alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of NELSON BROTHERS REALTY TRUST, Debtor. Thomas H. JONES et al. v. Ward CASTLE, as Trustee, etc., et al.

No. 6213.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

Oct. 14, 1937.

Roy D. Keehn and Chas. E. McGuire, both of Chicago, 111., for appellants.

S. L. Brenner, Thomas G. McBride, Harold Koven, and, Arthur L. Schwartz, all of Chicago, 111., for appellees.

Before EVANS and MAJOR, Circuit Judges, and LINDLEY, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Now this day come the parties by their counsel, and this cause comes on to be heard on the transcript of the record from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, on briefs of counsel, and on oral argument by Mr. Charles E. McGuire, counsel for appellants, and Mr. Thomas G. McBride, counsel for appellees.

On consideration whereof, it is now here ordered, adjudged, and decreed by this court that the order or decree of the said District Court in this cause appealed from be, and the same is hereby, affirmed, with costs.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA 

No. 85282 IN THE MATTER OF THE 

RESIGNATION OF SUE ELLEN 

MARTINELLI, BAR NO. 8849. "=1 

SEP 2 6 2022 

ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR RESIGNATION 

This is a joint petition by the State Bar of Nevada and attorney 

Sue Ellen Martinelli for her resignation from the Nevada bar. 

SCR 93(5) provides that Nevada attorneys who are not actively 

practicing law in this state may resign from the state bar if certain 

conditions are met. The petition includes statements from state bar staff 

confirming that no disciplinary, fee dispute arbitration, or client security 

fund matters are pending against Martinelli; and that she is current on all 

membership fee payments and other financial commitments relating to her 

practice of law in this state. See SCR 93(5)(a)(1)-(2). 

Bar counsel has recommended that the resignation be 

approved, and the Board of Governors has approved the application for 

resignation. See SCR 93(5)(a)(2). Martinelli acknowledges that her 

resignation is irrevocable and that the state bar retains continuing 

jurisdiction with respect to matters involving a past member's conduct prior 

to resignation. See SCR 93(5)(c)-(d). Finally, Martinelli has submitted an 

affidavit of compliance with SCR 115. See SCR 93(5)(e). 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 
The petition satisfies the requirements of SCR 93(5). 

Accordingly, we approve attorney Sue Ellen Martinelli's resignation. SCR 

93(5)(a)(2). The petition is hereby granted. 

It is so ORDERED. 

C.J. 

cc: Bar Counsel, State Bar of Nevada 

Sue Ellen Martinelli 

Executive Director 

Admissions Office, United States Supreme Court 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

2 

C4) 1947A
#### Athelia C. Watson, Respondent, v. William Stromberg, Appellant.

St. Louis Court of Appeals,

November 10, 1891.

1. Law and Fact: construction of oral contracts. Where the terms of an oral contract are not admitted, it is for the jury to determine what the contract is.

2. New Trial: weighing the evidence. This court will not grant a new trial on the ground that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence, though the trial court may properly do so.

*Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court.*— Hon. James E. Withrow, Judge.

Affirmed.

*B. S. Robert,*for appellant.

*Henry Boemler,*for respondent.

Rombauer, P. J.

The plaintiff claims that she executed a quitclaim deed to certain lands in consideration of the defendant’s promise to pay her $150, if she would do so. Upon the defendant’s refusal to pay this sum she brought suit before the justice, and there, as well as upon a retrial of the cause in the circuit court, recovered a verdict for the entire amount claimed. The defendant seeks to vacate the judgment on the sole ground that it is unwarranted by the evidence, and that the court erred in refusing to nonsuit the plaintiff.

*631The terms of the contract in this case were not reduced to writing. The law is that, where the terms of a contract are not admitted, but are to be ascertained from the oral evidence of witnesses, it is the province of the jury to determine from the evidence what the contract is. *Judge v.*Leclaire, 31 Mo. 137; *Jungemann v. Brewing*Co., 38 Mo. App. 463. This general rule of course presupposes that there is substantial evidence showing the contract and its terms. After a careful reading of the record we are led to the conclusion, that it does furnish substantial evidence of the contract claimed by the plaintiff. It is true that her testimony is in part disingenuous and evasive, but the credit to be given to it as a whole is not for our consideration. In that regard the province of the trial court and ours is different. Many cases arise wherein the trial court may properly exercise its power in vacating a verdict as opposed to the weight of the evidence, and yet wherein we should not bé justified in vacating it on the ground that it was brought about by bias or prejudice, or was unsupported by substantial evidence ; and the present cause is of that class.

