disabilitylawco.org 

s/ Ellie Lockwood 

Ellie Lockwood 

Timothy P. Scalo 

SNELL AND WILMER LLP 

1200 Seventeenth Street, Suite 1900 

Denver, CO 80202 

Telephone: 303-634-2000 

Facsimile: 303-634-2020 

Email: elockwood@swlaw.com; 

tscalo@swlaw.com 

 

Case No. 1:11-cv-02285-NYW Document 108 filed 10/12/18 USDC Colorado pg 2 of 3
4830-5213-9896 

 3 

64296489 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned hereby certifies that on September 28, 2018, a true and correct 

copy of NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY was 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:

Tanja E. Wheeler 

Lauren Peach 

Libbie McCarthy 

First Assistant Attorney General 

Colorado Department of Law 

State Services Section 

Ralph L. Carr Colorado Judicial Center 

1300 Broadway, 6th Floor 

Denver, CO 80203 

Ph: 720-508-6151 

Fax: 720-508-6041 

tanja.wheeler@coag.gov 

Lauren.Peach@coag.gov

Libbie.McCarthy@coag.gov 

Counsel for Defendants 

 /s/Sandy Braverman 

 Sandy Braverman 

Case No. 1:11-cv-02285-NYW Document 108 filed 10/12/18 USDC Colorado pg 3 of 3
#### In the Matter of DRUSILLA CARR, Inc., Debtor. DRUSILLA CARR, Inc., v. GARY LAND COMPANY.

No. 6233.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

Oct. 22, 1937.

Armand Prete and Glenn W. Springmann, both of Gary, Ind., and Everett G. Ballard, of Chicago, 111., for appellant.

Kemper K. Knapp and Harlan L. Hackbert, both of Chicago, 111., and Frank B. Pattee, of Crown Point, Ind., for appellee.

Before EVANS, SPARKS, and MAJOR, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Now this day come the parties by their counsel and this cause now comes on to be heard on. the transcript of record and briefs of counsel and oral arguments by Mr. Glenn W. Springmann, counsel for appellant, and by Mr. Harlan L. .Hackbert, counsel for appellee,

On consideration whereof, it is now here ordered, adjudged, and decreed by this court that the order or decree of *1003the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, in this cause appealed from, be, and the same is hereby, affirmed, with costs.
1 “[#246]” 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.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge Robert E. Blackburn

Criminal Case No. 11-cr-00422-REB-04

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

4. RICHARD CROSSE,

Defendant.

_____________________________________________________________________

FINAL ORDER OF FORFEITURE 

_____________________________________________________________________

Blackburn, J.

The matter is before me on the United States’ Motion for Final Order of

Forfeiture [#246]1

 filed June 13, 2013. The Court having reviewed the Motion FINDS:

THAT a Preliminary Order of Forfeiture was entered on March 14, 2013;

THAT all known interested parties were provided an opportunity to respond and

that publication was properly effected as required by 21 U.S.C. § 853(n);

THAT no Petition for Ancillary Hearing has been filed by any petitioner, and the

time for so doing has expired; and

THAT it further appears there is cause to issue a forfeiture order under 21 U.S.C.

§ 853.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, DECREED, AND ADJUDGED:

Case 1:11-cr-00422-REB Document 247 Filed 06/17/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

1. That the United States’ Motion for Final Order of Forfeiture [#246] filed

June 13, 2013, is GRANTED;

2. That judgment of forfeiture of the following property SHALL ENTER in favor of

the United States pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853 free from the claims of any other party:

a. miscellaneous marijuana grow equipment seized on June 10, 2011,

from 3885 Forest Street, Denver, Colorado; and

b. miscellaneous marijuana grow equipment seized on October 13,

2011, from 3885 Forest Street, Denver, Colorado; and

3. That the United States SHALL HAVE full and legal title to the forfeited

property and may dispose of it in accordance with law.

Dated June 17, 2013, at Denver, Colorado.

BY THE COURT:

Case 1:11-cr-00422-REB Document 247 Filed 06/17/13 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2