Here, under proper instructions of, the court, the jury found the agreement as claimed by plaintiff, and, as they have done so upon substantial evidence, there was no legal error in refusing to vacate their verdict. We can reverse judgments for legal errors only. Judgment affirmed.

All the judges concur.
Exhibit 32.2


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 Hickory Tech Corporation on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David A. Christensen, Chief Financial Officer of HickoryTech, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:





(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 HickoryTech.











/s/ David A. Christensen


David A. Christensen


Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


July 29, 2010
**Exhibit31.2**

**Certification Pursuant to Section302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

I,John F. Coger, certify that:

1.I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Community Valley Bancorp;

2.Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual report;

3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this annual report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual 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)) and internal control over financialreporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for theregistrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 annual report is being prepared;

b) Designed suchinternal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control overfinancial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonableassurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparationof financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generallyaccepted accounting principles;

c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to thefiling date of this annual report (the “Evaluation Date”); and

d) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5.The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors:

a) All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.
| Date: May 17, 2007 |   | By:                               | /s/ John F. Coger |   |
|--------------------|--------|-----------------------------------|-------------------|--------|
|               |   |                              |
|               |   | John F. Coger                     |
|               |   | Executive Vice President, CFO/COO |

 

----
_________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

December 5, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

137806 (13) Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, 

Justices 

LEONARD ARTHUR STRICKLAND III, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 137806 

 COA: 288136 

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

___________________________________ 

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion to waive fees is considered and it 

is DENIED because MCL 600.2963 requires that a prisoner pursuing a civil action be 

liable for filing fees. 

Within 21 days of the certification of this order, plaintiff shall pay to the 

Clerk of the Court the initial partial filing fee of $48.00, shall submit a copy of this order 

with the payment, and shall refile the copy of the pleadings which is being returned 

with this order. Failure to comply with this order shall result in the appeal not being 

filed in this Court. 

If plaintiff timely files the partial fee and refiles the pleadings, monthly 

payments shall be made to the Department of Corrections in an amount of 50 percent of 

the deposits made to plaintiff’s account until the payments equal the balance due of 

$327.00. This amount shall then be remitted to this Court.

 Pursuant to MCL 600.2963(8) plaintiff shall not file further appeals in this 

Court until the entry fee in this case is paid in full. 

The Clerk of the Court shall furnish two copies of this order to plaintiff and 

return plaintiff’s pleadings with this order. 

jm 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

December 5, 2008 

Clerk
#### BAKER v. STATE ex rel. JONES.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June Term 1953.

Certiorari denied without opinion.
30.00
    %
    
    of your cumulative salary if the company achieves
a pre-tax profit of
    
    $
    137.50
    %
    
    of your cumulative salary if the company achieves
a pre-tax profit of
    
    $
    1,000,00050.00
    %
    
    of your cumulative salary if the company achieves
a pre-tax profit of
    
    $
    2,000,00062.50
    %
    
    of your cumulative salary if the company achieves
a pre-tax profit of
    
    $
    3,000,00075.00
    %
    
    of your cumulative salary if the company achieves
a pre-tax profit of
    
    $
    4,000,000
    Sincerely,/s/ Peter Edison


Peter Edison
Exhibit 32.02

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 Sbarro, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 27, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Carolyn M.
Spatafora, Senior Vice President of Finance of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that to my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 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: November 12, 2009



|                                            
|--------------------------------------------
|                                            
|/s/ Carolyn M. Spatafora                    
|Carolyn M. Spatafora                        
|Senior Vice President of Finance            
|(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

NOTE: A signed original of this certification has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Board of Education of Willard Village School Dist. *v.*Village of Willard.

(No. 25531

Decided December 4, 1935.)

*Mr. Bex F. Bracy*and *Messrs. Carpenter & Freeman,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Robert J. Vetter*and *Mr. G. Bay Craig,*for defendant in error.

It is ordered and adjudged by this court, that the judgment of the said Court of Appeals be, and the same is hereby, affirmed on authority of *Bd. of Edn. of City School Dist. of Columbus*v. *City of Columbus,*118 Ohio St., 295, 160 N. E., 902.

*Judgment affirmed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Stephenson, Williams, Matthias, Day and Zimmerman, JJ., concur.
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #11449 and #11450]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 2.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Indiana (FEMA-1795-DR), dated 09/23/2008.

*Incident:*                         Severe Storms and Flooding.                    

*Incident Period:*                         09/12/2008 and continuing.                    

*Effective Date:*                         10/03/2008.                    

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         11/24/2008.                    

*EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         06/23/2009.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to:U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road,Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance,U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the Presidential disaster declaration for the State of Indiana, dated 09/23/2008 is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster:

*Primary Counties: (Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans):*

Clark, Crawford, Dearborn, Jackson, Knox, Lawrence, Martin, Pike, Spencer, Switzerland.

*Contiguous Counties:*                     (Economic Injury Loans Only):Indiana:                

Brown, Daviess, Dubois, Franklin, Gibson, Greene, Monroe, Ohio, Orange, Perry, Sullivan, Warrick.

Illinois:

Crawford, Lawrence, Wabash.

Kentucky:

Boone, Daviess, Gallatin, Hancock, Oldham.

Ohio:

Butler, Hamilton.

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

Herbert L. Mitchell,

Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.

 [FR Doc. E8-24140 Filed 10-9-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 18-13737

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 3:16-cr-00092-BJD-PDB-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ELIZABETH M. JORDAN, 

 Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

________________________

(April 24, 2019)

Before TJOFLAT, JORDAN, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The Government’s motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant to the appeal 

waiver in Appellant’s plea agreement is GRANTED. See United States v. Bushert, 

997 F.2d 1343, 1350-51 (11th Cir. 1993) (sentence appeal waiver will be enforced 

Case: 18-13737 Date Filed: 04/24/2019 Page: 1 of 2 
2

if it was made knowingly and voluntarily); United States v. Bascomb, 451 F.3d 

1292, 1297 (11th Cir. 2006) (appeal waiver “cannot be vitiated or altered by 

comments the court makes during sentencing”); United States v. Grinard-Henry, 

399 F.3d 1294, 1296 (11th Cir. 2005) (waiver of the right to appeal includes 

waiver of the right to appeal difficult or debatable legal issues or even blatant 

error).

Case: 18-13737 Date Filed: 04/24/2019 Page: 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.1

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 Lancer Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended March 31, 2003, as
filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Christopher D. Hughes, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(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.

|June 28, 2004 |  | /s/CHRISTOPHER D. HUGHESChristopher D. Hughes,
Chief Executive Officer
|------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks
#### U. S. AIRLINES, Inc. v. U. S. FLYING SERVICE.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June Term 1953.

Certiorari denied without opinion.
2014 Q1 FES - EX10.1




EXHIBIT 10.1


FORBES ENERGY SERVICES LTD.
COMPENSATION RECOUPMENT POLICY


Executive Agreement


This AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") is entered into effective as of ____________, 2014, by and between Forbes Energy Services Ltd. (the "Company") and __________________ (the "Executive"), to acknowledge the Executive's agreement to comply with the Company's Compensation Recoupment Policy (the "Policy") that was recommended by the Compensation Committee and adopted by the Board of Directors of the Company (the "Board") on March 29, 2012.  


		
	1.
	The Executive understands and agrees that the Policy applies to all incentive-based compensation that has been paid or will be paid to the Executive and that is captured by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, including any regulations or rules promulgated thereunder (the "Covered Compensation").  The Executive further understands and agrees that the Policy may be amended from time to time by the Board, in its sole discretion, and that this Agreement shall apply to the Policy as amended.




		
	2.
	By signing below, the Executive hereby acknowledges and agrees that:




		
	•
	He or she has received the Policy, has had an adequate opportunity to review (and consult with legal counsel) the Policy, and fully understands the Policy;




		
	•
	If required by the Policy, the Covered Compensation shall be subject to forfeiture and/or reimbursement to the Company, as determined in the sole discretion of the Board (or a committee thereof);




		
	•
	He or she shall, upon receiving notice from the Board (or a committee thereof), take immediate and prompt action to effectuate any forfeiture and/or reimbursement that is required pursuant to the Policy;




		
	•
	The Policy applies to all Covered Compensation notwithstanding the terms (consistent or otherwise) of any existing or future compensation plan or arrangement, and notwithstanding the terms (consistent or otherwise) of any employment agreement, to which the Executive is a party; and




		
	•
	Any determination of the Board (or a committee thereof) in respect to the interpretation or application of the Policy to the Executive shall be conclusive and binding, and application of the Policy need not be applied uniformly among the executives.




		
	3.
	The Policy and this Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the internal laws of the State of Texas.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Executive and the Company have executed this Agreement effective as of the day and year first written above.


EXECUTIVE                        FORBES ENERGY SERVICES LTD.


Print Name:                         By:                         
Sign Name:                         Its: